Dave I’m glad you like what we’re doing with our new website.For anyone that hasn’t taken a look:http://www.hounslowlibdems.org.uk/pages/how-local-government-works.html…gives a pretty good overview of local government structures. I believe it is essential that the complexities of local government are explained – how else can our democracy be transparent and the community engage with the process? I hope we will expand our site to explain party structures and the officer structure in the local council that delivers the political agenda. Both seem to be rather poorly documented on public websites.A number of people asked on the forum why the Lib Dems didn’t enter an administration after the election. Fundamentally – despite the fact we polled 19% of the vote – we did not have the numbers of councillors that would make it practically conceivable to take on an executive portfolio. In future that could be different.After the election many other questions (below) were asked on this forum which I’ll take this opportunity to answer…-----------------------------------------------------------Conal Stewart: “I'm not best pleased that the Lib Dems abstained and I'd like to ask Andrew Dakers what he felt this would achieve for us? What was the Lib Dem groups' reason for doing so?”Vanessa Smith: “The Lib-Dems planned to abstain well in advance of the Council meeting - personally I think it's shameful and cowardly - if you stand for election you should play your full part - not sit on the fence. Still sitting on the well worn fence captured Andrew Dakers the place he wanted on West London Waste, personal interests therefore satisfied.”Phil Andrews: “The Lib Dems can answer for themselves, but have you never abstained from a vote? One of your own colleagues (presuming you are still with the HIA) abstained on more or less every count, and he is not a man with a reputation for cowardice or indecision. Do you not believe that there are sometimes circumstances in which absention can be an appropriate course of action?”Conal Stewart: “I don't think its appropriate on matters like this myself. I voted for Andrew Dakers and I can't say I'm happy with his absention. I'm sure he can explain in his own time its just that it seems to appear as Vanessa says a bit cowardly. And I think Vanessa makes a reasonable point.”Vanessa Smith: “NO never, I do not believe in abstaining, what's the point of it? Yes it's true John abstained for reasons of his own but it is not a course which I would take, but I do know he didn't do it for any personal gain, because he has more guts and intelligence than most.”-----------------------------------------------------------First of all, sorry for the delay in responding to these questions, but hopefully this thorough response will make up for it!I first commented on the post election situation in this press release..."Lib Dems consolidate in Hanworth & Bedfont and make historic break through in Brentford & Isleworth constituency"http://hounslowlibdems.org.uk/news/189.htmlOur position was and remains a clear desire to see "stable and competent administration" in Hounslow. In an article a bit later in May on ChiswickW4.com I first indicated that the Lib Dems might abstain to allow an ICG-Tory adminstration to form, without HIA involvement. See…"ChiswickW4.com - Make up of Hounslow Council remains unclear"http://chiswickw4.com/default.asp?section=info&spage=common/polvote06tw8g.htmIf agreement wasn't found between the parties the Chief Executive would have ended up running Hounslow (as was the situation in Brent until 26 June!). Stable three-way administrations (particularly when one party – in this case HIA - has no manifesto) are difficult to sustain. Furthermore we did not believe that an administration including a former Labour leader of the Council offered the people of Hounslow the real change of hands they voted for.And why did the Lib Dems not consider becoming part of the new administration? On a practical level as a group of four we felt we were already spread thin with the number of committees we sit on and there would be a significant tension between doing these well and an executive role, if we went down that route. Furthermore our policy platform is distinct from the Tories and being part of a joint administration would create ambiguity. (Personally I would also feel very uncomfortable about working so closely with a party that so recently supported the war in Iraq. Although this is generally considered a national issue I didn't see deselections of MPs by Labour (or Tory) local groups on the basis of an MP voting against the wishes of their party members. I think this lack of strong internal party democracy has weakened our wider democratic system.)Thus voting positively for the new administration would have been contrary to our policy platform. And voting against would probably have forced the administration to give HIA a seat on the executive, which we believe would have been contrary to the interests of providing a "stable and competent administration" in HounslowOne disappointment in the discussions with other parties that followed the election was the Tories backing out of an agreement to support a Lib Dem – Cllr Andrew Morgan-Watts - for chair of West Area Committee, despite the fact he pulled out of a contest for chair of scrutiny with Cllr Peter Carey. Having a Lib Dem chairing an area committee was another way better political balance could have been achieved, reflecting the election result. Again, my comments on this are already online at:"West Area Tories undermine their leader"http://hounslowlibdems.org.uk/news/193.htmlAlthough the Lib Dems are not part of the executive we are - like all parties – able to propose new costed and researched policies to full council. From outside the administration we are also in a better position to secure a broad base of cross-party support. See our priority campaign to make Hounslow Britain's greenest borough: http://www.hounslowlibdems.org.uk/news/194.htmlhttp://www.hounslowlibdems.org.uk/news/196.htmlVanessa Smith suggests that my "personal interests" were satisfied by the seat on West London Waste (WLW). In fact I suggested that Cllr Ruth Cadbury or another Labour party councillor might take up the place -- as I am already working incredibly long days. Ruth however wanted to continue focussing on aviation issues, which I understand as she has a great deal of expertise in this area. My priority was to see a representative on the board from a party that has a long standing commitment to significantly ramp up the amount we recycle and minimise the environmental impacts of waste disposal. The Tories to date have had a fairly patchy record in this area so we felt it sensible to adopt a precautionary position. ICG must have had some sympathy with our view as they abstained on this vote.I hope this helps clarify the Liberal Democrat group’s decisions post 5 May. Best regardsAndrew
Andrew Dakers ● 6840d