VanessaThe significant point here is that we didn't even seek an equal partnership. I'm aware that politicians regard themselves as being generally cleverer and smarter than the rest of us, confusing as they do a preparedness to scheme, plot and be underhand with political acumen and skill. I've frequently commented upon this irritating trait with which Labour partyists seem to be more or less unanimously afflicted but I have to say I encountered it in some of our Conservative partners also.However as I have said and repeated on countless occasions our brief was simply to use the position in which we had found ourselves to replace an entirely self-serving bureaucratic machine with an outward-looking and community-focused operation in which residents could themselves be meaningfully involved in the decision-making process. In return for this we were happy to give our partners more or less carte blanche to do their money saving thing (although we did intervene in what we considered to have been some of the more unpalatable proposals).We figured that whereas Labour would find our programme objectionable on ideological grounds the Conservatives would be fairly neutral about it, possibly regarding it as eccentric but basically harmless bearing in mind that it didn't really cost any money.As your say, however, events were overtaken mid-term by a misplaced euphoria in which our partners for some reason began to believe that they would take the world by storm in 2010 and replace the coalition administration with an entirely Conservative one. If you look around the web there are plenty of excited references to this expectation by Conservative supporters.Henceforth the desire to sideline the Community Group became, in my view, the driving force in the eyes of at least some of the Conservative Party bigwigs. Chief officers, at the very highest level within the local authority, began to quite openly challenge and frustrate Community Group priorities whilst working hard to realise Conservative ones. The Environment Department was without doubt the worst culprit and, as Steve rightly points out, this was best illustrated by the obstruction we faced over Mogden. Only when the Conservatives recognised that this could rebound on them electorally did they deign to take an interest, and when they did Communications was quite shamelessly used in a way that it was felt would show the Conservative Party in the most favourable light possible at the expense of the Community Group.I have been asked why, all this being the case, we did not pull out of the coalition. I have already stated publicly that I believe I was wrong not to have at least forced a discussion about this a year or so before the end of the administration's term. Once we were within six months of the election to have done so would have given an impression of opportunism. Instead we set our sights on another term in which there would be No Overall Control, and in Hounslow South even tried to give this desired outcome a helping hand.Had the outcome this year's election been a similar one to that in 2006 we may or may not have been prepared to re-enter coalition. Indeed we may not have even been asked. Certainly one of the options being floated by the Conservative Group was that of offering coalition terms to some members of the Community Group but not to others. I am assuming I'd have been one of the others.However in the event of the coalition having been resumed we would certainly have learned from our mistakes and laid down far more robust terms than we did in 2006 when, perhaps naively, much of what we did was based on trust. I have learned that in big party politics trust and honour and very rare commodities indeed. I dare say that some very high profile P45s would have been issued as an integral part of the package and the "only acting under orders" defences that we would have doubtless have heard at subsequent employment tribunals would undoubtedly have answered a few questions.So much for the local authority, what of the coalition that is currently leading the country? Well, I would imagine the feeling of many people is more one of relief that the old lot are gone than of trepidation as to what lies in store. This is something that you need to understand in the context of the local elections of 2006 and subsequent events. It is one thing being angry that your opponents are aligning against you, but quite another to understand why they consider it necessary to do so.Will the new administration make other options possible for the future? Options that were not options at all in 2006?You are probably in a better position than I to answer that Vanessa.
Phil Andrews ● 5497d