As the consultation process on a possible Town Council for Durham City is now under way, I have created a dedicated page with links to relevant files. The link is on the upper left of the screen.

This page also contains details of a petition in favour of the proposal and a petition form that you can print out and use. the petition should only be signed by electors living within the affected area.

Many people have concerns about the future of the mayor of Durham after the City Council is abolished next April, especially over who will elect the mayor in future and even whether the mayor will actually be a citizen of Durham City.

At County Hall last Thursday,  our fears were confirmed when the ruling Labour Cabinet decided to ask the government to allow all 126 County Councillors to elect the mayor instead of the 22 who represent the existing area of Durham City district.

I and my fellow Lib Dem Neville’s Cross Councillor Grenville Holland spoke passionately about our belief that the elected representatives of the City should choose the City’s mayor, but we were ignored.

If government listen to their party in power at County Hall, then it is conceivable that future mayors of Durham City could come from Seaham, Sedgefield or Stanley, rather than here in the City itself.

Even more deplorable is the statement in the report that Durham City’s Labour MP, Roberta Blackman-Woods supported this attempt to hijack Durham’s mayor away from the City.

All is not lost, though. The City Council will be putting in a vigorous representation against this idea, and the initial indications from government was that the elected representatives of the City should indeed choose the mayor under the Charter Trust arrangements.

Finally, Charter Trusts are meant to be short-lived affairs, so that when a town council is created for Durham City, the mayor would revert back to the Town Council. Even then, there were suggestions at County Hall that this might be over-ridden.

In my opinion, this appalling decision by the ruling Labour party at County Hall is nothing more than spite against the fact that they have been rejected overwhelmingly by the electors of Durham City. No dount those same electors will know how to respond when the next elections come.

Background - The government have recognised the importance of the mayor to Durham City and have promised that it will continue after local government re-organisation. In cases like this the policy is to establish something called a Charter Trust, the Trustees of which will elect the mayor and maintain its associated civic tradition.

Charter Trusts are meant to be short-lived arrangements within unitary council areas to cover a period until the relevant area (Durham City in this case) is fully served by town and parish councils after which the mayor would be transferred over to the relevant town or parish council within that area.

If the proposal to establish a town council for the currently unparished area of Durham City goes ahead, then this would mean the new Durham town Council would get the mayor, effectively taking things back to where they were before the 1974 changes to the structure of local government …

… unless Labour at County Hall gets its way.

Readers will have seen my previous posting about the defeat of my motion to the County Council calling for a widespread public consultation on the future of school admission in the County [following the overturning of the County proposals for Durham Johnston].

So what is happening now?

A report is going to the Council Cabinet next Thursday pointing out the problems (that I set out in my motion) and proposing - yes you have it - a widespread public consultation on the issue!

I guess I should be grateful that County has come round to my point of view, but the hypocrisy of it all is breathtaking.

I am a member of the City Council working group on the creation of a Town Council for the City.

The group met earlier this week (it meets quite regularly) and agreed to a publicity and awareness raising exercise in to begin the unparished city area later this month aimed at gauging local support for the idea.

I and the City Lib Dems are fully behind forming a Town Council as we believe it will be essential to maintain local links with elected members whose main concern is our historic city.

I moved a motion at yesterday’s meeting of the full County Council asking for a full and wide-ranging consultation with parents and local communities on the future of school admissions in County Durham.

I did this because of the decision of the Schools Adjudicator to overturn the Durham Johnson admissions criteria for 2009 entry in which he determined that the policy of giving priority to associated transport was intrinsically unfair. He was also critical of the council’s consultation procedures.

My motion was defeated by the Labour majority which leaves a very unsatisfactory situation.

This autumn the so-called “consultation” for 2010 entry will begin. School governing bodies will be asked their opinions, which will be fed into a mysterious body called the Education Forum. This comes up with proposals for Cabinet who take the final decision.

At no point do families and local communities get any real input. All they can do is to appeal to the Schools Adjudicator after the decisions have been taken.

What is this Education Forum? It consists of 14 people made up of two (Labour) councillors, 11 educationalists and just one parent governor representative. It meets in private (no-one else is allowed to listen in to the debate, not even other councillors) and the minutes are not made public. Indeed, I can find no mention of this body on the County Council web site.

In other words the policy is being made by something more akin to a medieval Star Chamber than an open democratic process. Moreover, there appears to be no way for elected councillors in general to scrutinise what is going on.

Frankly this is a scandal. In the debate yesterday, all that Councillor Vasey (Labour Cabinet member for young People’s Services - she sits on the Forum) could say was that the council was following government rules.

I rest my case!

Residents may be aware that County Councillors have been issued with (very up-to-date) mobile phones.

These now have an 0191 number assocatied with them so that if you ring in it will be at local call rates and not mobile rates.

My new number for this is 0191 372 5880.

Anyone using the A167 past through Durham City will have got caught up in congestion caused by road works by the new Durham Johnston school. This is due to new sewer connections being installed. The sceduled time period for the work is 28 July - 13 August, but I hope it will not take as long as that. To be avoided if you can!

Readers may remembers that the promised barriers along the A167 between Merryoaks and the Cock of the North roundabout didn’t get completed because of a shortage of the right kind of steel! I have just been notified that the work is now scheduled for 4 August - 5 September.

Finally, there will be road resurfacing works on short stretches of Potters Bank and Lowes Barn Bank close to the Duke of Wellington traffic lights over the two weekends 9-10 and 16-17 August. This will close each road while the work is being done, so watch out for detours.