My statement was as follows:
As of today and according to the Corporation website, there are a total of 24 elected members on the Policy & Resources Committee (not including the Ex-Officio members). The average time that the 24 members have been serving at the Corporation is 6 years.
Other statistics in relation to the elected members of the P&R committee include:
- Only 15 out of the 25 wards represented and none in Cripplegate or Aldersgate.
- 6 out of 24 female members.
- 4 out of 24 members from an ethnic background.
Extracting some of the stated purpose of the committee, it reads “The Policy and Resources Committee is responsible for the City Corporation’s governance arrangements, recommending its strategic priorities, agreeing policy and the activities associated with the promotion of the City of London.”
The importance of the committee is highlighted by the hard-hitting Ex-Officio members which include the Lord Mayor, Chief Commoners and both the Chair and Deputy of the Finance Committee. In fact, I have heard the Policy and Resources Chair referred to as a sort of ‘Prime Minister’ of the City which arguably underlines its importance.
In essence, then, it would be safe to say, that the Committee probably has the most influence over the future of the Corporation and perhaps rightly so however it seems contradictory that it may not exactly be open to the “future of the Corporation”. That is, newly elected members. Yes, the 38 new members this year were welcome to put themselves forward for election to the P&R committee however did we really have a chance against people with almost two terms under their belt? One new member put themselves forward and came last in the election which speaks for itself.
In any case, this year the P&R committee will again be poorly represented on many fronts but no more so than by newly elected members. This means that the decision-making process of the Corporation may be compromised in that there will be a narrower range of thought and increased subjectivity. Who best to challenge potentially dangerous and outdated norms than someone who was not there to establish them in the first place? This not only sets a bad example internally but may also impact on our reputation as a progressive organisation. For example, newly elected members and hence the above underrepresented groups are excluded from many important business and civic events including the recent breakfast with the Prime Minister of Japan. This does not look good for the Corporation.
In fact, the reason I am raising this issue is because I am a newly elected member and can immediately see that something is not quite right with how members are elected to such an important committee. Looking at the current and past statistics, I feel that that the opportunity to add unique value as a newly elected member is miles away and, by that time, I may have been corrupted by established thinking. I therefore feel we need to rethink the election process in relation to the P&R committee to make sure that the Corporation has true critical thinking so that it can make the right decisions for its future.
This needs to start immediately (not in a year or two’s time) by finding a way to include newly elected members in the decision-making process by, for example, creating 3-4 one-year term ex-officio places for newly elected members?
This is just a suggestion however, today, I would like to ask the Chair of the P&R Committee to come back to this Council before next month’s meeting with a plan of how they will include the 38 new members into the Policy and Resources Committee’s decision-making process?
Supplementary question
Given the importance of the P&R committee, do you think that the election of the Chair of the P&R committee should be open to the whole Common Council?
