REINSTATE THE POWER TO SURCHARGE ELECTED LOCAL AUTHORITY MEMBERS PERSONALLY

The Issue

The Local Government Act 2000 amended the Audit Commission Act 1998 to remove the ability of the Audit Commission or Secretary or State to recover financial losses from individuals. Instead, they would be subject to normal sanctions determined by the Standards Board and Adjudication Panel.This has proved to be a retrograde step that increasingly encourages arrogance on the part of elected municipal leaders.  The most recent example is the ruling by the High Court in January 2021 that the London mayor’s Streetspace schemes were illegal.  This is a quote from the judgement:

“If the Mayor and TfL had proceeded more cautiously, monitoring the situation and acting upon evidence rather than conjecture, their proposals would have been proportionate to the difficulties which needed to be addressed.  As it was, the measures proposed in the Plan and the Guidance, and implemented in the A10 order, far exceeded what was reasonably required to meet the temporary challenges created by the pandemic.   It was possible to widen pavements to allow for social distancing, and to allocate more road space to cater for an increase in the number of cyclists, without seeking to “transform” parts of central London into predominantly car-free zones.”

Instead of accepting the judgement, the mayor and Transport for London have embarked on a costly appeal.

 

This petition had 139 supporters

The Issue

The Local Government Act 2000 amended the Audit Commission Act 1998 to remove the ability of the Audit Commission or Secretary or State to recover financial losses from individuals. Instead, they would be subject to normal sanctions determined by the Standards Board and Adjudication Panel.This has proved to be a retrograde step that increasingly encourages arrogance on the part of elected municipal leaders.  The most recent example is the ruling by the High Court in January 2021 that the London mayor’s Streetspace schemes were illegal.  This is a quote from the judgement:

“If the Mayor and TfL had proceeded more cautiously, monitoring the situation and acting upon evidence rather than conjecture, their proposals would have been proportionate to the difficulties which needed to be addressed.  As it was, the measures proposed in the Plan and the Guidance, and implemented in the A10 order, far exceeded what was reasonably required to meet the temporary challenges created by the pandemic.   It was possible to widen pavements to allow for social distancing, and to allocate more road space to cater for an increase in the number of cyclists, without seeking to “transform” parts of central London into predominantly car-free zones.”

Instead of accepting the judgement, the mayor and Transport for London have embarked on a costly appeal.

 

Petition Updates