what is the point of them ?

comedy value

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/1965569.stm

ahhhhh , i see

About as much use as school governors!

If they’ve got no real power, they’re pointless. (And by real power I mean money, of course…)

Here in Spain the local mayor can make a real difference, it’s not seen as a joke job only suitable for eccentric characters (eg Boris or Ken) that couldn’t make it at national level. Madrid’s mayor could quite possibly become the president, someday.

They’re mainly traditon and for ceremonies. I think london is the only one where the mayor does something important/has responsiblitly of large budget. Not sure if the other big cities’ mayors do…

My uncle was the mayor of Manchester in 1999-2000. His first week in office was when United won the treble.

Do you mean ceremonial mayors like most cities, or elected novelty ones like Doncaster, Hartlepool and London?

There are two types of Mayor, cermonial i.e. fancy dress opening fetes. and Elected. It’s an alternative to the crony cabinate system where the party with the most councillors elects a few untouchables that make all the decisions in secret.

If you live somewhere that has a major party following you are stuck with them forever and they are virtually unaccountable.

With an elected Mayor they have real power, perhaps too much for one person but if they **** up they are out the door next term beause people vote for the person not the party.

That’s the point. Then again – Hartlepool…

They do it differently in the US

http://intheblogs.cosmobc.com/?p=135

Yeah the reason why Tony Blair decided to introduce directly elected mayors with executive powers was that he intended that only his stooges would get to stand as Labour candidates. Sod leaving it to dodgy elected Labour Party members in committees to incorrectly decide who the leader should be.

Then a ‘US tabloid style’ campaign backed by his mates in the media such as Rupert Murdoch would ensure that no politics would be discussed, instead, utterly irrelevant issues would be the deciding factor, resulting in the correct stooge being elected on election day and Tony Blair maintaining his complete and total control of all aspects of British political life. It didn’t necessarily go according to plan. Devolution was also viewed in a similar manner.

It never had anything to do with democracy, and everything to do with power and control. A bit like the House of Lords “reforms” really.

i voted carcetti :)

In theory, they are the guy you vote for to run the things gthat you care about where you live. Unfortunately, if they were like this they would cause something called a “postcode lottery” as a side-effect of “subsidiarity” and are therefore rendered pointless.