Published I think the night before the Mayoral referendum in Nottingham; so 2nd May, 2012. Rarely can an issue have been so uninspiring, and yet be the subject of a referendum. You'd have thought when a national consultation on directly elected Executive Mayors yielded only 19 responses from members of the public, the Government would have got the message. But no. Cos as Alan Simpson so ably pointed out when writing in the Nottingham Post on Monday, this referendum is not about democracy, but about subjugating cites. "Making a stand for something better has nothing to do with mayors. Cities driving the most exciting changes do so because their citizens demand it. And those cities have realpowers. Ours do not. "In the UK, the government agenda is different. Downing Street would block any radical transfer of power from the centre, or of moves forcing the exposure of graft and corruption.In this scenario, mayors are just seen as easier to manacle than councils." Cries of horror, I'm sure. But the Westminster / Whitehall approach has been to centralise. They are risk averse and are frightened about having to account for more local decision making. The powers for the new types of Mayor are not known. They are to be negotiated after the November elections that do opt for change. Also a new type of meeting in Downing Street (at which the Prime Minister has only undertaken to attend the first). That includes Leicester who are one year in with a new Mayor, but he has no new powers. And I don't mean to say anything here about Peter Solsby, who I'm sure is very fine, and indeed I've campaigned for him in at least one campaign. And I'm sure I'd campaign for him again. But what can Leicester say has changed that's all that exciting? No, the rationale is - London is doing better than the rest of the country, and the lack of powers for the larger English cities will mean they struggle when co- operating with, or competing with other cities from across the world. OK, so let them have powers, but only if the powers are executed by someone who is in some way indebted to the current government. Notions that Mayors are figureheads at those expensive conferences on the south coast of France in a way that leaders can't be doesn't wash. Not having a Mayor certainly hasn't stopped attendees at such events proclaiming success. After this comes a whole set of proxies for a debate about why to change. Which is inevitable, cos if you want to re-design local government, you wouldn't settle on starting with such a small question. One of the more interesting proxies is that a number of people want a metropolitan authority for Greater Nottingham. Well, in the County Council before 1998, we had one. (Of sorts - parts of Derbyshire remained outside despite their strong connections with Nottingham.) But good luck to anyone who wants to start that campaign to put the surrounding towns into a new unitary authority with Nottingham. (The 1998 re-organisation was again a national Tory idea (John Major) to break up local authorities that had clout. A repeat of breaking up the Metropolitan Authorities in the mid-eighties. And like so much else they've come up, especially in recent weeks, their ideas fall apart cos they deny the reality. London has not gained so much in strength cos of an elected Mayor - ask the City!) Introducing directly elected Executive Mayors raises the stakes on being able to get rid of someone who is discovered unsuitable Tony Benn would often say - "If one meets a powerful person, ... ask them five questions: "What power have you got? Where did you get it from? In whose interests do you exercise it? To whom are you accountable? And how can we get rid of you?" Ask Doncaster. They have people from London trying to help whilst the current Exec Mayor sees his term out. The risk such Mayors pose dawned on business reps at the Chamber of Commerce at their recent debate. So Nottingham should be proud and stand tall. If a number of cities refuse such tatty offerings, another solution to giving power to the English cities outside of London will have to be found. Government should work out a better deal. The first option is best for Nottingham. See Alan Simpson's article - "NOTTINGHAM needs an elected mayor like a dog needs flippers." http://www.thisisnottingham.co.uk/Alan-Simpson-Nottingham- vote-mayor/story-15890405-detail/story.html. (Now lapsed)