The last thing our rulers want is a Tory mayor

Never ask a question unless you know the answer. This is advice often given to reporters when dealing with politicians.

And here's another piece of advice, especially for Barnet politicians: never hold a public consultation until you know the result.

I doubt if our local leaders really need this advice it seems to have been policy for some time.

The latest, and one of the biggest, consultations that we have seen is now taking place. It is over the system of political management chosen for Barnet Council.

In fact there isn't much choice on offer. The Government has ruled that only three systems are acceptable.

1)A directly elected executive mayor who can appoint other councillors to an executive.

2)A directly elected mayor with a council manager who has decision making powers.

3)A leader elected by the council with a cabinet-style executive consisting of other councillors.

The first two call for an all-powerful elected mayor.

Notebook feel some individuals at the town hall are already quite powerful enough, and the last thing we want is for one person to be inflated to superstar status.

So that means we must remain with the present system of a leader and cabinet. In fact this is the result the council leadership wants and is determined to achieve.

There is one interesting argument in favour of an elected mayor. It would reduce the power of the group meeting. On most councils one party has an overall majority, and it is the private meeting of councillors in that particular group which usually decides policy.

An elected mayor would, hopefully, be above such things as group meetings. He has wide powers and has been directly elected by the public and must therefore answer to them.

Even allowing for this, I cannot bring myself to endorse the idea of an elected mayor, but it has to be admitted that nothing else will do much about the potential power of group meetings.

Barnet has, as usual, congratulated itself on the consultation it is now conducting. But it should be understood it is being held only because the Government demands it.

The council switched to the cabinet system a couple of years back without bothering to consult anyone. The consultation now taking place will serve to legitimise what has already been done.

The Labour-Liberal Democrat administration that is running Barnet has good political reasons for wanting no truck with an elected mayor.

Even in these difficult times for the Tories, they remain the largest single party on the council. Their candidate Brian Coleman had a famous victory in winning the local GLA seat.

So the assumption must be that the Tory candidate would be successful in any contest for an elected mayor in Barnet.

Beyond offering a choice between the three approved government systems, Barnet Council doesn't seem keen to engage in much discussion about how the council is run.

Considering the money they are splashing out on this consultation that seems a pity, so Notebook will try to open things up a bit. I doubt if I shall get the freedom of the borough for it, but it's a small contribution to developing local democracy.

The great unmentionable in this consultation is the fourth option the one the Government wouldn't allow despite considerable pressure. This is to retain the traditional committee system, albeit in a more streamlined form.

It is a system with more meetings open to the public and more papers and information available. You know what's going on, and if you're reasonably quick you can find out before the decisions are made.

The sweeping away of the committee system in Barnet has certainly not brought greater "transparency", whatever that means.

For example: under the old system the workings of the council's in-house services, like refuse collection, were overseen by the DSO (Direct Service Organisation) committee. This includes the all-important balance sheet showing who is trading profitably and who is losing a fortune.

Under the new system this information goes to a private meeting called the Trading Operations and Incomes Group. And it stays there we hear nothing about it. Progress? Well some politicians probably think so.

In fact there has been a marked reduction in factual information coming out of the town hall since Barnet switched to the new system. And carefully spun press releases are no substitute for hard facts.

Notebook has frequently drawn attention to the fact that under the new system most councillors have a secondary role.

After next year's borough elections Barnet will have 63 councillors. The Government has said nine must be the maximum number for the cabinet. So there are going to be an awful lot of councillors reduced to a supporting role and who are supposed to spend most of their energies on constituency work.

Clearly there is a case for a councillor cull, but the trend towards less real information and more power in fewer hands is not my idea of progress.