Bassam: Why we need a mayor

AS CITY electors go to the polls in probably the longest-running poll conducted locally, we need to remind ourselves just what is at stake.

Primarily, the referendum is about giving electors the right to choose who runs the city in their name, rather than a few councillors. It is about extending democracy and giving people the power, rather than a few politicians.

But what makes this so important and what is it about this once-in-a-lifetime decision that changes how we see our city? Just what do mayors do?

There is no doubt the stakes are high in this poll. On the one hand, we are offered the cosy world of committees, unchanged down the decades.

Places where largely unknown councillors muddle along making decisions, usually rather slowly, which are barely explained and rarely understood.

On the other, a system new to most and understood perhaps only through what we see and hear about from New York or Paris or Rome and closer to home in London with Ken Livingstone - where things certainly do happen.

The Yes campaign argument is simple.

We live in a fast-moving world where rapidly changing events in one place can affect us globally within moments.

Brighton and Hove as a city needs to be positioned to meet the rapid changing political and economic changes so we prepare our citizens for the future and adapt to stay ahead of the game.

Mayors as civic leaders are well placed to do this and ensure that city councils can change and take advantage of the challenges they meet.

Just think what would have happened to Barcelona if the visionary Pasqual Maragall had waited forever for a committee system to decide whether the city could use its Olympic bid to regenerate itself.

Now Barcelona is one of the great cities of the world, with its citizens sharing in the prosperity that the mayor and his office have generated.

Imagine, too, what New York would look like if Rudy Giuliani had been forced to wait on a never-ending series of committees to meet before he took tough action to tackle crime and drugs in the city.

During his time in office, murders have fallen 65 per cent and crime generally by 57 per cent. I argue we need some of that here. No doubt in the wake of the World Trade Centre tragedy New Yorkers will look to their mayor to lead them through civic renewal and put the heart back into the city. It won't be easy but, well-led, they will do it.

Look too at Rome, where Mayor Rutelli has, since 1993, renovated the city's parks, gardens, museums and squares.

The water systems, facilities for the blind and disabled have improved immeasurably and he has reduced homelessness by 25 per cent. During his time in office, he has helped create 42,000 new businesses and 65,000 new jobs.

Mayors can do much but most concentrate on crime, drugs, tackling poverty, getting transport working better, creating jobs and improving the environment and schools.

Here in Brighton and Hove a mayor would have to tackle all these things, along with cleaning up the city, getting its refuse service sorted out and tackling recycling.

There is much to do but safety on our streets and in our communities is a big issue.

We need to be tough on the crimes that frighten our people and make the city feel less secure.

Tackling crime means helping all age groups and adding to the tolerant and easy-going lifestyle we all value in both Brighton and Hove. Beating the drugs menace is part of that. We have the highest rate of drug- related deaths in the country. Last year, more than 80 people died of heroin abuse alone.

That is the tip of the problem manifesting itself. Just imagine how many of our young people are affected. An elected mayor could not and will not idly let these problems overtake us.

For any high-profile elected official, the crime that goes with it will dominate the agenda because it will be the people's agenda.

Similarly with transport, poverty and improving our schools. Job creation and regeneration go hand in hand. We need to create the skills base to carry on attracting top quality employers and new employment. Getting more people into work means we tackle poverty and have to sort out the problems of accessing the city and improving further public transport.

This is all part of a virtuous circle, with a pressure on the elected mayor to deliver on the promises he or she might make to tackle these great issues.

None of us in the Yes campaign pretends it is easy. The mayor will have to work hard with the councillors, the other public services and the people to will civic improvement to happen.

But what a contrast the new approach might bring to the negative, back-biting unpleasantness that often characterises local government politics.

I argue we need to create a new sense of civic improvement and renewal and raise standards of concern and debate by focusing on the big-picture issues that will shape the city's future.

There will always be opposition. Some in the No campaign, such as the Greens, opposed the city bid, just as they oppose the best intentions of the football club and other major, and much-needed, projects, such as the library.

We have to rise above all that and stake out a vision that we can all share in.

My message is simple. At present we let a few councillors decide who runs the city. Let us be bold and put our trust in the people. Let us go for the elected mayor.