<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss
version="2.0"
xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
> <channel><title>Comments on: Panchayati raj, English style (or not)</title> <atom:link href="http://www.PieAndCoffee.org/2007/01/23/panchayat/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><link>http://www.PieAndCoffee.org/2007/01/23/panchayat/</link> <description>&#34;When things speed up hierarchy disappears and global theater sets in.&#34; --Marshall McLuhan</description> <lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 21:46:19 +0000</lastBuildDate> <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency> <generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator> <item><title>By: Kaihsu Tai (Oxford, England)</title><link>http://www.PieAndCoffee.org/2007/01/23/panchayat/comment-page-1/#comment-185191</link> <dc:creator>Kaihsu Tai (Oxford, England)</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 13 Mar 2008 11:39:13 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.PieAndCoffee.org/2007/01/23/panchayat/#comment-185191</guid> <description>Last Friday, I went to a meeting of the Oxfordshire Partnership. The leader of the County Council, Keith Mitchell  (Conservative), who is the chair of the Partnership, welcomed the first member of the public ever to observe a meeting of the Partnership -- yours truly. During the discussion of the sustainable community strategy Oxfordshire 2030, hardly anyone present around the table seemed to have a solution about how to fulfil their new statutory ‘duty to involve’. The Partnership and council members do not know well about the ‘themed’ (e.g. waste) and local strategic (e.g. Vale, Oxford) partnerships. The take-away feeling I got was:
Where is the politics?
It is all very well to talk about ‘partnership working’ -- but what we really need is participatory democracy and real politics! What happened to political campaigning: canvassing on the doorsteps? What is wrong with debates in the council chambers, that we need to introduce this extra layer of ‘partnerships’?
If you live in Oxfordshire, contact the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.oxfordshirepartnership.org.uk/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Oxfordshire Partnership&lt;/a&gt; and go to the next meeting.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Last Friday, I went to a meeting of the Oxfordshire Partnership. The leader of the County Council, Keith Mitchell  (Conservative), who is the chair of the Partnership, welcomed the first member of the public ever to observe a meeting of the Partnership &#8212; yours truly. During the discussion of the sustainable community strategy Oxfordshire 2030, hardly anyone present around the table seemed to have a solution about how to fulfil their new statutory ‘duty to involve’. The Partnership and council members do not know well about the ‘themed’ (e.g. waste) and local strategic (e.g. Vale, Oxford) partnerships. The take-away feeling I got was:</p><p>Where is the politics?</p><p>It is all very well to talk about ‘partnership working’ &#8212; but what we really need is participatory democracy and real politics! What happened to political campaigning: canvassing on the doorsteps? What is wrong with debates in the council chambers, that we need to introduce this extra layer of ‘partnerships’?</p><p>If you live in Oxfordshire, contact the <a
href="http://www.oxfordshirepartnership.org.uk/" rel="nofollow">Oxfordshire Partnership</a> and go to the next meeting.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Kaihsu Tai (Oxford, England)</title><link>http://www.PieAndCoffee.org/2007/01/23/panchayat/comment-page-1/#comment-164473</link> <dc:creator>Kaihsu Tai (Oxford, England)</dc:creator> <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2008 06:57:47 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.PieAndCoffee.org/2007/01/23/panchayat/#comment-164473</guid> <description>Ah, the Oxfordshire Partnership is a &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.neighbourhood.gov.uk/page.asp?id=531&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Local Strategic Partnership&lt;/a&gt;.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ah, the Oxfordshire Partnership is a <a
href="http://www.neighbourhood.gov.uk/page.asp?id=531" rel="nofollow">Local Strategic Partnership</a>.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Kaihsu Tai</title><link>http://www.PieAndCoffee.org/2007/01/23/panchayat/comment-page-1/#comment-163912</link> <dc:creator>Kaihsu Tai</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 16 Jan 2008 23:32:07 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.PieAndCoffee.org/2007/01/23/panchayat/#comment-163912</guid> <description>Recently a controversial decision was made to &lt;a href=&quot;http://greenoxford.com/index.php?option=com_content&amp;task=view&amp;id=540&amp;Itemid=2&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;build an incinerator in Oxfordshire&lt;/a&gt;, with the decision formally taken by a body called the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.oxfordshirepartnership.org.uk/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Oxfordshire Waste Partnership&lt;/a&gt;. I wonder what kind of a body this is, and whether it is &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra_vires&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;ultra vires&lt;/a&gt; (not to say undemocratic) for the local authorities to delegate their powers thus to this body: Recall the principle &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delegata_potestas_non_potest_delegari&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;delegata potestas non potest delegari&lt;/a&gt;.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Recently a controversial decision was made to <a
href="http://greenoxford.com/index.php?option=com_content&amp;task=view&amp;id=540&amp;Itemid=2" rel="nofollow">build an incinerator in Oxfordshire</a>, with the decision formally taken by a body called the <a
href="http://www.oxfordshirepartnership.org.uk/" rel="nofollow">Oxfordshire Waste Partnership</a>. I wonder what kind of a body this is, and whether it is <a
href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra_vires" rel="nofollow">ultra vires</a> (not to say undemocratic) for the local authorities to delegate their powers thus to this body: Recall the principle <a
href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delegata_potestas_non_potest_delegari" rel="nofollow">delegata potestas non potest delegari</a>.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Kaihsu Tai (Oxford, England)</title><link>http://www.PieAndCoffee.org/2007/01/23/panchayat/comment-page-1/#comment-56614</link> <dc:creator>Kaihsu Tai (Oxford, England)</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 09 May 2007 10:04:23 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.PieAndCoffee.org/2007/01/23/panchayat/#comment-56614</guid> <description>I might note that &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/wps/portal/publicsite/kcxml/04_Sj9SPykssy0xPLMnMz0vM0Y_QjzKL94k3Mg8FSZnFO8WHOepHogtZIoR8PfJzU_WD9L31A_QLckMjyh0dFQEnurQ-/delta/base64xml/L3dJdyEvd0ZNQUFzQUMvNElVRS82X01fMU9C&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Oxford&#039;s unitary-authority bid has since failed&lt;/a&gt;.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I might note that <a
href="http://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/wps/portal/publicsite/kcxml/04_Sj9SPykssy0xPLMnMz0vM0Y_QjzKL94k3Mg8FSZnFO8WHOepHogtZIoR8PfJzU_WD9L31A_QLckMjyh0dFQEnurQ-/delta/base64xml/L3dJdyEvd0ZNQUFzQUMvNElVRS82X01fMU9C" rel="nofollow">Oxford&#8217;s unitary-authority bid has since failed</a>.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Kaihsu Tai (Oxford, England)</title><link>http://www.PieAndCoffee.org/2007/01/23/panchayat/comment-page-1/#comment-15467</link> <dc:creator>Kaihsu Tai (Oxford, England)</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 24 Jan 2007 14:49:59 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.PieAndCoffee.org/2007/01/23/panchayat/#comment-15467</guid> <description>It is nice to be proved right: They have just reorganized the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.nhs.uk/England/AuthoritiesTrusts/Sha/Default.aspx&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;strategic health authorities&lt;/a&gt; last year, strictly following the English regional boundaries except that the South East is split into two: &quot;South Central&quot; and &quot;South East Coast&quot;.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is nice to be proved right: They have just reorganized the <a
href="http://www.nhs.uk/England/AuthoritiesTrusts/Sha/Default.aspx" rel="nofollow">strategic health authorities</a> last year, strictly following the English regional boundaries except that the South East is split into two: &#8220;South Central&#8221; and &#8220;South East Coast&#8221;.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Kaihsu Tai (Oxford, England)</title><link>http://www.PieAndCoffee.org/2007/01/23/panchayat/comment-page-1/#comment-15432</link> <dc:creator>Kaihsu Tai (Oxford, England)</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 24 Jan 2007 09:54:59 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.PieAndCoffee.org/2007/01/23/panchayat/#comment-15432</guid> <description>We have similar overlayings here in England.  Take Oxford: To start, the schools and social care that are taken care by the Oxfordshire County Council (so far so good).  The police service around here is the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.thamesvalley.police.uk/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Thames Valley Police&lt;/a&gt;, governed by the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.tvpa.police.uk/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Thames Valley Police Authority&lt;/a&gt;, covering several counties.  The (public!) healthcare is steered by the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.tvha.nhs.uk/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Thames Valley Strategic Health Authority&lt;/a&gt;, followed by a herd of &lt;abbr title=&quot;National Health Service&quot;&gt;NHS&lt;/abbr&gt; trusts.  And then there is the triad of regional organs: the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.go-se.gov.uk/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Government Office for the South East&lt;/a&gt;, the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.seeda.co.uk/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;South East England Development Agency&lt;/a&gt;, and the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.southeast-ra.gov.uk/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;South East England Regional Assembly&lt;/a&gt;.  Except for the city/district and county councils, hardly anybody knows how to get oneself &quot;appointed&quot; (not elected!) to any of these organs.
Personally, I think the police and health functions should be merged into the county, to make them more democratically accountable.  When the counties are abolished, the &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regions_of_England&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;regions&lt;/a&gt; should take over, as the confederations of local authorities envisioned in the Green manifesto.  By then, the regional boundaries will have to be adjusted: Oxfordshire has little in common with Kent beyond that each of them is an hour&#039;s train ride from London.  There should be at least three regions in the &quot;little crown&quot; around London, rather than just two (South East England and East Anglia = East of England).  But this is already too much detail for you western-Atlantics!</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We have similar overlayings here in England.  Take Oxford: To start, the schools and social care that are taken care by the Oxfordshire County Council (so far so good).  The police service around here is the <a
href="http://www.thamesvalley.police.uk/" rel="nofollow">Thames Valley Police</a>, governed by the <a
href="http://www.tvpa.police.uk/" rel="nofollow">Thames Valley Police Authority</a>, covering several counties.  The (public!) healthcare is steered by the <a
href="http://www.tvha.nhs.uk/" rel="nofollow">Thames Valley Strategic Health Authority</a>, followed by a herd of <abbr
title="National Health Service">NHS</abbr> trusts.  And then there is the triad of regional organs: the <a
href="http://www.go-se.gov.uk/" rel="nofollow">Government Office for the South East</a>, the <a
href="http://www.seeda.co.uk/" rel="nofollow">South East England Development Agency</a>, and the <a
href="http://www.southeast-ra.gov.uk/" rel="nofollow">South East England Regional Assembly</a>.  Except for the city/district and county councils, hardly anybody knows how to get oneself &#8220;appointed&#8221; (not elected!) to any of these organs.</p><p>Personally, I think the police and health functions should be merged into the county, to make them more democratically accountable.  When the counties are abolished, the <a
href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regions_of_England" rel="nofollow">regions</a> should take over, as the confederations of local authorities envisioned in the Green manifesto.  By then, the regional boundaries will have to be adjusted: Oxfordshire has little in common with Kent beyond that each of them is an hour&#8217;s train ride from London.  There should be at least three regions in the &#8220;little crown&#8221; around London, rather than just two (South East England and East Anglia = East of England).  But this is already too much detail for you western-Atlantics!</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Adam (Southern California)</title><link>http://www.PieAndCoffee.org/2007/01/23/panchayat/comment-page-1/#comment-15311</link> <dc:creator>Adam (Southern California)</dc:creator> <pubDate>Tue, 23 Jan 2007 19:55:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.PieAndCoffee.org/2007/01/23/panchayat/#comment-15311</guid> <description>I believe in Massachusetts and the rest of New England the township governments perform much of the &quot;default&quot; local government role in areas outside of incorporated cities.
In California the default local government is the county. Everyone in California is in one county or another, but communities can also incorporate into cities, which can then set their own local laws and gain a considerable amount of local control over land use and such. The cities then, in turn, form associations of governments (such as SANDAG) that govern regional transportation and housing needs. School districts and special districts (like for water, parks, even pest abatement) form yet another level of local government. You&#039;ve always got a county government, and everything else is optional.
I&#039;ve heard no clamoring for the abolition (or addition of) any layers of local government in California. Essentially the county serves as your default until a community feels like it could do a better job running things locally. Probably the biggest structural issue with local government is that county supervisors are elected by the entire county electorate (five districts per county, except in San Francisco) but have different levels of authority depending on whether you&#039;re in an incorporated city or not. For example, East Los Angeles is an unincorporated community, but all of their local government comes from the County. Their supervisor (Gloria Molina) is elected not just by the people of East L.A. and other unincorporated areas, but also by the residents of many neighborhing incorporated cities like Commerce, Montebello, Bell Gardens, El Monte, etc.
In the United States, Hawai&#039;i and Alaska both have only a single level of local government. Hawai&#039;i has counties and Alaska has boroughs.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I believe in Massachusetts and the rest of New England the township governments perform much of the &#8220;default&#8221; local government role in areas outside of incorporated cities.</p><p>In California the default local government is the county. Everyone in California is in one county or another, but communities can also incorporate into cities, which can then set their own local laws and gain a considerable amount of local control over land use and such. The cities then, in turn, form associations of governments (such as SANDAG) that govern regional transportation and housing needs. School districts and special districts (like for water, parks, even pest abatement) form yet another level of local government. You&#8217;ve always got a county government, and everything else is optional.</p><p>I&#8217;ve heard no clamoring for the abolition (or addition of) any layers of local government in California. Essentially the county serves as your default until a community feels like it could do a better job running things locally. Probably the biggest structural issue with local government is that county supervisors are elected by the entire county electorate (five districts per county, except in San Francisco) but have different levels of authority depending on whether you&#8217;re in an incorporated city or not. For example, East Los Angeles is an unincorporated community, but all of their local government comes from the County. Their supervisor (Gloria Molina) is elected not just by the people of East L.A. and other unincorporated areas, but also by the residents of many neighborhing incorporated cities like Commerce, Montebello, Bell Gardens, El Monte, etc.</p><p>In the United States, Hawai&#8217;i and Alaska both have only a single level of local government. Hawai&#8217;i has counties and Alaska has boroughs.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel> </rss>
