Role of the Mayor- Moving Beyond a Figurehead
By Jayati Narain*
The Mayor of Kochi, is not only the head of the Cochin Corporation, but is also the representative and face of the city. Unfortunately, this is a position that is merely become a token one, coming to the forefront only at times of election. Local urban bodies rather than actually leading development and growth in cities have become an extension of the state government. Thus, the elections that took place over the past week are actually more critical to political parties from a state perspective, rather than a local one.
The sidelining of the Corporation is the
result of a failure to implement existing provisions, rather than a weak
structural framework. The mandates and laws governing decentralisation in India
at the Centre and state level do provide a wide scope for local governments to
work at a grassroots level and develop according to the needs of the area. This
is critical, especially in urban areas in Kerala, as the state has a growing
urban- rural continuum and the significance of cities feeds in to that of the
state. Unfortunately it is this developmental and economic overlap that seems
to be working against the urban local bodies.
While it is difficult for any mayor to change the rules concerning their finances and political
power, they should at least be able to address the issues relating to
administrative power. This would not be demanding any extra powers, rather
asserting the powers already guaranteed to them. A strong mayor would thus be one that is not just planning for the development of the city or
addressing existing civic issues, but who understands the system that they will
be working within. It is only with a clear understanding of the system that the
mayor and her council will be able to maximise their level of influence and
control in city development project.
The functions of the mayor and the Corporation
are often unclear, even to those in office. This may be attributed to the fact
that often, political parties do not invest much in the candidates standing for
local bodies. Thus, generally local government is not a stepping-stone for a
longer political career, rather these candidates act as placeholders for the
party. Thus, the lack of experience and practical knowledge about the post is
not something that is given much importance by the party. Often, rather than
being oriented to their roles and responsibilities (beyond the week long
sessions held by KILA) candidates operate as low level bureaucrats for the
state.
In order to have a strong local
government, candidates must be clear about the extant of their power and
jurisdiction. It is only when they have a clear understanding of the system can
they work within it effectively. The process of making urban local bodies more
efficient and autonomous is cyclical one. Once the corporation begins taking
advantage of all its powers, and limiting the power of the state it will be
given greater importance, which may in turn lead to it being able to demand a
greater degree of autonomy.
Kochi, the commercial capital, and the only
city in the state shortlisted in the 2nd round of the smart city project,
obviously holds much political significance. This has led to some of the provisions
in the Kerala Municipal Act getting overshadowed by larger political interests.
Even when the ruling party at the state and local level are the same, a
friendly political climate, the powers of the corporation have constantly been
undermined by the state and parastatal agencies.
According to the 12th schedule of
the constitution, article 243 W, ‘Public
amenities including street lighting, parking lots, bus stops and public
conveniences’, come under the purview of
urban local bodies. However, bus stops constructed by the town planning
commission of the Cochin Corporation were demolished by PWD, based on the
grounds that the roads were maintained by the PWD thus they have authority over
construction along it. Similar examples of parastatal agencies over stepping
their jurisdiction are present in the case of several provisions set in place
to empower urban local bodies. In the case of
‘roads and bridges’, and ‘water supply for domestic, industrial and
commercial purposes’, agencies such as the Kerala Metro Rail Limited and
the Kerala State Water Board have played a much larger role, than
constitutionally mandated. This is due to the lack of coordination and
overlapping responsibilities that come up between these agencies and the
corporation. While these agencies are working for the city, it is at the cost
of the city administration. The benefits of such projects are thus geared
towards the state government rather than the city government.
The first step towards avoiding such
situations, or planning them better would be for the role of the mayor to be
clear. The mayor presides over all the standing committees of the council, and
is supposed to have regular meetings with them. She/he is a representative of
the city to the state and Central government. Thus, the work done by them is
principally for the city, and the socio-economic development of the city is in
their hands.
A strong mayor need not be a charismatic
personality or a strong willed individual. They should be able to work within
their existing administrative structure, and understand it well enough to reap
maximum benefits from it. Looking at the growth and structure of cities around
the world, this is definitely something that is achievable.
The last 15 years have seen the city of
London grow and develop at a massive pace. The last 2 mayors of London, Boris
Johnson and Ken Livingstone, are actually the only two official mayors of the
city. It was due to Livingstone that the position of the head of the Greater
London Council was officially given the post of the mayor. While the current
mayor Boris Johnson is credited with many the reforms the city is taking
towards sustainability and being more environmentally friendly, many of these
reforms were initiated by Livingstone. The congestion tax as well the bicycle
rental scheme now known as Boris Bikes,
were developed under the tenure of Livingstone. Without getting into the
arguments of London city politics, and the assigning of blame and
responsibility, the examples of Johnson and Livingstone exemplify how a
political structure can be used to the fullest by a city mayor. Even though the
two represent different political parties, they both followed and implemented
similar policies as mayor of London. Johnson, known for being more vocal and
theatrical may have been able to garner more publicity, but the alone does not
qualify him as a strong and successful leader. Rather it was the decisions and
outcomes of his policies that qualify him as being effective.
While the concerns and priorities of the mayor
of London are very different from those of the mayor Cochin, they may serve as
examples. The key point being that regardless of the political system being
worked within, there is always room for the mayor to assert their power.
Currently in Kochi the state government and
parastatal agencies are subsuming this power. Thus, an important part of the
agenda of the next mayor should be how to take back some of their power, and
tip back the scales in favour of city government. This would be useful not just in making the
corporation more effective, but also prepare them to deal with challenges that
are sure to come if Kochi is selected as one of the city’s to be funded by the
smart cities mission.
* Author is the managing associate of CPPR- Centre for Urban Studies. Views are personal.