UKIP national party hails smashing of "undemocratic" cabinet system in Norfolk
PUBLISHED: 18:31 24 May 2013 | UPDATED: 18:32 24 May 2013
Archant Â© 2013
UKIP's national party said it was pleased to be involved in smashing the "undemocratic" cabinet system last night as the other party headquarters of the rainbow agreement were keen to hail local decision making.
But while Conservative head office remained tight-lipped following the agreement, news of the deal was being digested by national political commentators who hailed it a deal which could work well in the long-run for Tories nationally, with the narrative about letting the left in by splitting the right-wing vote having “never looked stronger”.
UKIP’s national spokesman said: “The national party was very clear after the election that we would leave it to the counties and the groups of councillors.
He said: “They know their area better and how to service the people. We are very much in favour of breaking up cabinet government which we feel has been a damage to local democracy. If we can break it up we are going to take that opportunity.
“What we don’t have is a Tory council. What we do have is the destruction of the one-party state, which we were dealing with previously.
“We are enormously sanguine about this. We are very pleased to be involved in smashing cabinet which was undemocratic.”
An East of England Labour Party spokesperson said: “This was a local agreement to allow an administration to be formed on Norfolk County Council after the Conservatives lost power at the election and were unable to secure a mandate to govern.
“In line with party rules, the Norfolk County Labour Group were given permission by the National Executive Committee to form a Labour-led Cabinet to govern in the best interests of Norfolk.”
The Green Party said: “The national party believe it is up to the local party to make the best local decisions they can. It is totally up to the party.”
A Liberal Democrat spokesman said: “We believe that our local party need to make this decision themselves in the interests of their constituents. They are better placed to do that than us at HQ.”