Lord Provost's role: 'Coalitions and tight votes are now more likely'

A WEEK ago the News urged councillors to stop squabbling and get on with the business of running Edinburgh. With a heavy heart, we need to return to the message today.

Last time, our call followed the expulsion from a council meeting of Labour leader Andrew Burns. At the time he was furious that the decision was made on the casting vote of Lord Provost George Grubb.

Councillor Burns is clearly still burning at the insult and, as we report today, he is writing to Mr Grubb to complain about the way he does business. He alleges "formal practices aren't being followed" and that the Provost is biased towards his fellow Lib Dems and their SNP partners.

The Labour leader has some backing from the Greens and Tories. With echoes of the debate over the House of Commons Speaker, there are now calls for reform of the role of the Provost and they way he or she is elected.

The News is all for modernisation, especially if takes account of the fact that proportional representation has changed the face of local government. Edinburgh's four-way split is almost unique, but coalitions and tight votes are now more likely.

If Provosts are to have a casting ballot it is right that – like Holyrood's Presiding Officer – they act independently. We do not agree that there should be a secret ballot for the post as there is too much secrecy in government already. Let candidates stand on their merits and once in post act for the city, not their party.

Granted, this will make parties seeking to form an administration reluctant to lose a voting member, but most city residents will care little if it allows the Provost to take a stronger line.

It might also help them adopt the mantle of "Mr/Mrs Edinburgh", and spend their time promoting the city to the world – rather than arguing about procedure with local rivals.

No-one to care
IT SEEMS incredible that someone could die in their home in Scotland's capital in 2009 and their death go unnoticed for years.

But that is exactly what appears to have happened to Isabella Purves of Rodney Street. She was in her 80s, but we know little more of her – no wonder she was able to "disappear" so easily.

It is a sad lament of our times that no relatives were around, no authority was looking out for her, no neighbours realised something was wrong. It is true that no-one was responsible for Ms Purves in life or death . . . and that's the saddest part of this tragedy.