WE'VE got a welcome opportunity for consultation about the way Harlow Council makes decisions in future.

Harlow Council's aims of increasing openness, accountability and involving more people in decision-making are excellent. But the government's recent fourth option of an improved committee system seems potentially more democratic than a cabinet and leader.

I support reservations about the two mayor options such as there being too much power for one person, they can't be removed for four years and personality politics.

The council's preferred option is for a cabinet and leader. But research on early cabinet models does not augur well for developing an open democracy.

There was a tendency to meet behind closed doors, excluding public and press.

Concentration of power in a few hands did not increase accountability. If cabinets were appointed, a potential for patronage existed.

Most councillors could be reduced to marginalised backbenchers, limited to occasional uneasy scrutiny.

This model is a recipe for conflict. A cabinet has wide-ranging responsibilities. Feeling overburdened and under siege, there's limited time for shared policy development.

Too cosy a relationship might develop between senior management and cabinet, with a shift in the balance of power from cabinet to senior management, with access to, and control over information.

The sovereign role of the whole council is diminished.

The much-maligned committee structure had its strengths. Power was shared more widely and openly among councillors and staff.

Public and press accessibility to meetings increased potential influence and accountability.

The council is the ultimate sovereign body, determining policy for public record. It is not simply a debating chamber for competing party political resolutions.

Harlow's Area Committees could be strengthened. Executive powers over local budgets could involve more residents. They could also fulfil more searching scrutiny roles.

It was argued that there would be no-one directly accountable and decision-making would be too lengthy.

Yet there would still be an elected leader and councillors. Chairs could speed up non-controversial decisions, or meet more often.

An enhanced committee system, working with local residents could increase participation and therefore pass the key tests of transparency, openness and accountability.

Have a look and see what you think.

JEAN CLARK,

Rushmead Villas,

School Lane,

Harlow