POLITICAL figures in Stoke-on-Trent have labelled the city's power-sharing cabinet system a disaster for democracy.

Elected Mayor Mark Meredith told the audience at a public governance debate at Staffordshire University last night that he felt the cross-party cabinet he had formed with Liberal Democrats and Tories had helped take the city forward in the last 12 months.

But Stoke-on-Trent Central MP Mark Fisher blamed the coalition between the three main parties for high levels of voter apathy in the city.

“The coalition may be well intentioned, but to the average person in the street it is meaningless and it is just papering over the cracks,” he said. “The truth is that the political parties in this city have failed.

“No city can be well governed with one party as its voice. I think the coalition is a disaster.”

Staffordshire University vice-chancellor and Stoke-on-Trent Governance Commission member Professor Christine King said the coalition caused confusion among the electorate.

“We heard from so many people that they were confused about party politics on the council,” she said. “This suggested that the clear alternatives were not being understood.”

The five panellists were united in condemning a Government decision to limit the options on how the city should be run in future. But there was heated debate about which of the two choices on offer would best serve the city.

Under the terms of the Local Government Act 2000, the current elected mayor and council manager system can only be replaced by either an elected mayor and a cabinet or a council leader and a cabinet.

The city council will choose its preferred option in September then hold a public referendum on the issue.

Mick Temple, professor of politics and journalism at Staffordshire University, said: “It is absolutely ludicrous that the people of Stoke-on-Trent are not being offered a proper choice.”

Potteries Alliance leader councillor Peter Kent-Baguley said he was also unhappy about the limited choice, but nothing could be done about the legislation that set out the options.

He added: “What is important is that there is a referendum, because I'm sure there is a move afoot to get rid of the referendum.”

Professor King said the governance commission had been aware of people's dissatisfaction with the options.

But she said: “It is in the law. We looked very hard at the legislation and I know a lot of people said they wanted a third option. But we have to accept that this is where we are.

“Let's get moving and get this city where it needs to be.”

Mr Meredith said he was keen to see a referendum take place and hoped to stand for re-election if voters chose the elected mayor and cabinet option. “I got elected on the basis of promising a referendum to get rid of the elected mayor and council manager system because I think it is undemocratic,” he said.

“I think the very best option by a mile is a directly elected mayor with a cabinet of councillors.

“I believe I would get the Labour nomination and I would certainly seek the position.”