Rees: ‘Our focus is not sitting around a campfire singing Kumbaya’

Marvin Rees claimed that the mayoral system of governance has been “phenomenal” for Bristol as he continued to defend his role following a vote to put the position to a citywide referendum that could see it scrapped.

The Labour mayor also predicted a “very messy period of time for the city” during the the debate in the run-up to the May 2022 referendum.

“A mayoral system is not focused on internal conversations, positioning and backroom deals,” Rees told David Garmston on BBC One’s Politics West on Sunday morning.

Here is the full transcript of their interview:

Garmston
“Are you going to be the last elected mayor of Bristol?”

Rees
“Well, it’s a possibility. I think the campaign they run will be very hyperbolic. It’ll be very low and it’s gonna be very messy period of time for the city and we’ll see what comes out the other end of it.”

Garmston
“Would that be a shame in your opinion, if you or someone like you were to disappear?”

Rees
“I think it’d be more than a shame. And it’s not about me. I’ve already said I’m standing down in 2024. This is about the future of the city. I think it’d be more than a shame. I think we’d lose a system of city leadership and that – I don’t just mean council leadership, I mean, leadership within the city – that has been phenomenal for the city, enabled us to really get some big things done and raise our profile, attract inward investment, and really put Bristol on the  map.”

Garmston
“Yeah, but that’s you marking your own homework. The councillors don’t feel that do they?”

Rees
“Why the councillors voted for it, I think it’s because it’s a system that they’re struggling – many of them are struggling – to cope with. A mayoral system is not focused on internal conversations, positioning and backroom deals. A mayoral system is focused on the city and getting things done.”

The referendum in May 2022 will ask whether the mayoral model should be replaced by a committee system made up of councillors – photo: Ellie Pipe

Garmston
“You see, they claim that you’re dismissive of them. And yet your reaction to the debate was to be dismissive of them. You said they were like a load of schoolchildren effectively.”

Rees
“No, I’m dismissive of the quality of the argument. Look what happens. What am I supposed to, how do you engage with a debate that likens me to Pontius Pilate after five years of being likened to Trump and Putin and Kim Jong Un? That’s not a quality debate. The argument’s around democracy disappearing with no new ones. So for example, there are organisations, there are groups in the city – you don’t have to go far – who were saying actually, we never had this level of engagement with Bristol City Council. The One City plan, for the first time the city has come together and put a plan on the table that takes us up to 2050, 30 years in the foreground, tackling hunger, housing and we just dismiss all of that engagement as though it doesn’t exist? That’s not a quality debate.”

Garmston
“You obviously, you take it personally, don’t you?”

Rees
“No, you’re reaching. I’m finished in 2024. It’s not about personal.”

Garmston
“But would it be a reflection on you if you were the last?”

Rees
“David, can I just challenge? If we do the debate like this it’s not going to help? First of all on the personal point, it’s not personal for me. I recognise that some of the arguments made against the mayoral model will be personal and you just have to look on social media: ‘let’s get Marvin’, this, that and the other. But for me, it’s not a personal question. It’s about what’s the model of governance that will best service Bristol.”

………………………………….

Read more:

• Should Bristol retain the elected mayor model?
• ‘Getting rid of the mayor would relegate Bristol to the status of a parish council’
• ‘Bristol’s mayoral model has failed to deliver on its promises’

………………………………….

Garmston
“Let me just read you a quote from Karin Smyth, Labour MP for Bristol South. She says the system of local government with an elected mayor is designed to ride roughshod over democracy. That’s one of your own Labour MPs.”

Rees
“People in my own party can be wrong and Karen’s wrong on this occasion.”

Garmston
“Just one last issue. We have a West of England as well. And you have to all work together. At the end of the day there can be only one president one king, one queen or whatever. And there’s been a bit of, sort of, sharp elbows, I suppose, in that top committee room. I mean, again, that’s a problem, isn’t it, from having too many mayors, your opponents would say.”

Rees
“They’re different jobs. And this is something that must come out.”

Garmston
“But you don’t get on.”

Rees
“Are you talking about personalities and relationships, or jobs? As those are different things. Let’s boil down to what question you’re actually asking me.”

Garmston
“We know there’s friction within the West of England.”

Rees
“Okay, but what’s your question?”

Garmston
“So does having another mayor make that situation worse?”

Rees
“Alright, okay, well, that’s a specific question. They’re different jobs with a whole different realm of responsibility. The metro mayor is on three lines: transport, homes and skills. The metro mayor has a billion pounds to spend for 30 years. We spend a billion pounds a year in this organisation and our remit covers adult social care, crisis situation, children’s services, right down to potholes as well. It is a different job. The title is the same. But essentially the metro mayor is the chair of a meeting of the leaders of local authorities, and we set it up so we could get the money investment. In terms of getting on, that’s about delivery. Our whole focus is on not sitting around a campfire singing Kumbaya. It’s about how do we make sure we get the billions of pounds Bristol needs to build homes and decarbonise and protect nature and build an inclusive economy.”

Main photo: BBC

Read more: Referendum to decide whether to replace elected with committee system

Listen to the latest Bristol24/7 Behind the Headlines podcast: