nothing is taken away
Stewardship governance establishes no new committee. Where this model speaks of the council, it means the body that already decides: the municipal council, the district assembly, the regional or national parliament, each at its own level. The council keeps what it has: the right to set the direction, to adopt the budget, and to have the final word on every question that comes before it. What changes is what reaches the council, and what happens after it has decided.
Today a council is asked to decide complex questions in little time, often without the expertise needed to weigh the options, and usually on a proposal that one department has prepared on its own. Under stewardship governance the council receives a proposal that has been worked through across departments, tested against the assessed developments, and whose financing has been proven. Afterwards it receives the evidence that its decision has in fact been carried out.
what the council gains
| today | with stewardship governance |
| complex questions, little time, one departmental proposal | options worked through across departments, financing proven |
| decisions that disappear into the administration | documented evidence that the decision was carried out |
| the budget year and the electoral term | a five-year horizon, rolled forward every year |
| responsibility dissolves when something goes wrong | named responsibility at every step, including the council’s own |
what the council decides
- the aims and priorities of the territory
- the budget
- the five-year development plan
- whether a proposal from a future forum is adopted or rejected
- whether a documented gap is closed or carried, and on what terms
The council does not decide the how. Project teams work out the concrete solutions and carry them through to implementation, within the frame the council has set and with named responsibility for every step.
the five-year development plan
The development plan is the instrument that extends the council’s reach beyond the budget year. It records the aims, the gaps that have been identified, and the way each gap is to be closed, with the measure, the estimated cost and the office responsible. The council adopts it.
The plan shall be rolled forward every year, not adopted anew. Each year the elapsed year drops out and a further year is added, so that the planning horizon never falls below five years. A newly elected council may change the plan at any time; what it does not have to do is start from nothing.
This matters because decisions whose effects last for decades are currently taken within an annual budget and an electoral term. The rolling plan gives the council a horizon that matches the questions it is actually deciding, without binding those who come after it.
proposals from the future forum
A future forum prepares the fundamental questions and hands the council a proposal. It decides nothing.
The council adopts the proposal or rejects it. A rejection shall be given with public reasons and with a better, financed plan for the same aim. This is the only restriction the model places on the council, and it is a restriction against the empty no, not against the council’s judgement.
Because the administration takes part in the forum, those who will carry out a decision are part of making it, instead of being handed the consequences at the end.
decisions that hold
A decision won by a narrow majority is fought for years afterwards and overturned after the next election. Three rules give decisions a longer life.
- A qualified majority for strategic decisions. Aims, priorities and the development plan shall be adopted by a two-thirds majority. What carries two thirds survives a change of majority.
- No anonymous no. A refusal to fund a documented gap shall be taken by named vote and with written reasons. The figure and the consequences shall be entered in the record.
- Responsibility follows the decision. Where the council formally decides not to provide the means and acknowledges the remaining gap, responsibility for damage arising from that gap passes from the head of department to the council. The responsibility then sits where the decision was taken.
None of this prevents a council from saying no. It prevents a no that nobody has to account for.
several authorities, one decision
Where a question concerns more than one authority – a district and its municipalities, a region and its districts – the council for that question shall be composed of the elected representatives of the authorities at the level below, together with one representative of the level above. The level above may veto a decision that breaks the law or directly endangers the whole. The veto shall be given with reasons and may be overruled by a three-quarters majority of the lower level after an independent review.