It is unlikely a character of adequate qualities will choose to surface. The traditional Carlisle families and businesses, which could have produced a 21st century Mayor, are long gone.My great fear is the candidate gaining the most votes could be a million miles from having those "adequate qualities". If there is a vote there MUST be a box so one can indicate that none of the candidates gain approval. Horrific if the Mayor elected was simply the best of the "bunch".

We don't need an elected mayor. You might end up with with either a mascot monkey as in Hartlepool or, even worse, Boris Johnson

Irrespective of your views on an elected mayor, what is the purpose of reducing the requirement for a referendum ?

This open the city up to running an expensive ballot, when very few people actually care. So what is the point ? with a low requirement there would be a low turnout and the cost.... hardly a good use of public money in the current climate.

A single person with sweeping powers..... really??? I can't say that gives me any confidence, although I do agree with the sentiments of the other posters, we need change, I'm just not convinced one person with such power is the right way to go - Remember Tony Blair, he wanted war and that what the country still has....

Not over keen on the elected mayor idea as it would be heavily underwritten by the major parties like the recent waste of money aka crime commissioner but I agree the local councils need wiped out. Cumbria has less population than many cities yet we have multiple local authorities all duplicating services and city and county councillors making a mint by claiming two sets of expenses.

I agree with John, Carlisle would, I believe, benefit in many ways from having an elected mayor. He or she would be able to give the effective leadership that is currently lacking in local politics. The present adversarial system leads to little more than political argument for its own sake when what our City needs is progressive governance that delivers effective and efficient services to our community.

It’s said that we get the politicians we deserve and that is certainly true in Carlisle. How many people take an active interest in what our Council does? Precious few if my experience of attending last Tuesday’s full Council meeting is anything to go by. I was one of three members of the public who went along to see what they are doing – and one of us was a former MP. The turnout speaks volumes about the ability of our local politicians to engage with the people they represent.

An elected mayor could also wrest back the powers that appear to have been usurped by a seemingly overstuffed senior management team. The Council has been reducing its services, staffing and responsibilities for years yet Carlisle’s senior managers seem to be immune from the cuts affecting other ranks.

I wonder how many people know that local authorities such as Carlisle are only required by statute to employ three senior officers. They are: a head of paid service, an officer responsible for financial administration (also known as the section 151 officer, and a monitoring officer. No other senior manager is required.

Even better news for the charge payer is that one person can hold more than one of those posts at the same time and can even hold those posts for more than one authority at the same time. Imagine the savings that could be made. It’s clear that the elected member system of governance isn’t going to rid us of our bloated senior management team, perhaps an elected mayor would deliver meaningful reductions in the monies we spend on unnecessary officers.
Go for it John, you have my support.

I'd do away with the whole local council idea as they're largely ineffective, inefficient and pander to their own egos.

Replace it with a directly elected mayor (for want of a better term) who has executive powers for the duration of their term (probably 4 or 5 years). Accountability can be given to a council of these mayors for a wider regional area (such as Cumbria).

Local councils achieve nothing but create bi-partisan politics and a reduction in the quality of local services.