With reference to Tony Girling & Co's manifesto, why is it a matter for regret that we should have a contested election for our top officers?
It is a matter for self-congratulation that, for the second year running, the democratic process is seen to affect this election. Would that every council seat was similarly contested. Members pay heavily for the privilege and they should be encouraged to exercise their rights as frequently as possible.
The alternative, which Girling & Co seem to prefer, is the undemocratic "Buggins' turn" syndrome from which we only escaped last year thanks to Martin Mears and Robert Sayer.
Girling & Co's manifesto laughably canvasses a return to "establishment" rule. The first line claims they are "the candidates for the whole profession" but then it gives the game away in the heading to the last paragraph of their "outline of our policies and philosophy" - "the largest firms".
Martin Mears may well be criticised for his style but I do not believe that after only one year the majority of practitioners want a return to the recent "irrecoverable past".