Standing up for democracy
IN last week’s column, Labour leader Rachel Burgess wrote about the Council’s ongoing public consultation on whether to change Wokingham Borough’s election system. Her column unfortunately contained several errors, which I wish to correct.
Reading Cllr Burgess’ piece, you would think that we have foisted this whole process on the public.
We have not.
Wokingham Borough must undergo a ‘Ward Boundary Review’, in which an independent body looks at making sure that our electoral areas are the right place and the right size.
At the start of the process, the council must decide on whether to have every ward having elections once every four years (Whole Council Elections or All-Out Elections), or every ward having elections in three out of every four years (Elections by Thirds).
Neither option is currently used in the Borough.
Some areas have Elections by Thirds, and some do not. As such, the Council was obliged to ask you which system you think the Council should have.
Is Cllr Burgess saying that we shouldn’t ask you what you think? After all it is you, the residents, who should decide.
The Labour leader also attacks the way the online consultation form works. Given a clear interest, I properly recused myself from the content and nature of the consultation. It was prepared and undertaken by Council officers to the exclusion of any councillor.
As your reply is an instruction to the Council, there must be checks to stop people replying numerous times by requiring personal details – and thus removing people’s right to be anonymous.
However, we have run numerous other consultations in the exact same way – is Cllr Burgess now saying that every consultation we have run is invalid?
It’s important to be clear about what is on offer. We are unable to have what we currently have which is wards which broadly reflect communities, and a borough election in three out of every four years but not an election in every ward.
Currently wards are one, two or three councillor wards either going to election once every four years, two years or every year (excepting the fallow year).
The Boundary Commission argues that the system must be electorally uniform to be electorally fair.
The consultation leaflet is very clear about the options, and the pros and cons.
Under the law, if we have Elections by Thirds, every ward will have to have three councillors, and cover a large area to be equal in number of electors with others.
This means that there will be councillors who reflect several villages, or parts of towns, which may have very different priorities.
How will your local councillors be able to represent all their residents?
By contrast, under All-Out Elections, there can be different ward sizes with different numbers of councillors. This means that the Local Government Boundary Commission, who make the final decision on where wards go, can draw up areas that really reflect existing communities, rather than lumping your neighbourhood together with another that have nothing in common.
Cllr Burgess references the savings quoted in the consultation. These are not my numbers, nor have they been arrived at by any other councillor. They are the work of the Council’s Chief Financial Officer and Monitoring Officer.
Cllr Burgess is either suggesting that they are incompetent or mendacious – which is it? The savings which could be made are material equivalent to 1% of the Council tax.
As the lowest funded authority in England, we need to be sure that we are spending your money wisely and not on vanity projects.
Finally, we turn to this bizarre assertion that All-Out Elections is an attempt to hide from the voters.
On the contrary, All-Out Elections mean that if you don’t like what the party in charge are doing, you can remove them from power in one sweep.
There is a real lack of courage in standing behind a system where only a third of councillors are facing the voters at any one time.
It means residents can vote for or against a party, and the party in power will stay in power. It also means parties in Opposition can promise unicorns, knowing that however well they do at the ballot box, they still won’t get into power to deliver on them; opposition can be entirely dishonest in their approach to the public without any possibility that they will be found out.
All-out elections are what Parliament, Counties, Mayors, Crime Commissioners, and the vast majority of Unitaries and Districts do once every four or five years; it what European elections were. We are an outlier for no apparently good reason.
The Conservatives in Wokingham Borough back adopting All-Out Elections because we believe that is the fairest system, the one that ensures councillors best reflect a community and value for money.
However most importantly, we want to know what you, the public, think we should do. Despite what Labour claims, that’s not an “affront” to democracy but standing up for democracy.
So please reply to the consultation https://engage.wokingham.gov.uk/en-GB/ projects/future-election-cycle on the engage.wokingham.gov.uk platform. The Consultation ends on 15th April.