Gloucester Green Party
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Gloucester Green Party Submission to the Gloucestershire Electoral Review This is our response to both Stage One and Two of the current electoral review of Gloucestershire. 1) We are not in favour of reducing the few two-member wards to single member wards. Currently there are only 2 two-member divisions within Gloucester , Quedgeley and Westgate. Quedgeley covers 2 wards at City Council elections, Quedgeley Fieldcourt and Quedgeley Severn Vale, and therefore, could be subdivided into these to create single member divisions. Westgate, however, is home to the City Centre Community Partnership which has won the ‘Good Communication & Networking’ award and ‘looks after’ the whole of Westgate. This community partnership shouldn’t be undermined by a geographical split. Furthermore, in two-member wards there is a greater likelihood that the electorate are represented by more than one political party, and this leads to a more diversified representation of opinions. 2) We disagree with the reduction of the number of Gloucestershire County Councillors from 63 to 53 for a number of reasons. In our view, the main driver for this proposed reduction is political, as it was a manifesto commitment by the ruling Conservative group. Their claim that the Conservative gains in the 2009 County Council elections are based on their manifesto and its promise to reduce the number of councillors by at least 10% cannot be substantiated, as many factors, including the expenses scandal in Westminster , might have influenced voters. A further argument for a smaller number of County Councillors has been to save money in line with Gloucestershire’s 30% budget cut. However, the financial savings by such a reduction will not be substantial. The average County Councillor in Gloucestershire earns between £1,700 and £8,800 basic pay. And it is these whose number would be reduced, while Cabinet and other councillors with special appointments earn what makes their salaries expensive through ‘special responsibility allowances’, travel expenses and subsistence. Should the workload of each councillor really be reduced, then allowances could be reduced in line, saving almost as much money. In contrast to these claims, we believe it is important to have local County Councillors who represent their local communities and residents, their particular concerns, needs, and aspirations. To achieve this, councillors must engage with residents and residents’ groups in their constituencies, gain knowledge and understanding of their concerns and opinions. As laid out in “Role Description of a Local Councillor” of Appendix B by the Liberal Democrats and Labour Group in their response to Stage One in October 2010 and as published online by LGBCE, key roles and duties include, “being accessible and liaising / consulting extensively with local communities, organisations, and businesses”, “to assist the council to achieve a full understanding within local communities of its role and functions and to promote it as being a listening and accessible organisation”. Given the geographical spread of Gloucestershire with both thinly populated rural areas and the complexity of its densely populated towns and cities, this requires an adequate number of representatives with time for community engagement. On average, Gloucestershire County Councillors represent around 7,500 residents. Already the Councillor Commission reports that councillors feel short of time. So if the number of councillors should be reduced, and consequently electoral divisions become larger, councillors would have to compromise even further the time and attention they can offer to their ‘representees’. It seems the proposal to reduce the number of councillors doesn’t take acknowledge or value this when it claims that in the future there won’t be a need for the same number of councillors. But this argument is solely based on time that councillors might be required to be appointed to council and outside bodies – so much work to be divided by so many people. We also believe local democracy should be a relevant and accessible part of the fabric of the local community. Thus any concerned local person, most likely having working or other obligations, who feels that they can contribute positively to their community by standing as a councillor should be able to do so without worries that the duties of a responsible councillor will frequently take up unreasonable amounts of their free time. The divisions should be no larger than can normally be managed by a person with a full time job or other obligations. Otherwise there is a greater risk that councillors will be predominantly retired, independently wealthy, or professional politicians. This we believe will contribute further to the decline in public participation in the voting process and apathy towards local government in general. In addition, the government claims that it wants to return more power to local councils. This would surely mean again more work for local councillors. Furthermore, we have seen a surge in local campaigns and petitions in Gloucestershire following the announcements of cuts to various public service provisions like libraries and youth centres, and the attempted sell-off of forests. It seems that more than before, local councillors were contacted by local residents to find local solutions. Given the political climate, it seems likely that this kind of local engagement, and requests for scrutiny of Cabinet decisions will increase in the future as more and more communities and residents will be affected by the coming cuts. In 2009, the size of scrutiny committees was already reduced from 11 to 9 members. Any further reduction would seem to us to point in a direction away from local engagement and democratic accountability. We support the opinion of most other parties who responded to Stage One of the electoral review to keep the number of Gloucestershire County Councillors at 63 and not to reduce the council size. 3) We support to maintain the use of co-terminus wards between Gloucester City Council and Gloucestershire County Council. Many wards and divisions in Gloucester have long traditions and many of them have their own community partnerships and residents groups. As these are often formed to express local opinion, it would seem unsatisfactory to change electoral divisions in a way that would split these. These are in our point of view: Barton Street Area (Barton & Tredworth), Moreland, Podsmead, Matson & Robinswood, Hucclecote, Barnwood, Brockworth, Longlevens (which now belongs to Tewkesbury Borough Council), Kingsholm, Westgate. Should there be need to redraw boundaries, some streets of the current Quedgeley Fieldcourt ward belong to Tuffley (around Bodinham Avenue) which might be more appropriately included in Podsmead. We are looking forward to your response to this electoral review. Charley Bircher, Gloucester Green Party committee member, on behalf of Gloucester Green Party .