2017 numberCouncillors Average no of electors per cllr SALFORD 174571 60 2909.516667 Bolton 198759 60 3312.65 Rochdale 161474 60 2691.233333 Tameside 171656 57 3011.508772 Gateshead 146650 66 2221.969697 Stoke on Trent 185646 44 4219.227273 Newcastle upon Tyne 181840 78 2331.282051 Halton 96279 56 1719.267857 Nottingham 221352 55 4024.581818 Oldham 159823 60 2663.716667 Derby 175878 51 3448.588235 Wigan 235732 75 3143.093333 Kingston upon Hull 184854 59 3133.118644 Coventry 230239 54 4263.685185 Middlesbrough 94704 46 2058.782609 St Helens 137971 48 2874.395833

2757428 929

Average per authority 172339.25 58.0625 2968.167922

Electoral review of Salford City Council – Conservative Group Submission

Submission on council size, to be submitted to the local Government Boundary Commission for England

In light of the Local Government Boundary Commission for England (LGBCE) review of Salford’s council size started in 2018, the following document is Salford City Council’s Conservative Group council size submission, which provides the LGBCE with a summary of the Conservative Group’s view on the appropriate council size and reasoning for this figure across the following broad areas (as stated in the LGBCE guidance on council size for local authority elected members and staff):

Governance and decision making, scrutiny functions and the wider Representative role of councillors.

Salford City Council is currently arranged into 20 wards electing 60 councillors by thirds. The Council has been under Labour control since its foundation and following the most recent local elections 50 of the 60 councillors represent the controlling Labour party, nine are Conservative, and there is one Independent councillor (elected as Labour). We have factored the ruling group’s preference to retain the election of the Council by thirds into our reasoning although we acknowledge it is not a subject for this review.

Salford operates with a Directly Elected Mayor in contrast to the other 9 GM authorities which operate a Leader and Cabinet model. The first election of the elected Directly Elected Mayor was held on the 3rd May 2012 following a local Referendum which led to a “yes” vote for a Mayoral system was held on 26th January 2012. This means that the first date that a referendum to abolish the Mayoral system could be held is 26th January 2022. However, even if a referendum is held, an Elected Mayor elected in May 2020 would serve a 4 year term until May 2024, regardless of the outcome. Mindful of this, we have considered how the role of a councillor has changed since the adoption of this system and acknowledge that it will be a material factor for much if not all of the lifetime of any new ward boundaries.

The Directly Elected Mayor has overall executive responsibility for the delivery of the Council’s services. The Mayor leads and chairs the Cabinet and has responsibility for proposing the general budget and policy to Council. He is not a councillor and so does not have a ward role. He is answerable to Council for major decisions such as setting the council’s budget for the year.

All of Salford City Council’s executive functions are vested in the elected Directly Elected Mayor. Section 9E(2) of the Local Government Act 2000 (as amended) provides that the elected Directly Elected Mayor may determine to exercise any of Salford City Council’s executive functions personally, or may arrange for the exercise of any of the council’s executive functions by the Cabinet as a whole, another member of the Cabinet, a committee of the Cabinet, an officer of the council or, an area committee.

Full Council is responsible for holding the Mayor to account. The Council typically meets seven times a year with Budget council meetings in February. In contrast to the majority of GM Councils, meetings are held during the day.

Salford City Council’s Cabinet consists of a directly elected mayor (the elected Directly Elected Mayor) and nine other Cabinet members, including two Deputy Elected Mayors who are also Councillors.

All Cabinet members have defined areas of responsibility to support the Directly Elected Mayor’s priorities. All Members in the Cabinet are Labour Group Members. Cabinet meetings are open to Members of the Public to attend. Opposition and Backbench councillors do not have direct input into these meetings and are not a part of the decision making process.

Lead members are Councillors selected by the Directly Elected Mayor to exercise some of his functions in matters relevant to specific functions of the council, as outlined in the Council’s constitution. In this submission we have considered what impact holding such a role has (a) on the role of the Councillor acting as a Lead Member and (b) the impact on their ward colleagues.

If for any reason the Directly Elected Mayor is unable to act, either of the two Deputy Elected Mayors may act in his place, on all areas of policy, responsibilities or any other matters as required. This is increasingly a consideration since the introduction of the Greater Manchester Mayoral system and the inclusion of the Directly Elected Mayor within the GM Combined Authority Cabinet.

We view this level of centralisation as material in our determination of the eventual size of the council. We have considered the decision making power/input of ordinary members along-side the possible impact for councillors in wards which are represented by one or more executive members. 2

Councillors are elected to represent the people of Salford across 20 electoral wards and represent their ward constituents at council meetings – in addition, most members host advice surgeries for constituents to address local concerns and seek assistance. We have considered the time demands of both community and council activities in this submission.

We note the generally high number of candidates (approx. 5 per ward) in local elections and have considered the enthusiasm of the wider electorate to participate in the City’s democratic process. Whilst a feature of First-past-the-Post elections is that it tends leave only a small number parties represented, we have considered the impact of council size in ensuring the most representative Council possible under the current system. We believe that any proposal should encourage increased participation.

The Conservative group considered whether the above factors had resulted in a quantifiable impact on the way they represent their constituents and in particular whether the Mayoral system had changed the way they discharge their duties.

Salford is one of ten councils which make up Greater Manchester Combined Authority (GMCA). The GMCA is run by the first Mayor of GM and the leaders of the 10 councils. As a group we considered what impact the new Greater Manchester Mayoral system had on the role and duties of a local councillor.

The Directly Elected Mayor of Salford is a portfolio holder in the Greater Manchester Mayor’s cabinet – this was a material concern for the group as it was noted that he has delegated significant functions to his deputies to off-set his new commitments. This in turn has an impact for ward members.

Additionally, we note that the new Greater Manchester Mayoral system includes important governance features, which ensure that individual authority members retain influencing and veto powers. The future role of councillors in exercising this power was considered.

At a local level Salford wards are grouped into eight neighbourhoods consisting of either two or three wards and each neighbourhood holds a number of committees according to local needs. The relevant ward councillors for a neighbourhood take part in these meetings which typically last 2 hours. All of the councillors who have been elected in the wards covered by each of Salford’s Community Committees are appointed as voting Members of their Community Committee and are responsible for making decisions in relation to that committee’s devolved budget. In 2017 to 2018, approximately £1.03 per head of the population is allocated to each community committee where decisions are made on how the budget should be spent. Each community committee elects a budget sub-group from among its members. They assess applications and make recommendations about how the funding should be spent. Budget sub-groups include local residents and local councillors. In addition to the community committee devolved budgets, a further £50,000 per year funding for highways and transport improvements is devolved to each community committee. This gives local people an opportunity to have a say on highways improvements and road safety in their areas.

The group considered the time dedicated to these sub-groups and the importance of Councillors working with residents on spending priorities. It was noted that in 4 of the 8 Community Committee Areas there were only 6 Councillors and that significant patronage was therefore awarded to a relatively small group.

Another key area of Council members’ roles is participation in the Overview and Scrutiny process. Overview and scrutiny committees are the main way by which the cabinet is held to account in public for the services the council provides. They examine the authority's policies and other matters of more general concern, often making recommendations either to the full council or to the cabinet on future policy options.

As a group we would contend that this still constitutes the most effective way for the opposition to hold the executive to account and affect decision making within the Authority. It was noted that most members of the Opposition group are members of more than one committee in order to ensure that all opposition places are taken up. This has a significant impact on members’ time.

The scrutiny committees meet monthly (except during the Council recess over summer) and the meetings are around 2.5 to 3 hours in length. The membership of scrutiny committees comprises elected members from all the political parties with a broadly proportional allocation of places.

3

It is of note that the relatively small size of the opposition means that there are only two non-Labour members on a normal committee and as such any change in the council’s size will have a material impact on the diversity of opinion on any such committee.

In addition to council business, the other significant part of the councillor’s time is the representative role they have with their constituents.

In addition to every-day ‘door to door’ contact, Councillors are also involved in community events. For example local Christmas lights, Easter egg hunts and music festivals etc as well as larger city-wide events from time to time.

In terms of casework, members dealt with a range of issues on a daily basis, and members noted that recent innovations in social media had actually resulted in an increase in cases reported by residents.

In conclusion, it is the feeling of the group was that there has been a material change in the role of a local member, moving away from decision making at Council meetings towards community based activity. However, whilst it was generally felt that the mayoral system had sped this process up, the shift was occurring as a result of wider advances in communications and information technology and that members were more readily contactable than has historically been the case and this in turn had led to an increase in case work.

Members noted that email, Facebook and Twitter were all staple parts of their interaction with their constituents, in addition to more traditional forms of communication and that they benefited from being able to work collaboratively with their ward colleagues.

In addition to the above factors, members considered the growing population of the city, which forecasts that by 2024 there will be a ratio of 3375 electors per member on current numbers (increasing from the 2017 figure of 2948) and increase of nearly 15%.

Whilst initially minded to explore the viability of reducing the size of the council in line with a stated ambition to reduce the cost of politics in the city, it was not felt that a reduction in the number of members would be conducive to active representation by local members and could result in an unmanageable burden for elected members, especially those in full time employment, with young families or providing care for relatives. As earlier noted, some wards are represented by executive members, we feel this too should be a consideration as the additional responsibilities of any such member will impact their ability to deal with casework and could create additional work for their ward colleagues.

Lastly, we note that the current CIPFA ‘nearest neighbour’ comparisons (attached with this submission) would indicate a council size of 58 for Salford (rounded to 57 for the nearest multiple of 3) for the current electorate of the City and have included population projections to 2024 in reaching a final figure.

Considering these factors, projecting outward to the expected 2024 electorate and with the Labour group’s intention to retain elections by thirds, we are minded to recommend to the LGBCE that the coming review proceed on the basis of the status quo – that is 20 3-member wards.

4