It means that the Stoke-on-Trent area will be served by 44 councillors, across 37 smaller wards.
The majority of wards will be represented by individual councillors, but a few will have two or three.
Of course, no-one can say for sure how the new system will work out because we simply don't know yet but some concerns have risen making it all the more important voters consider their candidate carefully.
The main concern appears to be - what happens in the event of a councillor (in an single-councillor ward) falling ill, or having to take a long-term break from their duties. In the worst case scenario, what happens if a lazy or incompetent councillor is elected?
In the old system, a councillor would always have a colleague in the ward to help out, so what will become of wards which aren't fully represented in whichever way?
It would be expensive to hold elections for a temporary councillor to cover someone off sick and arguably not democratic to appoint somebody not elected by the electorate...
Another issue is workloads - what if an elected councillor is also required to serve on other panels or in other roles (such as Lord Mayor). One ward may have a Councillor able to commit more or less of their time to different jobs or tasks.
Stoke-on-Trent City Council have adopted the change subject to the Local Government Boundary Commission for England recommendations.
Below are a few opinions shared with StokeElect on twitter earlier today.
"I think it's the fact that we've got them for four years that is more the issue. Get a lazy one and it will be hard work"
"does mean one councillor is going to have to be all things to all men in a lot of places..."
"all depends how active they are, 1 active councillor is far better than 3 pen pushers"
"would have preferred 100% single member (or even dual member) wards - think there are +ve & -ve for old & new system."
Yep. Fair summary.
ReplyDelete