As I've mentioned before, I'm not a Stokie and only moved here recently. It didn't take me long to pick up the political hype of the area and it's got me hooked. Because I'm analysing the May 2011 elections - I thought it best to research a brief history of Council elections and get to grips with the system in place here.
What a headache that's caused me!
I'm writing this post to summarise my findings for the changes implemented in the last 15 years. I've also been looking more at specific ward results over the years, but this post is just about the election/councillor/wards systems.
I've used legislation.gov to find most of this information out and a bit of brain-power to work things out. If I've got something wrong, please tell me!
1995
The big reform of the Stoke-on-Trent local government system happened in 1995 when the 'Staffordshire (City of Stoke-on-Trent) (Structural and Boundary Changes) Order' was enacted.
It meant that Stoke-on-Trent would become a county in its own right and not be part of Staffordshire (in a legal sense) any long
It meant that Stoke-on-Trent would become a county in its own right and not be part of Staffordshire (in a legal sense) any long
er. This would mean a transfer of most responsibilities (excluding the police for example) to Stoke-on-Trent City Council.
This would all happen in reality on April 1 1997.
In 1996, elections would be held to elect a completely new set of councillors (although I believe they could stand to be elected again? Will be checking it out at the City Archives)
In 1996, elections would be held to elect a completely new set of councillors (although I believe they could stand to be elected again? Will be checking it out at the City Archives)
These 60 Councillors across 20 wards would then hold elections every year for one-third of the Council. In practice, it meant that the councillor in each ward with the lowest number of votes in 1996 would have their place put up for election (they could stand again for re-election) in 1998 - after two years of service.
In 1999, the councillor with the second lowest votes from back in 1996 would have their seat contested again.
And in 2000, the original most voted-for candidate in 1996 would have their seat contested.
I've put those words
In 1999, the councillor with the second lowest votes from back in 1996 would have their seat contested again.
And in 2000, the original most voted-for candidate in 1996 would have their seat contested.
I've put those words
into a table to make things a bit clearer on screen...
Councillor A received the most votes, B the second and C the least of the three.
Councillor A received the most votes, B the second and C the least of the three.
As you can see, after four years, a whole new selection of councillors is possible. But remember, councillors could stand for re-election. So 'D' could in fact be 'C' for example.
2001
By this point, the previous system had proved effective in that there was no major malfunctions in the system. However, The City of Stoke-on-Trent (Electoral Changes) Order 2001 made a slight alteration as well as a few boundary shifts.
It also meant the system would restart with a whole new Council (an 'all-out' election')
The pattern would now be that there would be no two-year grace period for all three councillors and the least successful of the three would ha
By this point, the previous system had proved effective in that there was no major malfunctions in the system. However, The City of Stoke-on-Trent (Electoral Changes) Order 2001 made a slight alteration as well as a few boundary shifts.
It also meant the system would restart with a whole new Council (an 'all-out' election')
The pattern would now be that there would be no two-year grace period for all three councillors and the least successful of the three would ha
ve their seat contested after 1 year.
To keep the 4-year term rule going, this would mean no election further down the time-frame as follows...
To keep the 4-year term rule going, this would mean no election further down the time-frame as follows...
This all followed in reality with the lack of election in 2009 (mirroring 2005 because of the 4-year rule).
2009
By 2009, many had grown tired of voting every year for just one councillor. The City of Stoke-on-Trent (Scheme of Elections) Order 2009 is a very small piece of legislation which makes a big difference.
By 2009, many had grown tired of voting every year for just one councillor. The City of Stoke-on-Trent (Scheme of Elections) Order 2009 is a very small piece of legislation which makes a big difference.
From 2011 (this election!) the "election every year by thirds" system would be abolished in favour for four-yearly all-out elections. A much simpler way of selecting a Council. As with the previous reforms, all current councillors lose their seat in may but may stand again.
2011
The Stoke-on-Trent (Electoral Changes) Order 2011 made the final update to the rules just in time for the May election. The Order changed the boundaries and number of councillors electable to each ward - the changes I'm sure you're all familiar with as they have been the subject of much media and political coverage in the local area.
Read the orders for yourself here: http://bit.ly/gmXpDT
So there you have a brief guide to how Stoke-on-Trent has had its elections for the last 15 years. Who knows how we'll be voting in 15 more to come?
You missed a bit...............
ReplyDeleteOh dear. At least I'm not a historian so I don't need to be too embarrassed! Would have been helpful to know what I missed though :)
ReplyDelete