Michael Becket, Liberal Democrats Juliet Boddington, Alliance for Green Socialism - save the NHS Sam CRoss, UKIP Robert Goodwill, Conservative David Hugh Malone, Green Party Ian Alistair McInnes, Labour
"God knows I'm no Tory, and I never set eyes on a Whig yet without feeling the need of a bath..."
This is the first time in my memory that Labour have put up a full slate of council candidates. Being a co-incident election I think that will push the Labour vote up.
Additionally, I've seen more Labour leaflets than ever before. I think I've spotted the tail end of a parliamentary drop and council leaflets seem to be going out a couple of hours before I get there with my leaflets. I expect that Labour will do better here than last time.
Well yes, but they are going to be a long way off winning.
Oh, definitely, it's not 1997 again. Labour got 26% last time, I would be unsurprised if they tipped over 30%.
What I do expect is an upswing in councillors, purely down to the fact that Labour have a full slate this time. In the past many Labour supporters had no Labour candidate to vote for. It's a shame that one of their main policy planks is to slash local democracy, but I have observed that it is a innate core belief in certain sectors of the Labour Party that The People shouldn't be allowed anything as dangerous as democracy. They might go and actually vote for somebody instead of doing what they're told, damn them!
If you're referring to PCCs, the people had their chance to vote for them. They didn't, because they didn't want them.
No, I'm refering to their policy to reduce the number of local councillors from 64 to 28 by merging the borough and county. Of course, by more than doubling councillors' workload I expect they won't be doubling their pay.
While I have agreements with some of the arguments in favour of unitary authorities, you do it because a unitary authority makes sense, not to arbitarily slash councillor numbers. The proposed 28 councillors would be taking on the combined workload of the existing 64 councillors (50 borough + 14 county). You need to provide evidence that the elected member workload has decreased to support a decrease in councillor numbers. A simple merger of two authorities is not a decrease in total workload. It is essentially the same workload. Yes, with some efficencies due to a single entity doing the workload, but not a 56% reduction in workload - unless this goes hand-in-hand with a drastic removal of local council responsibilites - which, judging by all parties' national manifestos, is the exact opposite of proposals.
(Somebody could remind me, how many county+district councillors did York+district have before unitary status, and how many does it have now doing the same job the two authorities used to do?)
Post by East Anglian Lefty on May 4, 2015 20:52:08 GMT
28 councillors for Scarborough & Whitby would only be a little over 3,000 councillors per elector, which wouldn't be excessively high by the standards of unitaries. It's a little smaller than I'd like, because once you discount the executive and the councillors who will never be any use you're left with limited numbers to perform scrutiny problems, but it's closer to the right answer than the present arrangement.
Labour's general election performance was very good - I don't know if the CLP put in special effort. (Of course, it was an unexpected gain for Lawrie Quinn in 1997, so it does have a Labour history.)
It's the first time in ages that Labour have put up a full slate of council candiates, with the result that they've doubled their number of councillors and will have a base to build on for future elections. I suspect a enthusiastic new broom has taken over.