Pimpernal
Forum Regular
A left-wing agenda within a right-wing framework...
Posts: 2,873 
|
Post by Pimpernal on Oct 30, 2013 8:48:47 GMT
Despite 18 months till the next local elections, Swale tories have refused to call a byelection despite Cllrs Alan and Jean Willicombe having left for Lincolnshire!
They both 'represent' Woodstock Ward on Swale
In their - probably not greatly noticed - absence two other Tory councillors will be 'dealing with residents' correspondance'...
This is allegedly to save taxpayers the expense of a byelection...
Thoughts?
|
|
Tony Otim
Green
Suffering from Brexistential Despair
Posts: 11,892
|
Post by Tony Otim on Oct 30, 2013 8:54:31 GMT
Can a certain number of electors not call for a by-election whether or not the conservatives want one or not, or have the councillors in question not actually resigned, in which case I would have thought that another party might move for their disqualification. I'm sure David will be along soon to set me straight as to the law.
|
|
Pimpernal
Forum Regular
A left-wing agenda within a right-wing framework...
Posts: 2,873
|
Post by Pimpernal on Oct 30, 2013 8:56:23 GMT
As I understand it, as long as they attend one meeting each every 6 months they cannot be removed...
There is of course another election happening next year they could align a byelection with to save taxpayer money...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2013 8:57:43 GMT
I suspect that this is more the fear of UKIP than any concern about the cost of a byelection.
If two councillors have left the area and their workload is being taken up by others, that suggests that they are, effectively, tendering their resignations. They are the only councillors for the Woodstock ward so an election should take place.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2013 10:54:37 GMT
Thats pretty shameful. No wonder they are voting some pretty fruity characters into power in that neck of the woods. If it was 6-9 months I would have some sympathy. Not at 18 months.
|
|
Pimpernal
Forum Regular
A left-wing agenda within a right-wing framework...
Posts: 2,873
|
Post by Pimpernal on Oct 30, 2013 13:28:30 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2013 13:36:11 GMT
If they commute to meetings for the next 18 months its probably fair enough on their part. Do you know if they plan to do this? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2013 13:44:46 GMT
they may think they are saving the Tories a UKIP defeat but this action has virtually assured a defeat in 18 months time as your leaflets Pimp can be written now ?
do they still pick up the expenses ?
|
|
Pimpernal
Forum Regular
A left-wing agenda within a right-wing framework...
Posts: 2,873
|
Post by Pimpernal on Oct 30, 2013 14:08:44 GMT
If they commute to meetings for the next 18 months its probably fair enough on their part. Do you know if they plan to do this? Well as the very erudite Cllr quoted in the article pointed out... if they represent their constituents well and do a good job then there's no real argument... the fact is however they haven't been attending local meetings at all recently and there are some rather important issues cropping up in their ward. I'd expect at least a weekly visit to the ward - maybe once a fortnight each? They £150 or so mileage allowance they'd get for a journey to a Council meeting might encourage them though? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2013 14:23:59 GMT
Well this is a simple case for me. All councillors should live in the council they represent, if they move away then an automatic by-election is called within 3 months, unless the 6 month rule is in place.
We had a similar case in Brandwood with a Tory and I think it was Tyburn with a labour councilor and both were a disgrace they carried on.
|
|
Pimpernal
Forum Regular
A left-wing agenda within a right-wing framework...
Posts: 2,873
|
Post by Pimpernal on Oct 30, 2013 18:57:11 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by iainbhx on Oct 30, 2013 21:01:21 GMT
Well this is a simple case for me. All councillors should live in the council they represent, if they move away then an automatic by-election is called within 3 months, unless the 6 month rule is in place. We had a similar case in Brandwood with a Tory and I think it was Tyburn with a labour councilor and both were a disgrace they carried on. Stockland Green, I got into a bit of trouble over that one. |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Oct 30, 2013 21:28:11 GMT
I don't think moving away should be a problem. In Cambridge we've had several councillors who have lived outside the city boundaries, but continued to be effective in their role. Undoubtedly if you are 150 miles away it does mean you should step down, but I wouldn't want to be too precious about it if they just move a mile or two outside the limits of the authority.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2013 21:35:53 GMT
not sure EAL they make decisions and won;t be affected by them, that is the principle really.
|
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Oct 30, 2013 23:28:26 GMT
And in several cases the voters have, in full awareness of that fact, continued to re-elect them. Besides, councillors take plenty of decisions on things that don't personally affect them. That doesn't mean they're less likely to act in a balanced and responsible manner.
|
|
andrea
Non-Aligned
Posts: 7,772
|
Post by andrea on Oct 30, 2013 23:35:30 GMT
A Greenwich Cllr went in Australia for a year in 2008. The voters re-elected him in 2010.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2013 0:30:38 GMT
In some authorities there appear to be tacit cross-party agreements not to make too much of a fuss when councillors leave. I can think of at least one London borough where a number (from all parties) moved away between elections with no byes being called. It was simply noted at the subsequent election that they had moved away and would not be re-standing.
|
|
Crimson King
Lib Dem
Be nice to each other and sing in tune
Posts: 9,842
Member is Online
|
Post by Crimson King on Oct 31, 2013 1:23:45 GMT
I don't think moving away should be a problem. In Cambridge we've had several councillors who have lived outside the city boundaries, but continued to be effective in their role. Undoubtedly if you are 150 miles away it does mean you should step down, but I wouldn't want to be too precious about it if they just move a mile or two outside the limits of the authority. It can be if the only qualification you put on your nomination paper was being on the electoral roll  |
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Oct 31, 2013 1:28:05 GMT
O/T:
I was on the Isle of Sheppey recently and couldn't help noticing that petrol seemed to be significantly cheaper there than elsewhere.
Nice bridge as well. My first visit to the area.
|
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Oct 31, 2013 9:30:24 GMT
In some authorities there appear to be tacit cross-party agreements not to make too much of a fuss when councillors leave. I can think of at least one London borough where a number (from all parties) moved away between elections with no byes being called. It was simply noted at the subsequent election that they had moved away and would not be re-standing. The most extreme example was in Brent, where the Conservative group leader Reg Sheppard retired from his job in the early 1970s and moved out to a larger house which happened to be in the London Borough of Harrow. The Labour group rather liked him and decided not to raise a fuss. In the 1974 election, he put down his agent's house as his 'home address' thereby appearing to be resident within the borough, and was easily re-elected in his home ward. Unfortunately for him the Labour candidate who was the runner-up in the election was not a party to the understanding, and put in an election petition on the grounds that Sheppard had given false details in his nomination paper. The petition resulted in Sheppard's election being declared void. |
|
