Electoral Reform: Response to white paper on empowerment - another missed opportunity on local government

Electoral Reform Society logo for press releases

Thursday, 10, Jul 2008 12:00

The Electoral Reform Society has responded to today’s publication of the Empowerment White Paper by the department for Department for Communities and Local Government.

The Society has attacked the DCLG’s decision to ignore recommendations from its own Councillors Commission on the piloting of proportional representation for local government.

Dr Ken Ritchie, the Society’s Chief Executive said:

“Is it any wonder that a majority of people don't feel councillors represent their views if elections can return councils without any majority support from local people? The residents of Birmingham, Leeds, Oxford or Southampton are among millions of voters with first hand knowledge of what passes for democracy in our local elections (SEE NOTES TO EDITORS)

“The Government say they are interested in “vibrant local democracy in every part of the country.” They claim they want to give “real control over local decisions and services to a wider pool of active citizens”. They have recognised that “people locally don’t feel they have an adequate say in the running of local services” and that “a majority don’t think councillors represent their views”. The Government seems to understand that there is an urgent need to get a “wider range of people [to stand] for election”.

“The suggestions identified by the Government are both useful and important. However, there is an obvious gap in the White Paper as it stands - the very reason why a majority of people think their views are not represented, and one of the barriers to greater diversity of candidates for local elections: our First-Past-the-Post electoral system.

“The Councillors Commission recommended piloting proportional representation for local government for a reason. We can only speculate as to why the Department that commissioned both papers chooses to ignore these vital conclusions today.

“If this government is serious about local democracy they could start by reading their own reports.

ENDS

Notes to Editors

Below are just some of the phenomena that dogged the recent local elections in England.

Wrong winners Under FPTP there can be cases in which a party can have the most votes but end up winning fewer seats than one or more of its rivals. The system has chosen the ‘winner’ despite how people have voted. There are examples of this every year, and 2008 saw several flagrant cases.

· Sefton (Merseyside) – Conservatives polled the most votes and the fewest seats of the three main parties.

· Birmingham – Labour second in votes, very close behind the Conservatives, but third in seats.

· Derby – Conservatives leading in votes (35.3 per cent to 32.3 per cent for Lib Dems) but won fewer seats (5, to 8 for the Lib Dems)

· Leeds – Labour won the most seats, the Conservatives won the most votes.

· Colchester (Essex) – Lib Dems won two more seats than the Conservatives, despite polling fewer votes.

· Ipswich (Suffolk) – Labour won half the seats on 34.1 per cent of the vote, despite the Conservatives having 41.1 per cent of the vote.

· North East Lincolnshire (i.e. Grimsby) Lib Dems won majority of seats (7) this year on 29.5 per cent of the vote, Conservatives 38.2 per cent of the vote and 4 seats.

These sorts of distortion can be caused by several factors, including tactical voting (as perhaps in Birmingham), electoral pacts (as perhaps in North East Lincolnshire), one party piling up votes in safe seats but losing out in marginals (as in Leeds), or turnout being particularly low in one party’s safe seats (as in Sefton).

Excessive majorities Local elections under FPTP can produce distorted results in which the winning party wins a big landslide based on a minority vote. This may not reflect the balance of opinion in the area, and the majority who do not support the winning party can see their wishes disregarded. Even if there is majority support, the effective working of the council should require some representation for opposition parties, in sufficient numbers to exercise their proper functions of scrutiny of the way the council’s executive governs the local authority.

· Rotherham – Labour won two thirds of seats on 36.2 per cent of the vote.

· Halton (north Cheshire) – Labour won 60 per cent of seats on 38.1 per cent of the vote.

· Stockport – Lib Dems won 39.6 per cent of votes, 57.1 per cent of seats.

· Eastleigh (Hampshire) – Lib Dems won 86.7 per cent of seats on 48.6 per cent of the vote.

· Tamworth (Staffordshire) – Conservatives won 90 per cent of seats on 49.5 per cent of the vote.

· Oxford – Labour won 50 per cent of seats on 34.6 per cent of votes.

· Dudley – Conservatives won 70.8 per cent of seats on 43.9 per cent of votes.

· Southampton – Conservatives won 46.5 per cent of the vote and 14 seats, the Lib-Lab coalition won 45.5 per cent and only 2 seats.

Under-represented parties In some local authorities, there is a point of view that has widespread support in the area but still fails to get adequately represented on the council. Not infrequently, a minority party can end up with no seats at all despite a respectable share of the vote.

· Harlow (Essex) – 27.1 per cent voted Labour, no seats.

· Rotherham – 16.1 per cent voted UKIP and no seats; BNP polled 6.0 per cent and won 2 seats.

· Wyre Forest (Worcestershire) – 14 per cent voted Labour, no seats.

· Peterborough – 19.7 per cent voted Labour, no seats.

· Southampton – Lib Dems won 19.1 per cent of the vote and no seats.

· Plymouth – Lib Dems won 13.7 per cent of the vote and no seats.

· Oxford – 20.2 per cent voted Conservative, no seats.

· Portsmouth – 13.4 per cent voted Labour, no seats.

· Manchester – Conservatives won 14.3 per cent of the vote (12,999 people) but no seats.

· Sheffield – 16.1 per cent voted Conservative (21,857 people) but no seats.

· Newcastle upon Tyne – 13.6 per cent voted Conservative (9,756 people) but no seats.

Contacts

For further comment please contact the Society’s press office on 020 79281622, or Ashley Dé on 07968791684 or ashley.de@electoral-reform.org.uk