Title

Telford and Wrekin Council has asked the Boundary Commission to reduce the number of its councillors by one-quarter and save £200,000. Its leader, Cllr Andrew Eade, explains the rationale Telford and Wrekin Council is undergoing a radical restructure. We are streamlining the organisation so that it is more efficient and responsive to community needs. Ultimately, we have to reduce costs to the taxpayer while maintaining high-quality services for all. We have long-planned for the downturn in public finances. We've set ambitious saving and investment targets for the entire authority to meet the challenge of delivering on the priorities for our communities and savings now required by the Government. Telford and Wrekin is home to Iron Bridge, a structure which changed the world. Now the council is making a revolutionary move of its own Telford and Wrekin began a major restructuring process more than 12 months ago, sweeping away directorates, to create a true, one council approach to services. This will make us to be more efficient and save money, and is already producing startling results. For example, by early November, we will have halved the number of senior management – directors and heads of service – posts across the council, saving almost £2m a year. This is a bold step forward, but amid clear and growing budget constraints, I believe we can and must go further. There are no sacred cows, and this restructure will cascade from the top downwards through the whole organisation, reducing staffing by 20% over the next three years. It is vital that councillors, too, are not exempt from these savings, and we need to play our part in the structural changes required by a forward-looking and modern authority which responds to its community. That's why, we're asking the Local Government Boundary Commission for England to undertake a review of the borough and reduce the number of councillors by at least 25%. This could see a cut in the current number of councillors from 54 to around 40. The commission has already indicated that its review will not start until 2012 at the earliest, and so any recommendations would not come into force until our local elections in 2015. As a general principle, I believe that each councillor should, wherever possible, serve a single member ward – not multiple member wards, as we have for some areas. Larger, single member wards bring a number of benefits. A bigger electorate-to-councillor ratio does not undermine a councillor's ability to champion the needs of the community they serve. Single ward members provide greater clarity for electors, more accountability, and effective governance for local people. The numbers we are suggesting are also ample to ensure good governance through effective checks and balances, and reinvigorating the relationship between elected members and the community they serve. In a climate of cuts, I see no reason why councillors, too, shouldn't share the pain that staff across every council are, or soon will be, feeling. For a council of our size, this simple measure would cut around £200,000 from our costs each year. Members' allowances are reduced by 25%, and a smaller council would mean a cut in associated support costs. Fewer special responsibility allowances would be required. In this climate of austerity, these proposals represent clear financial benefits which people easily understand. A more efficient and reduced administration with fewer councillors, can, I believe, also provide better and clearer representation for electors. In Telford and Wrekin, instead of one councillor serving an electorate of 2,200 voters, it would mean an electorate of around 3,000 per councillor – a figure I am sure any councillor worth their salt should be able to deal with. Some vested interests may claim that a cut in councillors undermines our democratic legitimacy. To them, I would say this – councillors continue to have a very important role, perhaps even an enhanced role, providing the voice of the community and providing the link between local democracy and central government. As all councils reduce the size of their officer core, it is surely a logical next step to reduce the number of councillors, too. This step would demonstrate to the community as whole that councillors are playing a direct part in the structural and cost reductions that are needed, while strengthened single ward councillors would be better champions for grass-roots democracy. In short, councillors provide a vital role in improving people's quality of life. I do not undervalue the role that we play. However, we have to be realistic about the times we are living in. With talk of redrawing parliamentary constituency boundaries across the UK, and plans to cut MP numbers to below 600, councils have a chance to seize the initiative and lead the way in reducing the cost of democracy, without affecting its accountability. It's all too easy for councils to extol their good housekeeping credentials with facts and figures. I believe now is the time for councillors as the ‘head of the household' to lead by example. Cllr Andrew Eade is leader of Telford and Wrekin Council

Title

WHITEHALL

Why we want fewer councillors

SUBSCRIBE TO CONTINUE READING