Following the annual reporting of councillors’ allowances in the press (Stockport’s councillor allowances total a little under £1 million for 63 councillors), which as I wrote a couple of weeks ago  seems reasonable to me if we want a good range of councillors able to run, and hold to account, a local authority with an annual budget of half a billion pounds.

In this weeks Stockport Times, a letter writer asks whether we could make do with fewer councillors.  Do we really need three per ward, or could one or two do the job?  Could we run Stockport with just 21 councillors, or 42, instead of 63?

It’s a good question to ask.

From my perspective, there’s more than enough useful work for 63 councillors to do, whether it’s dealing with casework from residents, attending local meetings (in my case, village partnerships, residents meetings and occasional others) plus the formal council meetings.  Other councillors also get involved with external bodies.

It’s also worth saying that most councillors – from all parties – do voluntary work outside the council.  For example, I think the majority of councillors are also school governors of at least one school (I’m vice chair of governors at Gatley Primary, and a leader of Gatley Cubs, for example).

So could we get by with far fewer councillors?  Probably the answer is yes, but you’d get a poorer service.  Your problems would take longer to sort out, you’d see a councillor at meetings less often, and there’d be less effective oversight and leadership within the council.

Maybe that’s a price worth paying.  In these times of austerity, there’s a case to be made for the residents of Stockport accepting a poorer service from their councillors if it would save a few hundred thousand pounds.

In my opinion, it would be a false economy but who knows – perhaps I’m wrong.

The other question is who has the power to change it.  As far as I know, the requirement for metropolitan boroughs like Stockport to have three councillors per ward is set down in the law passed in the early ’70s when they were set up, and it would require a further Act of Parliament (i.e. a new law from MPs) to change it.

   3 Comments