I assume that a resignation of a constituncy elected member would trigger a by-election.

Scotland has gone to STV with by-elections.

Pam
Belfast

Yes, we must oppose tinkering with the system; the fundamental lack of power is a big turn-off. But also most people understand that you cannot win without being a party member, and that puts off many people. So actually it is in the interest of councils (not to mention Parliament) for political parties to be large and diverse organisations.

But there are two other, broad areas that I feel need addressing:

a) Issues about working people being either actively discouraged from standing or at least feeling (knowing!) their career will suffer. Employers need to appreciate that their staff could benefit from being a councillor, in the same way as they can from a secondment.

B) We should not dismiss the real turn-off to most people from opening oneself up to close personal scrutiny. Your address and phone number usually in the public domain; people knocking on your door at all times of day and night. Even for parish councillors.

With the huge rise in the ‘quangocracy’, it’s not surprising that many people who genuinely want to undertake public service do so by appointment to a (well-remunerated) NHS trust or similar, rather than go to the trouble of fighting an election.

I’d be tempted to say yes to them for unopposed candidates, if it didn’t open up the possibility of opposing parties deliberately not standing against a candidate they otherwise couldn’t defeat…

As Josiah Bartlet said: “We have term limits – they’re called elections.”

The problem is, surely, that in a lot of places we DON’T have elections. Not meaningful ones anyway. There are far too many places around the country where elections are a mere formality.

But surely the solution to that is to have a fairer electoral system rather than simply kick out individuals for being too successful?

As for appointments from a list, they have already introduced the idea of some appointed councillors for Parish Councils (in the recent Local Government Act) so it’s just an extension of that really. The new New Labour establishment really do not believe in local democracy, full stop.

I hope we will be going very strongly on the attack against the whole report which is at least 50% dangerous, wrong, rubbish.

I’ll be ultra-generous and give them the benefit of the doubt until I’ve seen all the proposals though some of the headline grabbing ones above are clearly a bit barking

Parties reselect candidates (we do it democratically if someone else wants a go) and then the voters get a choice. If the voters are happy with their previous choice, then so be it. Yes, new blood is to be encouraged, but better to acheive that through a decent electoral system that improves voter involvement as they’ve started to do in Scotland than by false limits on terms.

And filling Council vacancies from “a list of names”? What do they think we are, a bloody school governors board?

I really ought to wait to see what the report actually says before commenting further. But I think to get better councillors – at least on smaller councils- we need to be given more power, not more money.

And having been elected and re-elected ever since 1984 I’m not keen on the idea of being disqualified simply because I’ve done more than 5 terms…