Worcestershire’s Councils: Time for changes!

A ‘Hands off Herefordshire’ campaign was set up in1972, with a petition of over 60,000 signatures handed in to 10, Downing Street, calling for the preservation of Herefordshire. However In 1974 Worcestershire and Herefordshire were amalgamated to create the county of ‘Hereford and Worcester’ - the same year that ‘Bromsgrove District Council ‘was formed by the merger of Bromsgrove Urban District and Bromsgrove Rural District Councils.

These two Counties had very large difference in population sizes – Herefordshire had about 140,000 people, whilst Worcestershire had a population of about 420,000. The people of Herefordshire therefore perceived this as a takeover rather than a merger; especially after it emerged that the administrative centre was to be located to the east of Worcester city - County Hall in Worcester was built in 1977.

Then in 1998 ‘Hereford and Worcester’ was abolished and a new administrative county of Worcestershire came into existence, which regained its historic border with Herefordshire - that then became a ‘Unitary Authority’. While the former "Hereford & Worcester" districts of Redditch, Worcester, Bromsgrove, Wychavon and Wyre Forest were retained with little or no change and a new Malvern Hills District was constituted. Later, local government restructuring in 2009 did then abolish some two-tier administration in counties such as Shropshire, but not in Worcestershire.

Yet despite the abolition of ‘Hereford & Worcester’ as an administrative county, some cross-boundary organisations and resources were still shared with the Herefordshire unitary authority;  which included waste management, the youth offending service, Hereford & Worcester Fire & Rescue Service and the radio station BBC Hereford & Worcester.

So Worcestershire at present has three tiers of local government - by including Parish and Town Councils as the first tier; the 6 District Councils of Bromsgrove, Redditch, Wyre Forest, Wychavon, Malvern Hills and Worcester City as the second tier and Worcestershire County Council the top tier.

However the two main party political leaders of Bromsgrove District Council have recently jointly stated that they would like the 19 Parish Councils within the District of Bromsgrove disbanded - with comments such as “the concept of parish councils was outdated”. Yet they have also said that they would like to hear people’s views on this; so why not widen the debate to include all the Councils within Worcestershire?

Perhaps to many people the impression of a ‘Parish Council’ may conjure up images from the comedy series ‘The Vicar of Dibley’, and regard them as having very little power or relevance; yet is the present two tier set up within Worcestershire of a County Council and 6 District Councils still affordable and sustainable long term and are the district councils fully in tune with and sensitive to local feelings?

Bromsgrove District Council completely disregarded local campaigners and demolished the town’s Market Hall in 2010. While in 2011 Pershore Town Council were told by Wychavon District Council that it had to name streets on a new housing estate after servicemen buried in the local cemetery and not varieties of plum - the fruit that the town is very well known for – which was the wish of the town council; who were displeased with the approach and dismissive attitude the district council showed toward the town council.

So do we really need all these high cost Councilors in Worcestershire; which has 57 County Councilors on annual basic allowances of £8,515 each and 228 District Councilors, on over £4000 each – Bromsgrove’s 39 Councilors are on £4,200 each; whereas the Unitary Council of Shropshire has only 74 Councilors and Herefordshire just 58. The first tier of Town and Parish Councils has very few powers but these Councillors effectively do their role for little or no financial reward.

Two-tier local government is wasteful and confusing to many people, who are often unsure if it’s the District or County Council providing services. Yet the possibility of splitting Worcestershire into two ‘Unitary Authorities’; the North consisting of Bromsgrove, Redditch and Kidderminster and he South consisting of, Wychavon, Worcester City, Malvern Hills and possibly Stourport and Bewdley, is already known about – where a ‘unitary authority’  is  responsible for the provision of all local government services within its borders.

The ‘Unitary Authorities’ idea began in England in 1969; then since 1996 all 32 Councils in Scotland became unitary authorities and in 1997 all 22 Councils in Wales. Herefordshire became a Unitary Authority in 1998 and 9 more were created in 2009 - which includes Shropshire, and there are now 55 Unitary Authorities in England. Yet asking Councilors to vote to abolish district councils is like asking turkeys to vote for Christmas; it’s the Government that would have to instigate any changes they considered necessary.

The present two-tier system is unsustainable in the long term and with Councils continuing to share more services and personnel to save money they are effectively and inadvertently aiding the process of making a ‘unitary authority’ outcome become more likely to be imposed on Worcestershire eventually.

Before1974 Bromsgrove’s ‘Urban  District Council’ was an effective local Town Council but Bromsgrove is now just an area within the District of Bromsgrove that contains about one third of the district’s residents; while the District of Wychavon still has three town councils. Yet Bromsgrove’s Ward Councillors appear to have very limited influence in the District Council Chamber; where major decisions affecting the town seem to be decided by the Councilors living well away from the town centre.

So would Bromsgrove town residents be better served by having a town council that had real and not just ceremonial powers, with between 20 and 25 councillors representing about 30,000 people?  A town council is responsible for museums and tourist information centres,  both of which Bromsgrove District Council closed; yet the Local Government and Rating Act of 1997 gave a statutory right for residents to petition for parish and town councils, that requires a minimum of 500 signatures.

Within a unitary framework, empowered ‘Town Councils’ -  such as Bromsgrove and Kidderminster - could  provide far greater local accountability, by having only Councillors who reside within the town area; which if the Government is serious about ‘Localism’ it could endorse by ensuring that more power is devolved down to a local level.

In the last 40 years ‘Local Government’ in Worcestershire has seen several major changes, with many Councils moving from old to new multi-million pound, plush, purpose-built new Council buildings. Yet relatively low turnouts at local elections and past predictable voting patterns have demonstrated clear public apathy and cynicism about local politics. Yet why in this information overload age do so many people seem so poorly informed about many important local matters?

In October 2010, when Bromsgrove District Councillors had to debate on whether to have a ‘Mayor’ or ‘Stronger Leader’ ,only eight Bromsgrove residents  responded in writing  to the public consultation– of which four supported a mayoral system, two a stronger leader model and two expressed no preference. Yet most people, when asked at the time, seemed to know nothing at all about it and Councillors just voted for a ‘Stronger Leader’.

Most Council Meetings are not watched by many of the public; yet the minutes of meetings can not fully reflect what took place. Bromsgrove District Council recently even voted to stop the audio recording of Council Meetings – yet at least meetings at Worcester’s County Hall can be viewed both live and recorded on the Internet (Via their webpage or YouTube).

We do need a wide variety of flavours of candidates to choose from at election time, typically represented by a broad spectrum of political colours - blue, red, yellow and, green; with UKIP’s purple now added to the mix. Yet people should vote on more than a preferred colour and learn more about the candidates, looking beyond the paper propaganda pushed through our letterboxes, full of promises that will later be claimed to be aspirations that at present are unaffordable.
 

Readers who submit articles must agree to our terms of use. The content is the sole responsibility of the contributor and is unmoderated. But we will react if anything that breaks the rules comes to our attention. If you wish to complain about this article, contact us here