Dear Editor,

IT is shocking, but perhaps unsurprising, to see devious tactics employed by Harlow Council’s Conservative administration as they seek to influence the outcome of the public consultation on changing the Harlow voting system.

If you first look on the Council’s website there in a very balanced approach, it takes readers through both the pro’s and con’s of changing the system before taking them to a page where they can register their views. https://www.harlow.gov.uk/your-council/have-your-say/consultations

It says,
Why keep elections by thirds?

More frequent opportunities to make your views known with more immediate political accountability.
Greater continuity of councillors as they can’t all be replaced in a single election.
Gradual change that retains knowledge and experience whilst allowing for new councillors with new ideas.

Voting for one councillor at an election is simpler and understood by voters.
Why change to whole council elections?
Four year mandates and less focus on yearly campaigning.
Lower cost as elections won’t take place every year.
Allows for a complete change in councillors once every 4 years and we can have single or multi-member wards.
Fewer elections may reduce election fatigue which may increase turnout.

So far so good!

But then Harlow Council put out a press release to Your Harlow on 27th July in which only the argument for changing to voting every four years is given, and where readers are directed by link to a Council web page to register their views without having seen the argument for remaining with the present system.

This is contrary to the government guidance given in THE CODE OF RECOMMENDED PRACTICE ON LOCAL AUTHORITY PUBLICITY which states that Council publicity must be both “objective and even handed”.

Who agreed to the content of this press release and thought that this was acceptable practice?

The 27th July press release makes a mockery of the notion of impartiality and is arguably little else than a devious attempt by the Harlow Conservatives to inappropriately use Council resources to influence the outcome of a public consultation process.

One can only hope, for the sake of informed democracy, that the Council will now correct its mistake and in future only publish “objective and even handed” articles and press releases on this matter.

Incidentally, the following local Councils and others use the “elections by thirds approach” Basildon, Brentwood, Broxbourne, Cambridge, Castle Point, Colchester, Epping Forest, St Albans, Stevenage, Watford, Welwyn and Hatfield. You can find more information on this government website which lists all the district councils and their method of voting.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/election-timetable-in-england/election-timetable-in-england#district-councils2

Regards

Tony Edwards

Councillor for Toddbrook (Labour)