Determining the size of

Gloucestershire County Council

Submission to the Boundary Commission on behalf of
Gloucestershire County Council Conservative Group

1. Introduction
This submission is made on behalf of Gloucestershire County Council
Conservative Group. The group constitutes the majority party on the council,
representing 41 of the 63 County Councillors.

We have examined in detail the current roles and responsibilities of existing

county councillors, the potential changes to those roles and placed them against
the criteria of the Boundary Commission in carrying out this electoral review.

We recommend that the Boundary Commission should determine that

Gloucestershire County Council should be composed, following the 2013
election, of 53 County Councillors.

Should you have queries about this submission, or require further information,
please contact at first instance, Richard Coates, the group’s political researcher.
He can be contacted on 01452 425807 or at
richard.coates@gloucestershire.gov.uk

2. Roles and Responsibilities of councillors

There has been limited change to the roles and responsibilities of councillors
since the last boundary review in 2004. The council has made the transition
from the Local Government Act 2000 Leader and Cabinet model to a strong
leader model under the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act
2007, with limited impact on the operation of the council in practice. The council
has also reintroduced a number of scrutiny committees and reduced the role of
councillors in staff appeals.

Full Council
The full council meets seven times per annum and is composed of all 63 County
Councillors. Its major decision-making task is the approval of the budget at its
February meeting and appointing the Leader at the meeting following an
election, or following the resignation of the previous Leader or a successful vote
of no-confidence. It also hears motions proposed by councillors and gives
councillors the opportunity to question Cabinet Member or chairs of committees.
The Local Government Act 2000 prohibits this meeting from taking executive
decisions.
The Chairman and Deputy Chairman of the council fulfil various ceremonial
representative roles on behalf the council and preside over full council meetings.

The Leader and Cabinet

The Leader is appointed every four years by council and selects the remainder of
his Cabinet. Cabinet is responsible for most policy and top level decision-making
for the council. It is scheduled to meet 8 times annually, although extraordinary
meetings are not unusual. Individual Cabinet Members are empowered to
formally take individual decisions outside of these meetings.

Currently the Leader has appointed 9 other Cabinet members, the maximum
permitted by statute. Cabinet members have very wide ranging time pressures
beyond their formal meetings, with most meeting at least weekly with senior
officers and many much more frequently.

Scrutiny
Since 2009, the council has six scrutiny committees, overseen by the Scrutiny
Management Committee.
The size of scrutiny committees is determined by the Full Council, with the
number primarily being determined by the requirements for Widdicombe
proportionality, rather than considerations around the workload of each
committee. Prior to the 2009 elections each committee contained 11 councillors.
Overview Scrutiny Management Committee (OSMC)
OSMC works to co-ordinate the work of scrutiny in the council, determines how to
respond to call-ins and commissions task and finish groups. It is currently
composed of 13 members, 5 of whom are chairs of the other scrutiny
committees appointed ex-officio. It meets six times annually, although
extraordinary meetings are sometimes called – usually to respond to call-ins.
Other scrutiny committees
Budget and Performance scrutiny, Environment scrutiny, Children and Young
People scrutiny all currently consist of 9 members and meet 6 times annually.
Community Safety scrutiny consists of 9 County Councillors and 6 districts
councillors and meets 7 times annually. Health, Community and Care Scrutiny
Committee is composed of 9 County Councillors and 6 district councillors. It
meets 6 times annually.
Scrutiny task groups
In addition to the work of individual committees, OSMC can commission task
groups to examine particular issues.

Regulatory and other committees

Planning Committee
Whilst the majority of the planning functions in Gloucestershire are carried out
by district councils, the County Council retains responsibility for minerals and
waste planning, as well as the power to determine planning applications with
regards its own developments – for example schools and fire stations. This
committee is responsible for determining planning applications, which often
involves site visits prior to the committee meeting. The committee is composed
of 19 members and meets 6 times per annum.
Traffic Regulation Committee
This committee examines consultation responses to proposed traffic orders and
provides advice to the cabinet member in reaching a decision. It has nine
members and meets five times annually.
Commons, Rights of Way Committee (CROW)
The CROW Committee’s role is to consider and decide on applications for the
registration of land as a Town or Village Green and applications made to amend
the Definitive Map of Public Rights of Way.
There are 9 members serving on the Committee and it is scheduled to meet
twice a year.
Appeals Committee
The Appeals Committee acts as an umbrella committee for Appeals Panels that
hear and determine appeals in respect of refusal to supply home to school
transport, together with other areas where the right to appeal exists. The
individual appeals are heard by 3 members drawn from the committee.
There are 18 members serving on the Committee and it is scheduled to meet 13
times a year (with provision to meet more regularly if required).
Appointments Committee
The purpose of the Appointments Committee is to enable members to play a full
role in deciding which persons should be employed as the Council’s most senior
officers and to determine terms of employment. Meetings are held as and when
required.
Corporate Parenting Committee
The role of the Corporate Parenting Committee is to ensure the county council
and its partner agencies have a joint commitment to achieving improved
outcomes; agreeing and overseeing implementation of the Corporate Parenting
Strategy and narrowing the achievement gap experienced by looked-after
children.
There are currently 9 members serving on the Committee and it is scheduled to
meet 6 times a year.
Pensions Committee
The role of the Pensions Committee is to give advice on the proper management
of the Gloucestershire Pension Fund and carry out the function of the Council as
the Administering Authority.
There are currently 6 County Councillors and 1 District Councillor serving on the
Committee and it is scheduled to meet 5 times a year.
Standards Committee
The role of the Standards Committee is to maintain high standards of probity
amongst members through the provision of advice, training and by carrying out
investigations in respect of allegations of misconduct by a member or a co-opted
member. The rules of political proportionality are not applied to the Standards
Committee.
There are 6 members and 3 independent members and it is scheduled to meet 5
times a year.
Constitutional Committee
The role of the Constitution Committee is primarily to keep the Constitution
under review to ensure the structures and procedures that it contains continue
to promote the effective and efficient administration of the authority and open,
accountable decision-making.
There are currently 9 members serving on the Committee and it is scheduled to
meet twice a year but in practice usually meets more regularly.

Councillor Appointments to Outside Bodies

In addition to attending formal meetings of the Council, Gloucestershire is
represented by County Councillors on a range of national, regional and local
bodies. There currently 95 places on outside bodies which equates to 1.5 places
per councillor. A full list of outside bodies appointed by the full Council and by
the Cabinet is attached at Appendix C.

Analysis

Overall there are 154 council roles and 39 outside body roles to fulfil in the
council. Currently this means that each councillor has to perform an average of
2.44 council roles and 0.6 outside body positions. However, there is also clearly
substantial variation between the workloads of individual councillors. Whilst the
average backbench councillor performs 2.4 council roles, one does six and
several four, whereas several only fulfil one and one none at all.

This variation shows that there is scope to reduce the total number of
councillors. Reducing the number of councillors to 54 would increase the
average number of council responsibilities from 2.44 per councillor to 2.85 and
outside bodies from 0.6 per councillor to 0.7. This is a very minor increase which
would not affect the workload of most councillors. Demonstrably councillors can
cope with this workload, as, under the current system, some councillors have a
workload of more than double even the increased average. This is before taking
into account anticipated changes to responsibilities which will further reduce the
burdens placed on councillors.

It is also worth noting that, as the size of most committees is dictated more by
the requirements of political proportionality than numerical need, a reduction in
the overall number of councillors could well be accommodated with no increase
in the number of committee roles to be fulfilled.

3. Anticipated changes to responsibilities

Gloucestershire County Council is currently planning to reduce the authority’s
budget by 30% in four years time, with many of the necessary changes and
reductions taking place immediately. The transition period will, no doubt,
produce additional workload for councillors. However, it is inherently the case
that, once the change is completed, a smaller council, which in some respects
does less, will also reduce the area over which councillors have to exercise
executive control, or scrutinise, or represent their constituents in the processes
of. This will not be a like for like reduction – a 30% budget cut does not suggest
a need for a 30% reduction in councillors – but it will lead to less councillors
being necessary for the running of the council than is currently the case.

Additionally, as part of this process, the administration will be seeking to review

the outside bodies on which councillors sit, so that only those which are a good
fit with the authorities official functions will continue to be seen as official
appointments, rather than appointments in a personal capacity. This will also
reduce workload.

Various changes implemented, or planned to be implemented by the coalition

government will also lead to less councillors being required. The reduction in
mandatory targets and the removal of the Comprehensive Area Assessment
process has reduced workload for both the executive and scrutiny functions.
Whilst the situation is yet to be clear, there have been strong suggestions that
the council’s NHS scrutiny functions will be abolished as part of coalition changes
to the NHS. Whilst some changes, such as the introduction of LEPs, will lead to a
small increase in responsibilities, these have typically been in a very limited
number and in many cases actually only represent the transition from an
unofficial lobbying function (for example lobbying the Regional Development
Agency) to a formal decision-making role. It is also expected that an increasing
number of schools in Gloucestershire will opt out of local authority control by
becoming academies. This will further decrease the workload of councillors.

In addition the council is reviewing the member-lead appeal functions – this has
already lead to the removal of staff appeals to councillors for most staff with a
consequent reduction in the workload of the appeals committee. It is likely that
the increasing number of academy schools and potential reductions in
discretionary home-to-school transport will also serve to reduce the numbers of
appeals dealt with for both the transport and admissions aspects of that
committee.

As with predictions as to housing numbers in 2016, predictions as to councillor

workload require a certain amount of supposition. What is clear is that the
direction of travel caused by the coalition, the anticipated substantial reduction
in funding, as well as internal reforms of the council strongly indicates fewer
councillors will be required in future than are under the current system.

4. Representational role
One consideration that must be examined before consideration of any alteration
to the number of councillors is whether doing so would interfere with the
representational role of councillors. In many respects this is by far the most
important aspect of the work that councillors do – particularly so in the case of
backbench councillors.
We recognise that the Boundary Commission does not seek to set council size by
reference to other councils or to any national average of voters per councillor.
However, this can prove instructive in examining the issue of the councillor’s
representational role. Currently Gloucestershire has a below average ratio of
councillors to electors – 7,400 electors per councillor compared to an average of
9,074 nationally. As such, we know that most county councillors are able to deal
effectively with more electors each in their representational role than those in
Gloucestershire currently do. In the case of Essex each county councillor
represents almost twice as many constituents as their counterparts in
Gloucestershire.

As such it is difficult to argue that a reduction in the number of councillors would

jeopardise their representational role – most county councillors already deal with
substantially more electors each.

5. Manifesto commitment
The Conservative manifesto at the 2009 election included the commitment to
“reduce the number of councillors. We will ask the Boundary Commission for
England to reduce the number of councillors by at least 10%”. We recognise it is
no business of the Commission to implement the political commitments of
councillors. However, this was part of a manifesto which received overwhelming
public support at the ballot box. As such, we believe that it shows not only a
democratic legitimacy for reducing the number of councillors, but also
demonstrates a measure of the “local consensus” to which the commission’s
technical guidance refers.

6. Conclusions
Points to note

- The council copes well with the current number of councillors.

- The size of most council committees is determined by

proportionality, not by business need.

- The size of the council’s business will reduce by 30% in four years.

- The direction of travel from the coalition suggests further reduction

in the obligations placed on councillors

- Other councils already cope well with a reduced number of

councillors

- Manifesto commitment to reduce councillors

We believe that there is a strong case that reducing the overall number of
Gloucestershire County Councillors will help to secure effective and convenient
local government into the future. Efficiency is an important part of effectiveness
– particularly when the council and the country are faced by such a demanding
financial crises. Reducing the number of councillors will provide not only a
limited cash saving, it will provide an important moral contribution – showing
that the council only has the necessary number of councillors, as we move to
only having a necessary number of staff and provision of only necessary
services. We believe that exempting councillors from the necessary process of
assessment, challenge and saving would undermine their role in the community,
something which would impede effective local government.

The current operating model for councillors is an important consideration –

although it must be noted that in many respects it is predicated upon the
current number of councillors. The size of most committees has been fixed
mostly to meet the requirements of proportionality, rather than in response to a
functional need. There is no suggestion that a scrutiny committee of seven or
eight members would be any less effective than the current nine. As such, a
reduction in the number of councillors need not necessarily lead to an increase
in the committee workload placed upon individual councillors.

There remains the question of what level of reduction would be appropriate. We

would argue for a reduction of at least 10%. That would anticipate the ensuing
reduction in council services and the responsibilities of councillors, whilst erring
on the side of caution. It would also bring the average number of electors per
councillor close to the national average – which demonstrates that the change
would not lead to a reduction in the capacity of councillors to represent their
constituents.

7. Numerical assessment
Bringing the council in line with the national average level of constituents would
suggest a council of 54 County Councillors (this would represent 9,085
constituents per division, as compared to a national average of 9,074). It would
also fulfil the Conservative manifesto commitment to push for a reduction in
councillors of at least 10%. If this number is applied to the projected 2016
electorate for each district, it would suggest the following division by district:

Round
ed
District Cllrs Cllrs
Cheltenham 10.28 10
Cotswold 7.86 8
Forest 7.56 8
Gloucester 10.49 10
Stroud 10.32 10
Tewkesbury 7.49 7
Totals/ Av 9085.
per Cllr 37

The difficulty with this allocation would be that, rounded to the nearest
councillor, this would only provide 53 councillors. One extra would need to be
added to reach 54. Both Tewkesbury and Gloucester could lay claim to the
additional councillor – but have an equally strong claim. Favouring one over the
other would substantially increase electoral inequality from the beginning of the
process. Hence 54 is likely to cause inherent problems with electoral equality
calculations later in the boundary review process.

This can be addressed by using one less councillor and having a council of 53,
which would also have the additional benefit of being an odd number – reducing
the chance of deadlock or the requirement to use the chairman’s casting vote.
53 County Councillors would breakdown as follows:

Round
ed
District Cllrs Cllrs
Cheltenham 10.09 10
Cotswold 7.72 8
Forest 7.42 7
Gloucester 10.30 10
Stroud 10.13 10
Tewkesbury 7.35 7
Totals/ Av 9256.
per Cllr 79

This still requires the addition of one extra councillor –but Forest of Dean is now
clearly the only deserving recipient.

As such we would recommend that the Boundary Commission should

determine that Gloucestershire County Council should be composed of
53 County Councillors.
 Leader
Council
Dep Chair of

Deputy Leader
Chair of Council

X
X
Cabinet

X
X
Planning Committee
Audit

X
Special Responsibility Allowance

Scrutiny Management
Budget and Performance
Chidren and Young People

X
Health, Community +Care
Environment
Community Safety
(excludes committees which meet less than 3 times a year)

Adoption
Pensions
Standards

X
Constitution
Traffic Regulation Orders

X
Appointments

X
Corporate Parenting
Appendix A

Committee places allocated to Cabinet Members and Members in receipt of a

Appeals

3
2
2
2
Total Committee Places Total Committee Seats
Cabinet Member X X 2

Cabinet Member X X 2

Cabinet Member X X 2

Cabinet Member X 1

Cabinet Member X X X 3

Cabinet Member X X X 3

Cabinet Member X X X X 4

Cabinet Member X X 2

Planning Cttee X X 2
Chair

Audit Cttee Chair X X X 3

Scrutiny Chair X X 2

Scrutiny Chair X X 2

Scrutiny Chair X X X X X 5

Scrutiny Chair X X X 3

Scrutiny Chair X X X X X 5

Scrutiny Chair X X X 3

Adoption Panel X X 2

Group Leader X X 2

Group Leader X X X 3
 Appendix B

Committee Seats allocated to Councillors not in

receipt of an SRA

Community Safety

Constitution
Scrutiny Management

Chidren + Young People

Standards

Traffic Regulation Orders

Appeals

Total Committee Seats

Planning Committee

Audit

Health, Community +Care

Environment

Pensions

Corporate Parenting
Budget and Performance

1. Councillor X X X 3

2. Councillor X X X 3

3. Councillor X X X 3

4. Councillor X X 2

5. Councillor X 1

6. Councillor X X 2

7. Councillor X X X 3

8. Councillor X X 2

9. Councillor X X X X 4

10. Councillor 0

11. Councillor X X X 3

12. Councillor X X 2

13. Councillor X X X X 4

14. Councillor X X 2

15. Councillor X X X 3

16. Councillor X 1

17. Councillor X X X X X X 6

18. Councillor X X 2

19. Councillor X X 2

20. Councillor X X 2
21. Councillor X X 2

22. Councillor X 1

23. Councillor X X X 3

24. Councillor X X 2

25. Councillor X X X 3

26. Councillor X 1

27. Councillor X X 2

28. Councillor X X X X 4

29. Councillor X X X 3

30. Councillor X X X 3

31. Councillor X 1

32. Councillor X 1

33. Councillor X X 2

34. Councillor X X X X 4

35. Councillor X X X X 4

36. Councillor X X 2

37. Councillor X X X 3

38. Councillor X X 2

39. Councillor X 1

40. Councillor X X 2
 Appendix C

Gloucestershire County Council Councillor Appointments to Outside bodies

Name of Body No of GCC

Representatives

Berkeley and Oldbury Nuclear Power Station Local 1

Community Liaison Committee

Cotswold Canals Project Board 1

Cotswold and Malverns Transport Partnership

1

Cotswold Water park Joint Committee

3

County Council Network [CCN] 4

Cross Boundary Issues Member Group 2

Gloucestershire Airport Consultative Committee 2

Gloucestershire Everyman Theatre Company 1

Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust Council of 1

Governors

Gloucestershire Local Access Forum 2

Gloucestershire Police Authority 9

GlosREC 1

Gloucestershire Rural Community Council 1

Gloucester United Schools

3

Hester’s Way Partnership 1

Local Government Association (General Assembly) 4

Road Safety Liaison Group 2 members per

district area

Severn Estuary Partnership 1

South West Councils 2

Standing Advisory Committee on Religious Education 4

(SACRE)
Gloucestershire County Council Cabinet Appointments to Outside Bodies

Coalfield Regeneration Board 1

Cotswold Conservation Board 1

Cotswold & Forest of Dean Destination Management 1

Organisation Board

Crime and Disorder District Partnerships 6

Furniture Recycling Project (Gloucester) 1

Gloucestershire Environment Partnership 1

Gloucestershire First 2

Gloucestershire Playing Fields Association

LGA Fire Service Forum 1

LGA (Rural Commission) 2

LGA (Urban Commission) 2

Local Government Flood Forum 2

Traffic Penalty Tribunal 2

Regional Flood Defence Committee (Midland) (one seat 1

shared between 3 authorities)

South West Provincial Council 2

South West UK Brussels Office management Board 1

South West Regional Executive Board Asylum 1

Seekers/Refugees

South West Regional Coordination of Trading Standards 1

South West Tourism 1

Wessex Reserve Forces & Cadets Association 1

Wye Valley AONB Joint Committee 2

Wye Valley Navigation Advisory Committee 1

University of Gloucestershire 2

Victoria County History Board 2

2gether NHS Foundation Trust 1