Four million denied a vote in attack on democracy

Four million people are to be denied the vote in May’s local elections in a “disgraceful attack on democracy” by Labour.

The Government is expected to cancel at least 27 council elections, meaning hundreds of councillors will avoid the risk of being voted out.

The Tories and Reform UK accused Sir Keir Starmer of “running scared” of the electorate at a time when polls show a collapse in support for Labour. Nigel Farage’s party will on Thursday launch a judicial review in an attempt to make the elections go ahead.

The Prime Minister is relying on an obscure clause in the 2000 Local Government Act which gives his ministers the power to delay votes.

The Telegraph on Thursday launches a Campaign for Democracy calling for the rule to be scrapped, forcing ministers to seek a full vote in Parliament for any delay to votes.

Opposition leaders backed our campaign for a change in the law to prevent ministers being able to cancel local elections “at the stroke of a pen”.

Leading constitutional experts also backed calls for a law change, saying there was a “clear conflict of interest” in giving politicians the power to decide whether voters should have a chance to vote them out.

More than 20 councils have confirmed delays – three quarters of which are Labour run. Seven more Labour councils are expected to join them, leaving a total of 3.7 million people disenfranchised. Some councils will cancel elections for the second year running, meaning councillors will stay in office for seven years without having to be re-elected.

The Government claims that it needs to give some councils the option of delaying elections because they are facing major restructuring under a programme to abolish some district councils and introduce mayoralties.

But the independent watchdog, the Electoral Commission, has suggested this does not constitute the sort of “exceptional circumstance” that would justify postponement.

James Cleverly, the shadow local government secretary, said: “It cannot be right that some elected representatives will now be serving seven-year terms. Residents have a right to choose who represents them, and the Government must respect that right.

“Labour are denying democracy and running scared of voters’ verdict on their appalling leadership. Having promised elections would go ahead, they have U-turned again. We voted against delaying elections last year and we will do so again. Democracy must prevail and voters must be able to make their voices heard.”

Nigel Farage, the Reform UK leader, was among those who backed a law change, and his party will launch a judicial review to force the Government to go ahead with elections.

His party’s lawyers will accuse Steve Reed, the Communities Secretary, of an “abuse of power” and said the 2000 Act does not give him the power to change the years of elections due to reorganisations.

Mr Farage said: “We will use every means possible, starting with our judicial review.”

The Government asked 63 councils if they wanted to delay elections this year in light of a local authority reorganisation that ministers suggested might drain their resources and make running a poll too onerous. A total of 20 have confirmed they will delay, 15 of which are Labour. The decision means 2.8 million people will be denied a vote in May.

With the deadline for a decision about to expire, nine councils were on Wednesday night still to decide. Seven of these were Labour run and expected to delay elections, bringing the total to at least 27, with around 3.7 million voters disenfranchised. One of the nine was Tory run and the other had no overall control. The remaining 34 of the 63 councils will go ahead with elections.

Sir Ed Davey, the Lib Dem leader, said: “We must never allow this to happen again. The law should be changed so that ministers cannot simply delay elections at the stroke of a pen. MPs should also be given a vote over future election delays and a chance to properly hold the Government to account.”

The decision to cancel elections has triggered widespread unease in Sir Keir’s party. Last month, Jim McMahon, the former local government minister, criticised plans to delay mayoral elections, saying his own government needed to “be better”.

Corina Gander, leader of Broxbourne Council – one of those that turned down the opportunity to delay its election – said Labour were “afraid of the ballot box”.

She said: “The Government, in my opinion, wants May’s elections cancelled because they know it’s unlikely they are going to win or retain many seats.

“Rather than saying we are cancelling them, they have tried to make us a scapegoat so that we turn around and say ‘we don’t want elections to go ahead’. My message has been clear since day one. I believe in democracy and that we should go to a vote.”

Kim Taylor, a Labour councillor on Tory-run Hampshire county council, which has rejected a delay, said she was “angry” at the Government for putting councillors in the position of having to decide on delaying elections.

She said: “I found myself frequently torn and plagued by guilt when thinking about having to choose between democracy and the potentially horrific outcomes if the local government review transition did not go smoothly.”

The Government’s ability to delay elections hinges on section 87 of the 2000 Local Government Act, which allows the Communities Secretary to change the year in which elections will be held.

The Electoral Commission has made it clear that it should only be used in exceptional circumstances, as happened during the Covid pandemic, and has questioned whether the reasons the Government is citing for the delays can be described as that.

The minister can lay a “statutory instrument” in Parliament to order the delay, but this is limited to very limited scrutiny, and no vote is required unless opposition parties force the issue.

Before the 2000 Act was introduced, delays were only possible through an Act of Parliament with full scrutiny, including in the two world wars or the Covid outbreak.

Sir Vernon Bogdanor, Professor of Government at King’s College London, said: “It cannot be right to give local councils themselves the right to decide whether to hold elections or not. Presumably many of those in power, if they feel that they are unpopular, would like to postpone elections.”

Colin Copus, Emeritus Professor of Local Politics at De Montfort University, said: “Allowing the centre to take away the democratic right of local voters because it might be inconvenient for the centre to hold elections is simply incompatible with any notion of democracy, so that power needs to be taken away.”

A Lib Dem peer will attempt to ensure elections can only be deferred after a parliamentary vote. Lord Pack, former president and acting leader of the Lib Dems, has laid an amendment to the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, and it will be debated in the next few weeks.

He said: “The right to vote is one of the fundamental rights that people in this country have. No elections should be cancelled without full parliamentary scrutiny and a vote ... We need to safeguard elections as the Government seems to be slipping into bad habits on this.”

Disgraceful attack on democracy

Darwin Friend, research director at the TaxPayers’ Alliance, said: “Cancelling local elections is a disgraceful attack on democracy that leaves millions of voters trapped with failing services and ever-rising council tax without any way to hold their councillors to account.

“Councils may talk about reorganisations and pressures, but the reality is that scrapping elections conveniently spares councillors from facing the public over their record. The law must be changed so elections can’t be cancelled for political convenience.”

A source close to Mr Reed said: “This is sensible stuff – councils are being reorganised to free up money for things that people really care about, like social care or fixing pot holes. They may need to delay elections where old councils are being abolished so we can move faster on elections to the new councils that will replace them.

“If opposition parties want to use this to score political points the only people that will suffer are taxpayers – whose money will be spent on unnecessary elections rather than front-line services.”

[Source: Daily Telegraph]