Legal Opinion Says SCC Employment Doesn’t Preclude Candidacy for West Surrey Council

Published on: 3 Jun, 2026
Updated on: 3 Jun, 2026

By Martin Giles

A legal opinion obtained by Surrey County Council, it says, before the election, gives the all clear to a West Surrey Councillor whose eligibility as a candidate in the recent election has been questioned.

The eligibility of Cllr Jo Shaw (Lib Dem, Guildford East) had been challenged because she is an employee of the county council and, although SCC is a separate body to the new West Surrey Council, some of their powers appear to overlap in the next 11 months when West Surrey Council is a shadow authority of the existing county and borough councils.

In response to an enquiry from a former R4GV county councillor, Fiona Davidson, Vicky Hibbert, assistant director for Governance and Democratic Services at SCC, said on April 8: “Based on the views gathered, it appears likely that a Surrey County Council employee would be ineligible to stand.

“Even though the new Council is a separate entity from Surrey during the Shadow year, it would still be involved in decisions related to the conclusion of Surrey, which would disqualify a Surrey employee from being elected as a councillor.”

But the Lib Dem group leader at WSC, Paul Follows, has said that Shaw had checked with both SCC, where she was employed, and Guildford Borough Council, where she was already a councillor, about standing and “no issues were raised”.

Shaw herself has not responded to enquiries from The Guildford Dragon.

Today, after weeks of waiting for an answer from SCC about what they specifically told Shaw, the council reiterated: “It is the responsibility of a candidate to assess whether they are disqualified from standing for election.”

But its statement continued: “In this case, Surrey County Council obtained external legal advice and had confirmation that an employee of the council may also simultaneously be a member of the shadow authority, up to the point of vesting day [when the new council takes over from the county and borough councils]. This is because the two authorities remain as two separate entities.

“However, at the point of vesting day, the position changes. If the employee has their employment transferred to the same successor authority where they are also a member, they will need to either resign from their employment or otherwise become disqualified for that office, thereby triggering a by-election.”

This would appear to leave the way clear for Cllr Shaw to remain as a councillor on West Surrey Council and be employed by East Surrey Council.

June 3: In response to an enquiry to SCC by the The Dragon, asking when the legal opinion was sought and obtained a spokesperson for the council said: The legal advice was obtained before the elections.”

Comment: A Storm In a Teacup? No, Rules on Candidacy Should Be Re-examined

Responses to Legal Opinion Says SCC Employment Doesn’t Preclude Candidacy for West Surrey Council

George Potter Reply

June 3, 2026 at 12:46 pm

So the law was complied with and no rules were broken. Perhaps a storm in a teacup after all?

George Potter is a Lib Dem couincillor.
Angela Richardson Reply

June 3, 2026 at 7:15 pm

I think Jim Allen had it right in his response to the editorial comment: A Storm in a Teacup? No…

Choose. Which master do you serve? It’s very difficult to represent residents well if you can’t hold your former officer colleagues properly to account on delivery, even if you do end up working for the other authority.

There is a conflict. Both are respectable roles. Much easier if the local residents aren’t left wondering is their councillor a poacher or a gamekeeper?

Angela Richardson is the former Conservative MP for Guildford
John Redpath Reply

June 4, 2026 at 11:19 am

If, as seems possible, Cllr Jo Shaw will work for East Surrey, while politically representing Guildford East ward at West Surrey Council, who is going to check this is the case and continues to be so?

Her pay cheque may well come from East Surrey Council, but will she be training staff on both councils? Separation of East and West will not be instant, as is clear by the mammoth size of the job in hand.

If she is still involved in training staff from both sides of the council, should any staff attending from West Surrey Council exclude themselves from the lesson in order not to risk undue political influence from the teacher who is also one of their councillors?

Surely it would be much simpler for all involved, not to mention more honest, if Jo Shaw resigns either from her political position or from her council officer job on vesting day.

What a shame Ms Shaw would not talk to The Dragon to make her position clear.

John Redpath is a former R4GV borough councillor.
Fiona White Reply

June 4, 2026 at 3:55 pm

Angela Richardson can’t resist trying to score goals even after VAR [video assistant referee] has ruled that no penalty should be given.

Fiona White is a Lib Dem councillor.
Matt Fray Reply

June 4, 2026 at 7:14 pm

A legal opinion isn’t a ruling. The analogous position in the legal system to the VAR would be a judge. Probably even an appeals judge, the trial court is more like the referee on the field.

A lawyer writing an opinion is more like a pundit in the commentary box. They might well have really good ideas, but they are just saying what they think.