Letter: A Consultation Is Not a Binding Referendum

Published on: 24 Mar, 2026
Updated on: 24 Mar, 2026

From George Potter

Lib Dem borough and county councillor

In response to: I Hope West Surrey Council Will Overturn GBC’s Town Council Proposal

I would simply point out to Lottie Harding that a turnout of around six per cent, even after a pamphlet had been sent to every single household shows that most residents clearly didn’t feel strongly about this issue one way or the other, and that whilst 46 per cent in favour was not a majority for the proposal, 47 per cent opposed was not a majority against the proposal either.

It can’t be had both ways. If one wishes to say that there was no majority for the proposal then one must also accept that there was no majority against it.

If, by contrast, there had been a clear majority one way or the other then the decision of councillors would have been that much easier, as it was in Mole Valley.

I will also point out that the six per cent who responded to the consultation are not necessarily demographically representative of the population as a whole, in any event.

A consultation is not a binding referendum, it is an exercise to allow people to give feedback on a proposal. And when a significant proportion of the negative feedback was based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the proposal, it is perfectly legitimate for a decision-maker to take that into account.

Part of living in a representative democracy is that we do not hold referendums to decide the outcome of every single issue.

And I would have thought that the recent experience of referendums in this country would highlight the shortcomings of slavishly following the initial opinion of the largest minority.

Responses to Letter: A Consultation Is Not a Binding Referendum

Jeremy Holt Reply

March 24, 2026 at 9:24 am

I do hope that the vote of anyone who votes against Mr Potter when he is a candidate in various elections will be ignored since the voter quite will clearly have fundamentally misunderstood the merits of Mr Potter.

It is unfortunate that so few residents vote in local elections but that does seem to prevent local councillors claiming that they have the right to dictate to us.

In fact, many councillors probably relish the low turnout in their “rotten” wards.

Mr Potter cannot have it both ways.
Bernard Quoroll Reply

March 24, 2026 at 10:09 am

So if in future a candidate wins a seat by only one vote, his or her party will not be heard to say, “the people have spoken”?

Or if people don’t vote at all, “even after a pamphlet has been sent to every single household”, the only possible explanation for not voting must be that they were too stupid to understand the issues?

We should recall the words of George Orwell in his book Animal Farm: “No one believes more firmly than Comrade Napoleon that all animals are equal. He would be only too happy to let you make your decisions for yourselves. But sometimes you might make the wrong decisions, comrades, and then where should we be?”
Lottie Harding Reply

March 24, 2026 at 7:18 pm

In my opinion there should now be a referendum on whether a parish council is to be set up on May 7 when we go to the polls in the local elections. This would only require an additional ballot paper to be given to voters at the ballot box which states: “Do you want a parish council for Guildford Town?” With a simple yes/no answer allowed.

When you take the proposed parish council precept as a percentage of the council tax paid to the borough council, it is an increase of around 30 per cent. Under any other circumstances if the borough council was proposing a council tax increase of nearly 30 per cent it would need to hold a referendum.
Sara Tokunaga Reply

March 25, 2026 at 9:05 am

I find it fascinating that Cllr Potter seems to feel he knows best about everything, and those who disagree with him know nothing.

Over the years GBC consultations have frequently proved to be a waste of time as the powers that be have already decided the outcome.

There was no reply envelope included with the pamphlet so we would have had to pay for return postage on this tick box exercise. Not everybody feels comfortable, or is able, to fill these questions out on line.

GBC councillors received no mandate from the results of this “consultation”, but has blindly gone ahead anyway.

I will remember Cllr Potter’s low estimation of my intelligence come the election!
George Potter Reply

March 25, 2026 at 10:28 am

I respond to Messrs Holt and Quoroll by highlighting that the clear difference between a consultation and an election is that an election has strict eligibility checks upon both candidates and voters. It also usually involves significant campaigning, by candidates, over a prolonged period which helps inform the electors about the choice in front of them.

A consultation, by contrast, is just a survey. It does not have rigorous eligibility checks. It does not have heavy campaigning and leafleting by both sides of the debate. It does not prevent people from completing it multiple times. And the questions in the survey cannot be added to or amended. The reason for this, as I am sure Mr Quoroll knows full well, is that a more rigorous exercise is significantly more expensive and time consuming. Elections are expensive, because rigour is expensive.

In a democracy we all, whether we like it or not, live within a social contract that derives legitimacy from the verdict of the ballot box. The reason that legitimacy is respected is, in large part, because of all the effort that goes into ensuring impartiality, equality and security. Without that effort then there would be no legitimacy, because what legitimacy could possibly be derived from a ballot box that people are free to stuff?

A survey, which is cheap to administer but insecure, is not the same thing as a democratic ballot. Conflating the two is to devalue the very concept of democracy.

However, for the record, if I were to ever find myself elected on a four per cent turnout then I would certainly not consider that to be a democratic mandate of any kind, and would have to ask what exactly went wrong that so few people were motivated to vote in the first place. The difference of course though is that in an election you choose people to exercise decision-making power and provide representation for a term of multiple years, rather than deciding the outcome of just a single topic.

I’ll also just add that, as a Liberal Democrat, I am part of party that has long believed in proportional representation in the voting system, to ensure that every vote counts equally, rather than the largest minority wins system that we have with first-past-the-post. I make no bones about the inadequacies of the system we operate within, and wish to see it change. But I don’t get the impression that Messrs Holt and Quoroll find any fault with our system until and unless it gives them a result they personally don’t like.

George Potter is a Lib Dem borough and county councillor.
- Jeremy Holt Reply
  
  March 26, 2026 at 8:25 am
  
  I would like to state that Cllr Potter has got entirely the wrong impression.
  
  It is a pity that he, as ever, cannot help himself from making personal smears.
Anthony Mallard Reply

March 25, 2026 at 5:15 pm

The councillor doth protest too much, methinks.
Jeremy Holt Reply

March 27, 2026 at 1:28 pm

I think Lottie Harding’s proposal to add a ballot paper should be pursued.

Many civilised democracies have referenda and/or propositions added to the ballot papers given to voters during local and national elections.

Her suggestion would involve minimal extra cost.

What has GBC to lose if it is serious about listening to the electorate?