Letter: Voters Should Decide How They Are To Be Governed Locally

Published on: 21 Oct, 2025
Updated on: 21 Oct, 2025

From Jim Allen

In response to: Councillor Claims LGR Process ‘Potentially Corrupted’ by Publicity Leaflet

The electorate will have not have any say about the reorganisation into unitary authorities and the move away from local democracy is very clear. Parish and town councils will only be talking shops with no statutory powers.

The options to leave well alone has clearly been omitted from the list of options. I said last year all councillors borough, parish and county across Surrey should have resigned en masse so that the electorate could have chosen which party policy they preferred, including candidates who preferred a no change option: that would be the democratic way and hang the costs.

We now have rumours that “behind the scenes” our democracy is to be delayed another year for fear democracy might unseat (and de-finance) councillors for different councillors with new views.

Let the people of Surrey vote on the subject.

Responses to Letter: Voters Should Decide How They Are To Be Governed Locally

Angela Richardson Reply

October 21, 2025 at 8:37 pm

In response to Jim Allen, people did vote for this in the general election of 2024. Perhaps, like 2019 being about Brexit and 2024 being about change, the line by line of the Labour manifesto wasn’t fully scrutinised by voters.

It doesn’t change the fact that by tactically voting or by staying at home, the people of Guildford and wider Surrey have chosen this outcome.

The milk spilled. Councils and resident voters have to work out how to clear it up.

Angela Richardson is the former Conservative MP for Guildford
- George Potter Reply
  
  October 23, 2025 at 11:55 am
  
  Angela richardson’s comment is simply not factually true in the slightest. The Labour 2024 manifesto stated: “In England, Labour will deepen devolution settlements for existing Combined Authorities. We will also widen devolution to more areas, encouraging local authorities to come together and take on new powers.”
  
  Local government reorganisation was not directly mentioned, and even if one were to argue that it was implicit in promises to “widen devolution”, that is absolutely not the same thing as cancelling the 2025 county elections in Surrey, which was definitely not in the Labour manifesto. The cancellation of those elections happened only because the Conservative leadership of the county council requested that the government cancel them, and the Labour government agreed to that request.
  
  So the idea that anyone voting in 2024 voted for this, or that this was anything other than a shabby, undemocratic stitch-up between Conservative councillors and a Labour government, is for the birds.
  
  However, it is good to see that even being defeated at the ballot box hasn’t occasioned Ms Richardson to reconsider her longstanding disdain for attention to detail. In this, at least, she is utterly in lockstep with the rest of the modern Conservative party.
  
  George Potter is a Lib Dem borough and county councillor.
Simon Higgins Reply

October 24, 2025 at 5:12 pm

Not surprising that Angela Richardson is defending the Labour Party manifesto as there is no discernible difference between Tory governments of the past 14 years and the current Labour government.

If Prime Minister Keir Starmer leant any further to the right he’d need scaffolding!