Opinion: Liberal Democrats Want Consultation… But Only When It Suits Them

Published on: 9 Nov, 2026
Updated on: 9 Nov, 2026

Cllr Jane Austin (Waverley Eastern Villages)

By Jane Austin

Conservative councillor in the West Surrey Shadow Council and leader of the opposition

I was intrigued to read Guildford MP Zöe Franklin’s concern about the lack of public consultation on a future Surrey mayor. Having watched the Liberal Democrats’ approach to decisions locally, the double standards are plain to see, and too many of their decisions look skewed in favour of the party line rather than the public interest.

A Surrey mayor reflects the Labour Government’s clear and stated direction of travel, yet West Surrey’s Liberal Democrats remain distinctly lukewarm about the prospect.

…too many of their decisions look skewed in favour of the party line rather than the public interest”

There is certainly much work ahead to explain to people outside the local government bubble what a mayoralty would deliver, including the devolved powers, funding, costs and benefits.

See: What Do Surrey Residents Think About Having a Strategic Mayor?

For me, an effective mayoralty is about strategic oversight: joining up transport, infrastructure, skills and economic growth, with the authority and resources to improve decision-making and the lives of Surrey residents.

But I confess I was struck by Ms Franklin’s statement, given how inconsistent it is with her party’s recent actions.

See: Guildford MP Has Concerns Over Installing a Mayor of Surrey

Take the West Surrey name change. The Liberal Democrat administration pressed ahead with seeking to rename our council “West Surrey and South Middlesex” without any consultation whatsoever. At Full Council, I proposed a public consultation, supported by Farnham Residents councillor Catherine Powell. The Liberal Democrats voted against it and proceeded with their request to the Government. Last month the Minister declined the proposed name change.

See articles on South Middlesex name change here…

So, when it came to renaming a council representing 700,000 residents, consultation was apparently unnecessary. Yet it has suddenly become a central concern when discussing a mayoralty that could bring meaningful powers and significant funding to Surrey but – and here is the key consideration – it would shift power away from the Liberal Democrat-led council that would sit beneath it.

Then there is the proposed new Guildford Town Council. A consultation found 47 per cent of respondents opposed the new council and 46 per cent supported it. Participation was low, but there was no clear public backing, and the Liberal Democrat-led West Surrey Executive proceeded regardless. Residents might reasonably wonder why their views carry different weight depending on the political agenda behind a decision.

And at last week’s West Surrey Standards meeting, Liberal Democrat councillors used their majority vote to substantially reduce opposition councillors’ opportunities to ask questions and speak at Full Council. That reduces public transparency and engagement, and it hardly strengthens their claim to champion democratic participation.

The same meeting also saw a public disagreement between Liberal Democrat Executive members over the location of the council’s headquarters. Cllr Leslie Rice (Lib Dem, Woking South West) raised concerns about whether there was enough evidence to show how the decision had been reached. It is a concern I have raised for years.

See: Plans to Centralise West Surrey Meetings in Guildford Labelled ‘Rogue’

Against that background, Ms Franklin’s statement seems confused at best. One has to wonder whether the concern is really about local democracy, or whether the Liberal Democrats simply aren’t confident they would win a Surrey mayoral election.

My view is that Surrey’s future should be determined by what it delivers for our communities. We need to be ambitious for Surrey, and for what devolution can deliver.