Consequences of cancelled/deferred local UK elections – residents can’t vote out a council that wants to plough under their “green belt”

“How Dare they!”

From here:

Our council is bulldozing the green belt – now we can’t vote it out

“As he sought to whip up support from voters, Michael Moran was clear: The countryside around Rugby was not for sale.

“Once built on, our green fields and habitats are lost forever,” the Labour councillor wrote on Facebook. That was in November 2023, before he became the leader of Rugby borough council.

“Now, Mr Moran is trying to push through the building of more than 1,500 homes on land in the town’s historic green belt – and those unhappy about this change of heart will be unable to vote him out of office because the council is trying to cancel its elections.

“It’s terrible, our right to vote has been taken away from us,” said Claire Baughan.

“Mr Moran would have been up for election in May, along with more than a dozen other councillors. But Rugby is one of 28 councils to have asked the Government if this vote can be delayed, claiming that a looming restructure of local government will make holding a ballot too expensive and complicated.

“I think that if there was an election today, most of the Labour councillors would be voted out because of what they’ve done – so they are postponing the election to stay in power because they know what’s coming.”

“One of the most vocal activists against the council plans is Linda Johnson. The civil engineer joined 150 protesters outside Rugby Town Hall in objection to the plans in March last year. For Ms Johnson, 50, the historic significance of her village, which is home to the 12m high motte-and-bailey Brinklow Castle, is paramount. “We turned up outside the town hall because we just wanted answers, but even after meetings I feel they’ve engineered around the issue,” she said.”

“I’m not going into political fighting talk, but it’s massively coincidental that the election is being delayed now.”

“Council documents state that grey belts were identified through studies independently prepared by consultants.

“[T]he studies are independent evidence and not the policy of the council,” the papers read. “They have not been, nor should they be, subject to member input.” – no member input?? Consultant studies – not policy? Does not look like planned policy formed by consultation with residents!

Re-draw the council boundaries, designate “grey belts” build housing estates ignore residets – sounds like its straight out of the Marxist playbook!

Onwards!

PLEASE take a paid subscription or follow/recommend my site to others you think might be interested. You may also donate via Ko-fi – (any amount three dollars and above here): https://ko-fi.com/peterhalligan