Currently, Plymouth City Council uses an ‘elections by thirds’ system. This means a third of the city’s 57 councillors are elected every year in a four-year cycle (with no elections in the fourth year).
The Council is consulting with local people on whether or not it should move away from this approach and consider an alternative model where local elections are held every four years, with all 57 seats on the Council being contested at the same time.
The Council wants to hear what you think.
It isn’t a vote or referendum. But, your views will be taken into account when the Council makes it’s final decision in November 2024.
The deadline for feedback is Sunday 22 September 2024.
Hard copies of the consultation are available in local libraries. If you need consultation information in a different format e.g. other languages or large print, please email: elections@plymouth.gov.uk
What are the two election models?
Current model for elections (by thirds)
Plymouth currently has 57 elected members, representing residents across 20 wards. 17 of these wards have three members, and the remaining three wards have two members. The council currently uses a ‘by thirds’ electoral system. This means that councillors are elected for a 4 year term and at each of these elections a third of the council is elected. For the 2-member wards there are no elections in the third year. In the fourth year there are no elections in any ward.
Perceived positives of this system
- Process known and understood
- More opportunities for voters
- Councillors and political parties held to account by voters more regularly
- Local issues not confused with national issues
- Allows for gradual change at the Council
- Can ensure that the political composition of authorities more accurately reflects the local political context
- Continuity of Councillors
Perceived negatives of this system
- Less stability – regular changes of political control can affect local businesses and Council services
- Confusing for the electorate as to which candidate is to be elected and what the process is
- It is difficult to see through major policy decisions, or large infrastructure or regeneration projects in a single year
- Difficult or unpopular decisions can be put off for future years, rather than taken when needed
- Constant year on year campaigning by councillors and political parties may lead to voter fatigue and a lack of interest
- Frequent pre-election periods, where there are restrictions on certain council activity for six weeks in the lead up to an election. This is inefficient as it limits some decision making and announcements
Alternative model for elections (all out every four years)
This process (called ‘All Out Elections’) would see all councillors in every ward up for election at the same time once every four years.
Perceived benefits of this system
- Electorate can vote on four-year manifestos and long-term commitments
- Clearer opportunity for the electorate to change the political composition of the Council
- Electors more likely to understand the election cycle
- Same electoral cycle as Police and Crime Commissioner and elections which take place every four years
- Fewer elections may mean less election fatigue and voter apathy
- Reduced costs. By holding a local election every year costs around £380k every year. If we move to conducting elections every four years, it is estimated that we will save £1.4m
Perceived negatives of this system
- Risk that some electors will disengage
- Risk that such a change would be perceived as less democratic
- A large turnover of councillors may lead to disruption, particularly if the direction of the council is changed significantly
- Political complacency
- May lead to more by-elections taking place and an increase in costs.
- Potential loss of experienced councillors
- Less frequent elections could be detrimental to encouraging candidates to stand for election as the opportunity to serve on the Council will be less frequent