‘Why this election must be for voters’

We are now only three months away from the election for the West of England’s first ‘metro mayor’. Yet, the region has not established a combined authority or defined the pay, location and general logistics of the metro mayor. This deal is a fantastic opportunity and unlocking over a billion pounds for our region is a very good thing, but if the deal proceeds at the current rate then we risk alienating significant chunks of the electorate. 

Since June last year, many people have debated whether the electorate were fully briefed about the implications of Brexit when they voted in the referendum on Europe, but these same people have remained quiet when it comes to the metro mayoral elections. This is because so many excellent individuals have worked tirelessly to get this deal past every obstacle that has been thrown in front of them – there have been lots of these – and do not want to put the deal at risk.

The combined authority is unlikely to be established until March, which means that the campaign will probably last for less than two months and it is highly unlikely that much of the electorate will know what they are voting for in May. This means turnout will be very low. I expect some parts of the West – such as Bristol West and Bath – will vote, but many other parts, like much of South Gloucestershire, will not.

This is not good news for the Conservative Party but it will be music to the ears of the Liberal Democrats, who stand a very good chance at winning this election. Especially if they can form an alliance with the Green Party and moderate Labour voters. These Labour voters, who like a tiny bit of affluence and do not think everything Blair did was bad, must be appalled by Labour’s clear electoral illiteracy in selecting a Momentum-backed candidate with very little experience – to be potentially tasked with running a £1bn budget.

It is perhaps a sign of the suicide note Labour have signed nationally and, it appears, locally. 

The main risk with the election in May is that it will be an election for the politicians and not the voters. Nobody can claim that the electorate have a clue about a) what this deal means, and b) what the role of the metro mayor looks like. This is because that information isn’t available yet.

Candidates are busy polishing their party rosettes and writing up their five-point plans to fix a region with decades’ worth of problems, but the truth of the matter is even they do not know where their office will be, what staff they will have, the salary and how the role will co-exist with another mayor and two local authority leaders.

Of course, this deal needs to happen and for many the sooner the better. Those people are right because our region has been plagued by political inefficiencies for many years and this role of commissioner or metro mayor is part of the resolution for moving things forward.

Any delay would cause a real headache for the Department for Communities and Local Government, local leaders and other partners in the region – but it comes down to one very simple thing: people should not be voting for something without the full facts. Yes, they will arrive before election day, but not far from it.

Proposing a delay won’t please the people who have worked hard to get this deal but we do need to get it right. Otherwise, we will have turnout below 20 per cent and an election dictated by a small demographic of the wealthy and highly educated. 

James Lancaster is a director at TFA, a political consultancy with offices in Bristol, Leeds, London and Reading

Read more: Stephen Williams selected as Lib Dem metro mayor candidate