What a committee system might mean for Bristol

When the polls close at 10pm on Thursday, the fate of how Bristol is to be governed in the future will be sealed.

The mayoral referendum comes just a decade after the city brought in the position of directly elected mayor, a job that has been held so far by two men: independent George Ferguson and Labour incumbent Marvin Rees.

It will see voters face two choices, to keep the mayoral model or switch to a new committee system of governance.

If Bristol decides to opt for a committee system, the role of city mayor will end following the conclusion of Rees’ second term of office in 2024.

Marvin Rees was re-elected as mayor of Bristol in 2021 and has said he won’t stand again when his term ends in 2024 – photo: Ellie Pipe

What is a committee system and how will it work in practice?

We will start by looking to other cities in the UK which have gone through a similar process for insight into what it could mean for Bristol.

Sheffield is set to become the first Core City to make the shift to a committee system of governance following a community campaign for change that led to a referendum last year, in which voters opted to switch from a leader and cabinet model.

Like in Bristol, a grassroots group called It’s Our City led the campaign for change.

The new model comes into play there this month after a cross-party committee spent a year drawing out the details of how the new system, which will last for at least a decade, will play out in practice.

Under the new way of working, there will be eight new policy committees aligned with service areas and strategic aims, and proportionate to the political make-up of the council, which will make decisions rather than individual councillors.

How does a committee system work?

As the example in Sheffield demonstrates, a committee system sees councils divided into politically-balanced committees that make the decisions. This means there is no requirement to have an overview and scrutiny committee, although some councils opt to have one or more anyway.

A committee system tends to give more of a voice to minority parties and independents as each committee is made up of members from all groups.

As things stand in Bristol under the mayoral system, Labour and the Greens have an equal number of councillors. The mayor has final decision-making powers and precedes over an all-Labour cabinet.

The motion, passed last year by cross-party consensus from Lib Dems, Tories and Greens, triggered the mayoral referendum, acting as some proof that with enough agreement among the opposition benches, decisions can go through that are against the wishes of the ruling administration.

Things don’t always work out for the biggest party group under a committee system either. As demonstrated in Brighton & Hove – where the council moved from a cabinet system to the committee system in 2012 – when a controversial committee decision last year to remove a cycle lane was branded “deeply irresponsible” by the Greens, who have the most councillors.

The committee system, which is being introduced or already in play in other areas including Brighton & Hove, Sheffield and Cheshire East Council, is not so much a new model of governance but a return to the predominant processes that operated before the Local Government Act came into force in 2000.
This concentrated decision-making in the hands of council cabinets and abolished the committee system for all but the smallest authorities.

But under The Localism Act of 2011, which set out a series of measures intended to transfer power from central government to local authorities and communities, they started making a comeback.

Fluctuations in local governance is a topic that Ed Hammond, deputy chief executive at the Centre for Governance and Scrutiny (CfGS) has spent many years researching in his role as an impartial expert.

He says the call for change often stems from disaffection with the existing system of governance.

In an article in 2019, Hammond noted the rise in interest around the matter of local governance models, saying: “Active local campaigns exist in a number of areas agitating for change”.

He tells Bristol24/7 that the actual referendum to decide the model of governance is only one piece of the jigsaw while the most important tool in making councils accountable, transparent and engaging of residents is the culture, attitude and values that underpin decision-making.

“The problem is that a change in governance does not guarantee a change in behaviour or people who have the power,” says Hammond.

“It can and will encourage more collaboration and debate but only if the need for behavioural change is agreed. Structural change is only one part of it and a perhaps bigger part is cultural and behaviour change.”

This means that for those who advocate and vote for a switch to committee system, getting the referendum result they desire is only the first step towards achieving the change they want.

Commenting on the upcoming referendum, Hammond says: “There are councils who have gone through this experience and oscillated between different systems of governance over the last ten years or so.

“The referendum is one of those choices that can comes across as quite esoteric. I think that’s a shame because it’s a really important way to think about how decisions that have a fundamental impact on how people live their lives are made. So I’m really keen that areas decide to go down theses routes of holding referendums.”

Listen again to Bristol24/7’s Twitter Space hearing from both sides of the mayoral referendum debate:

Main photo: Bristol24/7

Read more: Everything you need to know about Bristol’s mayoral referendum

Listen to the latest Bristol24/7 Behind the Headlines podcast: