Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I'm interested to hear from other EDF'ers about their experiences of this problem.


Talking to friends recently, the issue came up of emailing local councillors, either on some issue or for help and advice - and just never ever getting any sort of response. I became intrigued, and the more I asked around, the more I heard the same tale.


There's something really wrong with the whole local government system, no? Not least in London. Voters cannot be exempt from criticism because they - we - mostly just don't bother to vote. Which allows these political-party place-people to be slithered into these positions more or less permanently. Very soon it seems, they imagine they are councillors by some divine right.


Believe me, I will be happy to hear that this impression is mistaken. Please share good experiences of having had help from a local councillor. Certainly there are hardworking and responsive council members - Gavin Edwards has been mentioned to me several times. The support and intervention of a great councillor can be absolutely life-changing sometimes.


In my naivete, I imagine a system of independent local-level councillors who feel themselves to be what they actually are, legally and democratically: representatives of the voters. And are rigorously held to that mandate and that task. Not, as now, complacent little mini-MPs, cravenly taking 'the line' from party managers and the faceless-nameless senior officers who run Southwark pretty much as they please.


Name me a single local councillor who has DARED speak up for the rights of dog owners, and against the offensive foolishness of Southwark's endless jihad against dogs? Point made.


We know councillors CAN be very busy. We know it is - or SHOULD be - a hard job. But is that REALLY what's happening here? Failing ever to respond to a query from a constituent is just a fundamental lapse in duty. And yes, your names do keep coming up, Councillors Mills and Hamvas.


Lee Scoresby

It is right that all elected councillors reply to their electorate. Clearly they need to be approached in a civil and courteous manner and if it's support for a cause they don't agree with people may not necessarily get the response they want. Councillors are elected on a party manifesto so there will be differences in views and what they can support. If, however, they just haven't responded at all then maybe copy the issue to the relevant portfolio holder and also to the Leader of the Council who may help in accelerating a response.

I think I've had maybe one reply from a Rye Lane Ward councillor in five years of living here. I tried to engage about traffic issues, parking and various other topics but have now given up. James Barber always responded even though he wasn't my ward councillor.


I presume that because Labour have no meaningful opposition in the Rye Lane Ward they just aren't interested in engaging with their constituents.

Well I totally agree with a lot of what you say.


Worth noting that we had an extremely hard working and responsive councillor active on this forum very regularly who sadly lost his seat in the last election. Sadly people just vote based on common national party lines, rarely on local issues and only occasionally based on real knowledge of the councillor's actual performance in the role.


People bring this on themselves. Most people don't vote in local elections, don't seem to care a great deal about local politics and will only get upset if basic competence fails in some way. So, council seats are wrapped up by the few that are bothered to vote, usually the engaged political supporters who follow national politics and national leaders.


All that means, nobody seems to really care who their councillor is, local dominant parties (i.e. Labour here in Southwark) get away with treating the council like a fiefdom, have incentives to focus on internal politics than doing the actual job, and the potential for corruption and complacency is high.


Sadly it's a vicious circle so the more people see councillors as remote and unresponsive, the less likely they are to vote, and the more the bad ones will get away with it.

The only councillors who've ever responded to me in 24 years are James Barber (when he wasn't a councillor in my ward) and two Tory councillors in Village Ward (the late Toby Eckersley and Michael Mitchell), all three of whom were extremely good at sorting out the issues involved. As someone who's not either a LibDem or a Tory, I find that depressing and an indictment of local government, particularly in Labour-dominated London.
I agree with you guys since the recent elections or even before there seems to be a lacklustre response to responding. James Barber and Renata imo have always dealt with things in some way or form. I get the impression though it may be down to experience which the new guys may lack. However no excuse to not to respond at all surely it's just courtesy. Why take on the role if you can't manage the work??
I have tried to get some help with the Rye Lane councillors and like other people no matter how many times you email them, not one of them responded to any emails. I was then told to contact Jasmine Ali as she is the cabinet member for children, schools and adult care..........despite numerous emails to her alone again no response. Its disgusting, especially when children are involved and they can?t be bothered to reply to you. Needless to say i did not vote in the local council elections.
I totally agree it's very depressing when people don't vote. We are lucky to have a form of democracy and we have candidates from more than one party that stand in local elections. I don't think saying 'well that particular party always wins' is any excuse, we don't live in a one party state. With regard to lack of response to emails, have you thought your emails may not be getting through. Do you have evidence they reached the councillor and were opened. Why not find out when the councillors are doing their surgeries, make an appointment and actually see them face to face (or even more basic but revolutionary... write them a formal letter and send it registered).

cella Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Its depressing when people don't exercise their

> hard won democratic vote. It's rarely a useful

> protest and means they have no formal route to

> channel their views. Maybe use that anger to

> pursue them publically.


You can still moan and complain (and congratulate too) even if you didn't vote - no-one actually knows whether you voted or not in this system - although we all should vote I agree.


Actually it seems lobbying (email, in person, letter etc) is the most effective way to get things done in this country - the general line seems to be make the argument easy for your representative by doing the research on the subject including arguments that they can then use to tell their colleagues. If they really never reply you need to go along to there surgery I'd think, with letters and all your research.


http://the-shg.org/lobby%20government.htm

Yes we can moan and groan about lots of things. I think a lot of people are disenfranchised from politics or are uninformed about our political system generally. Some have an unreal expectation about what politicians roles are and demand that they get involved in the absolute minutiae of their domestic lives and if that doesn't happen for whatever reason they become cynical about politicians in general. IMHO we elect politicians on a manifesto and then they make decisions/vote on that basis. The most important thing is that they are then held accountable for their own and their party decisions and we can then vote them out if necessary. It's a precious right and lots if people treat it in a cavalier fashion I feel. Alongside this we can campaign and pracefully demonstrate about issues and this, historically, is the main way legislation is introduced/gets changed. One of the many great things about living in a democracy and, yes, with all its current flaws, one of the best countries in the world to live. Consider the alternatives....

Hi all


Thanks for raising this. I too would be interested to hear people?s experience of this. Although I am perhaps more optimistic for a positive response!


For my own part, as far as I know, I have responded to all the emails sent to me directly (if I am CCed into an email with other respondents it is sometimes more appropriate to leave it to others on the thread). However, I do receive a large volume of emails so if I am mistaken on this and have neglected to respond to a Goose Green constituent then I apologise. Please let me know what it was and I will make sure I deal with it immediately.


I cannot speak for other councillors? email response rates but, as far as I can see, all those mentioned on this thread work incredibly hard.


Best wishes

James

Hi Johnl,

Factual correction - it is known who votes in each election. It isn't known who people actually voted for. The whether someone voted is contained in the Marked Register which can be purchased from memory at ?20 per ward.

When you collect your voting papers at the Polling Station the officer puts a mark again your name on the paper elector roll to ensure no one else tries to vote in your name. A list of who voted via a postal vote is also available.

James Barber Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Hi Johnl,

> Factual correction - it is known who votes in each

> election. It isn't known who people actually voted

> for. The whether someone voted is contained in the

> Marked Register which can be purchased from memory

> at ?20 per ward.

> When you collect your voting papers at the Polling

> Station the officer puts a mark again your name on

> the paper elector roll to ensure no one else tries

> to vote in your name. A list of who voted via a

> postal vote is also available.


Thanks - I really didn't know that.

Paradise2 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I have tried to get some help with the Rye Lane

> councillors and like other people no matter how

> many times you email them, not one of them

> responded to any emails. I was then told to

> contact Jasmine Ali as she is the cabinet member

> for children, schools and adult

> care..........despite numerous emails to her alone

> again no response. Its disgusting, especially when

> children are involved and they can?t be bothered

> to reply to you. Needless to say i did not vote in

> the local council elections.


I am sorry to hear this, my dealings with Jasmine Ali have been extremely positive and helpful, so maybe she did not get your emails? There could be a genuine reason, I experience this when I send emails through my business account they can frequently end up in the Spam filter.

Keep in mind too that many local councillors are not doing it as a full time job. Many have other careers too. You don't get paid a salary as such to be a basic councillor, but receive an allowance of ?11,270 per year in Southwark (other councils may differ slightly) https://www.southwark.gov.uk/council-and-democracy/councillors-and-mps/member-allowances-and-expenses

If you take on more roles and duties by joining certain committees for example, you are given a greater allowance, which could then mean you'd earn enough to make it your full time job.

Seems to me that properly paying councillors to make it a full time job would help things a little.

V511 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Keep in mind too that many local councillors are

> not doing it as a full time job. Many have other

> careers too. You don't get paid a salary as such

> to be a basic councillor, but receive an allowance

> of ?11,270 per year in Southwark (other councils

> may differ slightly)

> https://www.southwark.gov.uk/council-and-democracy

> /councillors-and-mps/member-allowances-and-expense

> s

> If you take on more roles and duties by joining

> certain committees for example, you are given a

> greater allowance, which could then mean you'd

> earn enough to make it your full time job.

> Seems to me that properly paying councillors to

> make it a full time job would help things a

> little.

I would've thought that being a councillor might be the start of a full-time political career for some people. The allowance is very generous compared with some councils....especially as it seems to be quite a lot of money for nothing in some cases. As people have said- James was always very helpful and quick off the mark.

Many appear to see being a Southwark Councillor as a stepping stone to becoming an MP in a safe parliamentary seat - you can never accuse a Lib Dem of that! They move to London do a PR job, MP researcher, union official. Become a councillor for a London borough near parliament - Southwark is very popular for this. Get selected in their home town for a Safe Labour parliamentary seat. Get elected an MP. Usually 2-3 councillors in Southwark do this each national electoral cycle. I would question their loyalty and dedication to whichever part of Southwark they get elected to - we're just a stepping stone and they don't suffer the consequences of their councillors decisions. It drives short termism.


You can see the current allowance structure here - https://www.southwark.gov.uk/assets/attach/7142/Member%20allowances%20scheme%202018-19.pdf


Every councillor gets a 'basic' allowance of ?11,270 and then some get extra allowances ranging from ?2,946 to ?53,238 pa. A number of cabinet councillors then obtain extra roles at London Councils - a club of all London's councils with further special allowance. They're usually quite generous how they pay themselves for those as voters don't know about these. Other councils clubs such as the Local Government Association do the same.


If you'd like to know each councillors role and then cross reference the extra cash they're getting - http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgUserInfo.aspx?UID=50000711


Most councillors have to hold down a day job. A tiny proportion have families or are carers. But when you stand for election you don't stand to randomly represent or respond to residents. For me it was a calling and I would hope for most others they feel the same. In the round being a councillor probably set back my career a dozen years far out weighing any allowance received. But a great twelve years helping people.

There is a huge danger to an 'always elected here' incumbent party that they fall, eventually, as Labour did in Scotland to a level of complacency which lets in eventually a disruptive party (as the SNP was). This tends to happen when the voters are so taken for granted that they can be safely (it might seem) be ignored and other agendae pursued. Renata has always been a proud exception to this rule, and one must hope that James II will be too. When (if) I see him resist the position of the apparat because it goes against the interests of his constituents it will be a good sign.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Last week we had no water for over 24 hours and very little support from Thames Water when we called - had to fight for water to be delivered, even to priority homes. Strongly suggest you contact [email protected] as she was arranging a meeting with TW to discuss the abysmal service
    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...