News

New Police and Crime Commissioner welcomes review after low turnout

By Jon Nurse
November 27, 2012

The new Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) for the Thames Valley has welcomed a review into the elections after just 13.3 per cent in the region turned out to vote.

Tory candidate Anthony Stansfeld secured the position on Friday, with a total of 94,238 votes after the second round of the count against Labour’s Tim Starkey.

As PCC he will oversee the largest non-metropolitan force in the country with 8,000 police officers and staff and an annual budget of nearly £400 million.

In Wokingham there was a 13.97 per cent turnout, lower than the national average of 15 per cent.

Councillor David Lee, leader of Wokingham Borough Council, said: “The turnout was very low and it’s difficult to take any clear mandate from it.

“I think November is a bad time to do it and it should have been done with the elections in May. In hindsight you can say it needed more publicity but I think as much was done as could be in this area.

“The commissioners need to respond to local need for policing and react accordingly. All too often organisations become talking shops and it’s absolutely vital the public see the benefits and the specific outcomes of having a PCC. If they see that I think they will be sold on the idea.”

The Electoral Commission has announced it will conduct a nationwide review into the elections due to the low number of voters, with ministers blaming public unfamiliarity with the role.

Mr Stansfeld agreed the Government should have done more to explain and publicise the PCC elections and the second preference supplementary voting system.

He said: “We would have liked a vastly bigger turnout, but in the depths of winter when the mornings and evenings are dark, when people come back from work the last thing they want to do is go to a polling station.”

Mr Stansfeld added the Government had not offered a free postal system so none of the candidates were able to write to the 1.6 million voters in the region.

“The Government was caught in a Catch-22 situation,” he said. “The more publicity, the more it was going to cost and it was trying to keep that down.

“It still cost a huge amount, but that is one of the first things needed to get people turning out.”

He said people were confused about the voting system.

Mr Stansfeld has resigned as a West Berkshire Council executive member, but will continue to serve Kintbury ward, where he lives.

He will officially take up the new post tomorrow with staff employed by the police authority transferring to the commission at midnight.

Thames Valley Police Chief Constable Sara Thornton said: “I would like to congratulate Mr Stansfeld on his election victory and look forward to working together on behalf of the people in the Thames Valley.”

The PCC will indicate its proposed budget and precept for 2013/14 in December and a Police and Crime Plan will be published by March 2013.

| Submit Comments | View Comments (11)

« Previous Story | Next Story »

Most recent user comments 11 of 11

There appears to be a fluffy ginger cat asleep on his head.

graywok, Woosehill
27/11/2012 at 23:05

Would have prefered the money spent on more police on the street rather than create these roles.

Whatever month this election was held would have had a low turnout. As people have already commented, the vast majority didn't want these roles created. Have a referendum on the EU or about other major issues then see what the turn outs like, bet would be much much higher.

Mistwalker
27/11/2012 at 15:03

We should have been allowed to vote for no political commissioner - then we would have had a much larger turnout

come on lads
27/11/2012 at 13:58

I understood the voting system, I didn't think it was that difficult...

I actually did vote, and I did look up the candidates. I had a postal vote so didn't see anyone at the polling station, however I only put one vote in because I really didn't want anyone else getting the position. My belief was that this should not be a role for someone with political ties, and there was only one candidate who fit the bill.

Unfortunately the other few people who voted didn't feel the same way and we have a Tory in the position. Oh dear...

CJ formerly known as CMA
27/11/2012 at 13:28

Does anyone have a link to any of the original, pre-election quotes that stated very clearly 'this is not a political role'? I quite clearly remember seeing and hearing our politicians telling us this was apolitical - and then seeing the prospective PCCs on my voting card with a political party's sign next to each of them, and seeing them all wearing Labour/Conmerchant ribbons when the results were announced.

I agree with most of what has been commented here already. I knew the vote was coming, but was absolutely against it - I don't care what month it was held in, I was against it in principle, in its execution, in its waste of money (the cost of the vote, the wage to the PCCs, the cost of their staff - they will all have a staff, office, travel costs etc., so it'll be well over £100k each) - and the politicians now say 'well, it's just because it's dark out. In time, people will see the benefit and thank the all-knowing Conservative party for forcing this through. The fact that turnout was pathetic, lots of people spoiled their papers, and say that they're against the creation of these jobs for the boys is irrelevant; we wanted it to happen, so it happened. Do as you're told'.

Ain't democracy grand?

Damiano_Tommassi, Wokingham
27/11/2012 at 13:20

I voted for Antony Stansfeld's hairdresser.

Paul Daniels' reattached finger.
27/11/2012 at 12:09

@Tom Edwards - the "entire country" did NOT reject the new voting system. I agree it was rejected by a standard vote, but I voted *for* it as did many of my friends. Where are we then, if not included the "entire country"?

Currently the voting system shows who supports who. That is all. It encourages people to vote tactically against someone they actually dislike, thus handing unwarranted legitimacy to the opponent. It also discourages votes for the minor parties because such a vote is seen as "wasted". Such minor parties can only increase their support long term by showing they have support, and we'd end up with less of a two party system that barely reflects anyone's views.

PR goes even further to ensure that there was representation for every significant party voted for. Currently, if you vote UKIP, you are not represented at all because they have no MPs. With PR, if enough people across the country voted UKIP, there would be a UKIP representative in parliament.

The PCC voting system allowed people to vote for whoever they *support*, but if that vote isn't to count, they still got an opportunity for their one vote to count. I think it is a much fairer system that discourages tactical voting and ends up with a result that more people are satisfied with rather than the current one in which the *majority* are generally unhappy with (averaged across the country). No majority voted anyone in in the last general election, and we ended up with a party that the 60+% of people actually voted against. Great system(!) According to you, the "entire country" voted Tory (because they were the minority government), which it didn't of course.

The only reason the majority voted against changes in the voting system was because they didn't understand it or the benefits. Yet again, there was barely any campaigning on either front other than big posters saying "YES" or "NO", which helps no one.

mavdo, Wokingham
27/11/2012 at 11:42

I voted for Phillip Lee as Commissioner - I figured it would give him the opportunity to stop pretending to be an MP or GP.

Winstanley, Bracknell
27/11/2012 at 11:33

I voted for Mr. Plod of Noddy fame and they had the audacity to not count my vote! What exactly do I pay my Taxes for?!!!

Timothy Jefferies, Mayor Of Crowthorne.
27/11/2012 at 11:17

I didn't vote because I didn't agree with (a) the NEW posts being created making the process more bureaucratic than it already is, (b) the 41 jobs paying such HUGE salaries, (c) the politicisation of a process that was supposed to give people "control" over their police forces (which is just an excuse to shift blame from cuts that central government are enforcing anyway), (d) the *complete* lack of literature and campaigning by the candidates, thus giving no one a clue about what they stood for unless they actually went and looked it up, which they wouldn't bother to do if they thought the posts were completely worthless anyway. I'm also against the illegal nature of the candidates standing beside polling stations telling voters they "only needed to vote for one cadidate", which is INCORRECT and could be seen as vote fixing as it removed the entire point of using this voting system.

I'm not going to vote for a pointless political position that just gives someone a job that was never there before, paying a huge, unwarranted salary for telling the police to do things they are already trying desparately to do within a continuously falling budget and a continuously increasing expectantcy to solve crime. And all the while they will be spouting rhetoric about how great the current government's plans and policies are, spounting vast amounts of spin (aka lies) about their performance, or alternatively how it isn't their fault at all because the government aren't funding it properly, and yet NOTHING will change at all. Either way, we are just paying vast amounts of money for yet more political gamesmanship, and we had to go and vote for it!!! Utter insanity.

mavdo, Wokingham
27/11/2012 at 11:08

So - after spending £100m on an election for an Office that no-one wants, using a voting system that when we had the referendum the entire country rejected, even more money will be wasted on a review. Cameron has shown his contempt for the people once again. I used to vote Conservative, have done all my life, I will now vote UKIP – not enough to make any difference in Bracknell as Dr Do-Nothing will still get re-elected, but if enough people do it around the country, it will deny Cameron a Majority again

Here would be my feedback • No-one wanted it • No-one cared! • No-one understood it • Lots of people didn’t understand the voting system • There was little/no campaigning by any party and little or no literature [ Even my local Conservatives Councillors disagreed with it and didn’t do anything] • don’t hold elections in November. • Might have been easier and cheaper to have had 100% postal and just use the normal system of voting where the person with the most votes wins!

Alternatively ... scrap the post, or insist that no-one from a political party can stand as a candidate - let the people choose the best independent!