Wednesday, 22 February 2017

The electoral system in the City of London - an exercise in Hyper Democracy

The City of London's electoral system is rather different from other towns and cities in the UK. The differences are a product of its very long and complex history and unique status as a city which has circa 45 commute in workers for every resident. This combination of long and complex history and unique status has resulted in three different electorates:
  • The residents
  • The business voters
  • The livery
This article explores each of these electorates and their involvement with the election of the City's government.

The Residents

The residents are perhaps the easiest electorate to understand in the City. Every resident of voting age may participate in the election of representatives for their ward. In the City the representative are titled 'Common Councilmen' (imports both genders) and there are one hundred such Common Councilmen in total. Some wards have more Common Councilmen than others, depending on the size of the electorate in the ward. Consequently in some wards it is possible for every voter to vote for as many as ten candidates (including the ward's Alderman). Elections to the Court of Common Council (the City's government) take place every four years and are by secret ballot.

Each ward in the City also has an Alderman (again, imports both genders) who is the figurehead for the ward and nominally elected for life. That said, Aldermen retire at seventy by custom and put themselves up for re-election every six years, again election is by secret ballot. Aldermen are also members of the Court of Common Council. In total that means the City has one hundred and twenty-five elected local government representatives, or approximately one for every seventy residents. A by-product of this ratio is the fact that elected representatives in the City tend to be in close contact with, and very accessible to their electorate. Certainly this has been my consistent experience.

Common Councilmen are a varied bunch, some are retired, some are small business owners, some are city professionals who have understanding employers that will allow them to attend the numerous daytime committee meetings that make it difficult to hold down a full-time career and serve the local community. What they all bring is a strong commitment to civic duty, evidenced by the numerous charitable, pro-bono and civic affiliations present among the Common Councilmen. The Court of Common Council works through committees and consensus rather than cabinet government with an executive - this engenders a culture of collaboration rather than the partisan politics of local government in other cities.

Of the City's twenty-five wards only two have a sizeable resident population. Most of the City's wards have an almost exclusively business population, indeed the entire residential population of the City doesn't meet the UK government's minimum population threshold (10,000) for classification as an urban area! This is just one of the many anomalies that make the City unique.

The City is essentially a village from a resident population perspective, one that just happens to produce a Gross Value Add to the UK economy of about £45bn per annum (2014 figures) and the financial services sector alone generates around 12% of the tax revenues for the exchequer. It's a very productive village that also happens to bring in many workers to its businesses.

The Business Voter

The business voters form a separate constituency that widens the franchise so that the estimated 400,000 - 420,000 workers in the City have the opportunity to participate in the election of Common Councilmen and Aldermen. These workers and the businesses that employ them are the primary source of tax revenues and the primary consumers of City services. 

The businesses operating in the City are allocated votes on a scale that favours smaller businesses. Approximately 14,500 of the City's 15,000 business have between one and nine employees. A business with between one and nine employees gets one business vote (a maximum 9:1 ratio), whereas a business with 3,500 or more employees gets 79 votes (a minimum 44:1 ratio) but there are only a handful of such big business in the City. The effect of the business vote allocation scale is that for all but a tiny percentage of the businesses in the City the ratio is one business voter to one business. The City's business vote is therefore dominated by small traders and tiny enterprises (cafe's, corner shops, family run businesses) not by massive financial services businesses.

Myths and misconceptions about the Business Vote

A common myth or misconception is that the City is dominated by big businesses. The reality is rather different. There are slightly more than 15,000 business in the City, of which 98.5% are small and medium enterprises, only 1.5% are big business with over 1,000 employees (which includes all the big name banks and some of the bigger law firms). Together all these business produce 3% of the UK's total economic output (2014 figures). Since the advent of Canary Wharf many of the biggest banks have located most of their employees outside the City, and hence they are not eligible to vote in City elections.

The argument that big businesses dominating the business vote, or that business voters are influenced by their bosses is nonsense - the maths simply doesn't add up as the number of business with more than two votes is less than two percent of the total number of businesses in the City, and those businesses with large blocks of votes are a fraction of one percent of the total electorate. My wife works for one such large City firm and they struggle to get employees to join the ward list, so weak is the management's influence.

There is however a very real problem with the business vote and that's one of engagement. While the residents have about 20% of the votes and the business voters have about 80%, the latter are far less inclined to turn out and vote. Recent elections have shown that the residents exercise a far greater influence over the result than business voters do.

Another myth that circulates in certain outraged corners of the press and social media is that the City elections are funded by big business. The rules for campaign expense funding in the City are the same as elsewhere in the UK, with a basic figure of £266 plus 5.2p per voter permitted to each candidate. With the total number of voters in each ward usually being in the high hundreds to low thousands, the funding limits on election campaigns in the City are actually very small and certainly don't cover even the postage cost of a single campaign leaflet to every voter. A consequence of this is the fact that candidates have to get out and do a lot of legwork, meeting the electorate and getting to know their ward on close terms. Unlike other councils in the UK, the City does pays neither allowances or expenses to Common Council - a situation exacerbated by the fact that all meetings are during the working day. For those Common Councilmen who are employed this means they often forego career advancement to serve the City on a pro bono basis.

Since almost all the business voters work in tiny enterprises with just one business vote the opportunity for big business to fund or influence voting is in the scale of a rounding error. If big business does throw money at City elections (and as a business voter with a wife who is also a business voter in a different company I have seen and heard no evidence of such), then they do it to influence less than 1.5% of an electorate that consistently fails to turn out to elections in the City - clearly any mythical influence is both minuscule and ineffective.

The composition of Common Council

Whether the majority of voters in a given ward are residents or business voters the composition of the Court of Common Council is almost entirely made up of independent candidates (not aligned with a political party). At the time of writing none of the Aldermen and only one of the Common Councilmen is elected on a party political platform. Consequently party-political campaigns play almost no part in influencing the outcome of elections in the City of London. A quick examination of the profiles of the members of Common Council reveals a great many who fit into the profile of retired or semi-retired professionals who are often school governors; charity trustees; magistrates and generally the sort of person who is a civic minded joiner. 

Election campaigns in the City have a curiously homespun feel to them, with individual candidates going door-to-door, visiting residential blocks, small businesses and social meetings in churches, pubs and at ward clubs. The whole experience is more parish council than parliament as evidenced by the 'meet the ward team' events that are held by the Aldermen and Common Councilmen. These are informal gatherings at which voters can meet their elected representatives over a glass of wine or soft drink and have a direct and convivial chat about any issue that concerns them. This is direct democracy City style!

The Livery

The Livery make up the third electorate, and they are the senior members of the City's Livery Companies (trade, craft and professional guilds). The Livery doesn't participate in elections to Common Council (unless a Liveryman is also a resident or business voter), rather they participate in the election of the Sheriffs and the Lord Mayor. The City of London is unique in being able to elect its Sheriffs, elsewhere in the UK they are appointed by the Sovereign, and it has two Sheriffs who serve for a single year. It is a condition for election to the office of Lord Mayor that an Alderman must first have served as Sheriff. The office of Sheriff is unpaid and involves considerable expense for the incumbent. 

The Lord Mayor is elected from among the City's twenty-five Alderman for a single one-year term. The candidates are first approved by the Livery at a meeting called 'Common Hall' held in Guildhall. The approved candidates then go forward for election by their fellow Aldermen. As with the office of Sheriff, the Lord Mayor is unpaid and the occupant is expected to contribute substantially toward the cost of their office from their own means.

So the City is a very odd village indeed, one with far more business than residents, some wards with next to no residents, and a total residential population that is comparable with a large village, yet a commuter population of workers that is comparable with the residential population of Bristol. It has two types of elected representative (Common Councilmen and Aldermen) and an annually elected Lord Mayor - none of whom receive any salary, pension, bonuses or expenses from the tax payer.

Hyper Democracy

As a business voter and Liveryman, my own experience of the City's electoral system is one I describe as 'hyper democracy', how do I justify that statement?
  1. As a business voter I get to vote for up to eight candidates in Common Council elections as well as the Alderman for my ward.
  2. I know and have met all the Common Councilmen and the Aldermen for my ward - unlike the town where I live in which the councillors are largely unseen and unknown.
  3. Most of the candidates for election to Common Council have made the effort to meet me in person, always in their own time and all have taken the care to invite my views.
  4. I have sat in on meetings of the Court of Common Council and have always found the Common Councilmen for my ward to be approachable and accessible.
  5. I exercise my business vote freely, without influence from the business that has nominated me as one of its voters or from political parties or campaign groups.
  6. As a Liveryman I also get to vote for two Sheriffs and Alderman to become Lord Mayor every year and participate in the civic life my ward through the Ward Club where I meet other resident and business voters.
  7. All the Common Councilmen in my ward are independents, who have demonstrated a consistent commitment to the interest of the ward's residents and businesses. They stand without political affiliation and are able to exercise their judgement without the influence of party policy.
  8. To top it all off I also get to vote for several Bridge Masters and Ale Conners, as many auditors as there are vacancies for at each meeting of Common Hall.
  9. Despite having little interest in politics I have never been so well informed, engaged and connected with local government as I am in the City of London.




2 comments:

  1. Not every workplace nominates voters (the process is voluntary). The last City-wide elections were in 2013, 'business & other' voters made up 70% of the names on the Ward Lists. There appears to be a lot of 'deadwood' on the ward lists, with suspicions of receptionists at solicitors and accountancy firms merely listing the senior partners without ascertaining whether such people wish to vote.

    The Ward Lists are only used for elections to the Court of Common Council. The electoral register for the City is compiled on the same basis as everywhere else.

    ReplyDelete
  2. My wife is a secretary in one of the City law firms, when first she was offered the business vote she had no idea what it was about and certainly received no guidance from her employer. Being married to me she now knows 'rather too much' about the City's sui generis system of government.

    ReplyDelete