Remember to vote for your Reform Candidates next Thursday.

Polls will be open from 7am – 10pm.

Here are your two Derby candidates:

We are please to release our contract for this year’s local elections. The contract outlines our policies for Derby City:

The land used to have a low level fence around it but now it’s been damaged, leading to concerns around ‘inappropriate access’

As reported in the Derby Telegraph – link here

Reform Derby leader Alan Graves says that red tape is stopping a piece of land in his ward from being fenced off to stop travellers gaining access after an offer of repairing the fence by a local builder free of charge was turned down by Derby City Council. Councillor Alan Graves, said that the council was in a financial mess but it is unable to untangle itself from the local government red tape”.

Mr Graves said that the open space belonging to the city council on Glastonbury Road originally had a low-level fence around it but is now in need of urgent repair and in many places is completely broken, exposing the land to the possibility of “inappropriate access”.

He said: “The council’s parks department is responsible for ensuring their areas of land are properly maintained. The situation has been raised by local councillors and many residents over the last few years. The parks department has said they have no funds due to budgetary constraints.

Full Story can be found on Derby Telegraph site here.

Last night was an extraordinary meeting of the Full council to debate the next stage of a Combined Authority elected Mayor.

Prior to this the council have not been allowed to debate the issue, the current council leader has merely informed the rest of the council that this is what he is doing. So this was the first time we had to air our own views on the matter.

At the end of this message I will share my speech with you just so you know Reform’s position.

Procedurally, the debate is started by the person presenting the paper. There was a little bit of confusion in that the Leader was expected to start this off but he bowed to the Deputy Leader who during his contribution extolled the virtues of the position and explained that Derby City Council would still be in tact. In fact, he laboured this point.

Next the mayor opens debate to the rest of the chamber.

I was first to indicate I wished to speak. You will see what I said at the end of this message. Unfortunately, the Mayor during my speech did not like the fact I was against the idea of an elected mayor over Derby, Derbyshire, Nottingham and Nottinghamshire. The costs to the taxpayer will be extra to taxes we already pay. He stopped me 3 times trying to get me to change tack on what I was saying. He became very agitated and finally refused to allow me my full 5 minutes speaking on the matter.

The mayor very heatedly said I should be talking about the consultation of but not about the position of the elected mayor. I also tried to put in an amendment to make the ultimate consultation by asking for a Referendum on the issue so that all the people of Derby could decide for themselves whether they wanted another mayor. I was ruled out of order after advice by the legal officer. Whilst this was disappointing I had to accept that my amendment was not to be accepted and voted on. However, I should have been allowed to continue my point of view.

The council chamber is the place to debate issues of the city and debate the issues presented to us.

To allow his own party councillor to extol the virtues of the elected mayor but not allow me to express my concerns about the position is a misuse of his position as mayor. Some would say it is corruption and gives politicians and the council a bad name.

I still believe that on such an important matter that all the people of Derby should get a say on it and that it should be binding.

Their version of consultation is to talk to other institutions in the city and invite members of the public to go online to make their views known. As we know most members of the public will not even know they can do this and many will not be able to get online. As with all consultations it will be merely letting people know this is what they are doing. A sham in fact. Although it will be a box they can tick for the government.

Democracy was dealt yet another blow in that the mayor refused to allow me to finish my points and a Referendum was not even considered.

Cllr Graves Speech for Full Council Nov 2^nd

Members of the council. I hope that you have all considered why this is being thrust upon us as a council and as local residents.

This is simply a civil service idea with political ramifications.

Most decisions made by local government and national government come from ideas from civil servants. Many are good ideas but if we look back at Derby’s history there are many instances of civil service ideas that do not, and did not, work well.

Notably, the A52, the Incinerator and the Assembly Rooms come to mind. Nationally, the biggest error of judgment was the Poll Tax.

Leading politicians are persuaded to make these decisions and then get it in the neck when it all comes crumbling down.

So, I am appealing to you to consider some simple facts and question some of the arguments

1. Why are we being led down this path? Is it to make the government’s job easier? They currently have responsibility for all these areas that a new super Mayor would be responsible for.
2. The ministers already get paid to do this and now they want to hand it over. Will the salaries of the new Mayor and the Chief Executive be taken out of those ministers pay? Of course not, it will be another cost to the tax payer and worse still it will come out of the overall budget that should be spent on the area.
3. Do we really need another layer of politicians? Do you think the public want this? They are the ones we represent, so please consider them when you vote! Derby is one of the leanest councils in the UK in terms of politicians. Unitary. However, consider the counties, they have 3 councils: parish; district; and county. This post would add a fifth layer of politicians for the counties, what a crazy idea. The government got rid of our more efficient Police Committees and replaced it with the fourth layer of government, the Police and Crime Commissioner at a vast cost to the tax payer. Now this paper wants to add yet another layer costing us millions more, right at the time when a lot of people in Derby are in a poverty crisis. Most of our residents live in a Band A property not like the rest of leafy Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire. I don’t believe this is a good thing for Derby.
4. The government talks about levelling up and makes out this is devolution. It is really dumbing down. Creating new layers of politician is not devolution. All it does is make responsibility more remote. As councillors we have a direct connection with our public. We once had input into the Police but that link has now gone. A combined authority will create greater remoteness.
5. I’m sure you are all aware but for the record, this is not extra money as it says in the paper, this is not new money as politicians like to call it. It is a transfer of budget from government departments to this new political post. It is money that is already being spent.
6. Are people prepared to pay an extra precept on their council tax bills to support this?

A better solution to this would be to create a committee of all the MPs for the area. They have local knowledge and would represent their constituents in this wider area. It would also help to ensure that poor civil service ideas are disregarded at an early stage. It would give direct sense and responsibility to our parliamentary representatives. This would negate any further need for more politicians and it would not cost tax payers any more as they are already paid.

I understand that you are all whipped and are compelled to vote how you are told but I hope you will all consider how this affects your residents if it goes ahead.

(I will be voting against on behalf of our residents.)

I would like to suggest an amendment to the recommendations. To formally consult all the people of Derby via a Referendum at the next appropriate election. That the Council’s Returning Officer be instructed to prepare to hold that Referendum at the earliest opportunity, on the 4^th May 2023. The final decision to move forward on this proposal be given to the people of Derby. 

At this point the mayor stopped me from talking but this is what I would have said…..

Had this amendment been allowed it would have given us, as councillors, the confidence that we are doing the right thing for Derby by actually asking our residents if this is what they want.
You cannot just force another layer of politician, that all our residents have to pay for, onto them without their consent.
If they choose to have this extra layer of government then we will be confident that this is the right course of action.
Members of the council, if this is the right thing to do, let us not rush into it. Let us be careful and considered. The council loses nothing by taking our time over this. This amendment is a 5 month consideration. Many of us feel that this is being rushed though at a pace. Is it because once we choose this path, there is no turning back? Well if there is no turning back let’s find out what the people of Derby, the very people we all represent, want us to do.
Referenda is only used on important matters. I feel this is such an important issue that we should use it.
As you realise I am personally against the idea, however, I am a true democrat and will bow down to the choice of the people. Those confident in the attributes of an elected Mayor of a combined Authority should have no worries about what the people will choose. It will actually give you a mandate.
Members of the Council, support this amendment and you will be held in high regard by the electorate, the people you advocate you represent.

Reform Derby Houses of Multiple Occupants (HMO) motion passed in the last full Council meeting. The motion was to regulate how many Houses of Multiple Occupation there should be in certain parts of the city by giving the Council’s planning department more control.

Kirk Kus and Alan Graves believe HMOs can be helpful to the housing situation however, poorly located and badly managed creates a negative impact on both the tenants and the community.

Please see full speech video on the motion below or click here.