Tense and tetchy Peterborough City Council meeting highlights stark division over election postponement

Councillors at Peterborough City Council’s Sand Martin House HQ spent more than one-and-a-half hours exchanging views on the topic, with a highly vocal public gallery also joining in to share their opinions.

After a relatively sedate start to proceedings, the temperature rose when Cllr Wayne Fitzgerald (Conservatives) put forward a motion relating to the potential postponement of the May 2026 local elections in Peterborough.

It stated: “I propose that Members request that the Chief Executive send a letter to the Minister [Alison McGovern, the Minister of State for Local Government and Homelessness] making her aware that our Members do not/would not (as appropriate) support any decision by government to postpone the May 2026 local elections.”

Before opening the floor to debate, Monitoring Officer Graham Kitchen reminded the chamber that “the motion to be proposed… merely presents an opportunity for all members to debate the issue.”

“The vote on the issue, whilst being indicative of each individual member’s view on the matter, is of no legal consequence whatsoever,” he said.

In his opening remarks, Cllr Fitzgerald suggested that postponing the 2026 elections amounted to cancelling them, an observation which was greeted with claps and cheers from the public gallery:

“These elections will not come back in 2027, “ he insisted; “if there are any elections locally then it will be for the new unitary authority which is set to replace Peterborough City Council in May 2028.”

Responding as a point of accuracy, Council Leader Shabina Qayyum stated: “We have every intention of going into elections in 2027.”

Boos and shouts from the public gallery followed, prompting Mayor Judy Fox to appeal for calm and voice a warning. A request to “have some respect” was also issued.

This set the tone for the next hour-and-a-half of impassioned and sometimes rather tetchy debate.

Cllr Fitzgerald concluded his introduction by saying he did not “buy the argument” being put forward by Labour that the capacity issues associated with preparing for Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) were a reason not to have elections.

Cllr Mark Ormston (independent) seconded the motion.

“LGR is the extra work here,” he suggested, “not the elections. I feel the LGR timetable should, and will, have to change.”

He added: “I am not anti-LGR. I know this has to happen and I believe that opportunities exist for the new authority and the residents under its care.”

Cllr Nicola Day (Green Party) drew members’ attention to what she described as “the moral question” posed by not having elections in 2026.

“Democracy is precious, and we must defend democracy and the importance of free and fair voting,” she said.

“The public, as council tax payers, should be allowed their democratic right to vote.”

“It is unfair and undemocratic to deny the public a free and fair election.”

Councillor Christian Hogg (Leader, Liberal Democrats) took a different view on the motion:

“We feel this letter will have no effect other than to be used in various leaflets and social media posts,” he said.

“We are not in the business of supporting the Conservatives’ election machine and as such we will be voting against this motion.”

Fellow Lib Dem Councillor Chris Wiggin echoed that view:

“This motion is not about cancelling the elections,” he said. “This motion is pure party politics from Cllr Fitzgerald and the Conservative Party.”

As the arguments for and against the motion intensified, so did the reaction of the public gallery, with cheers and boos increasing in volume.

Acknowledging that “there is a lot of heat here tonight,” Cllr Steve Allen stated that, while he appreciated the challenges LGR was likely to present, not holding elections in 2026 would amount to “a democratic deficit.”

“Because we didn’t have elections last year,” he said, “I do think that it [the election] has to go ahead.”

He went on to suggest that the Labour government may be pushing for the postponing of elections as a way of “hiding behind fear of the outcome.”

Cllr Angus Ellis (Labour and Cooperative Party) took his opportunity to reemphasise that the significant costs and resources required to establish LGR must be considered when considering the postponing of elections

“It’s a huge amount of work,” he said. “It is… something we have thought about very, very deeply and it’s very important that we do this extra work to make sure LGR works properly, and hence why we have put forward the view to government that we do not think that elections should go ahead this year and that they should be postponed.”

This prompted a flurry of disagreement from the public gallery, followed by one final warning from Mayor Judy Fox:

“If I hear any more noise like that then you’ll have to leave,” she said.

This was followed by further rumblings in the crowd which resulted in a brief pause in proceedings.

The debate continued to ebb and flow, with members exchanging their views frankly, and assertively.

As discussions drew to a close, Cllr Qayyum rose to her feet to share her views on the evening’s proceedings:

Speaking to the public gallery, Cllr Qayyum said people were welcome to boo her if they didn’t agree with her decision to reply to the letter sent by the MInister of State for Local Government and Homelessness with a request that the 2026 elections be postponed:

“The letter was sent to me,” she asserted: “as leader of Peterborough City Council, I take responsibility.”

“The buck stops with me.”

Summing up, Cllr Fitzgerald suggested Labour was “running scared,” that poor polling nationally and locally was its true motivation for postponing elections.

The Conservative councillor also countered the view that his motion was merely a token gesture and that nothing can be done to undo the executive decision that has been made to recommend the postponing of elections:

“The leader of this council can rescind or withdraw the letter to the MInister [of State for Local Government and Homelessness],” he said.

Speaking to the council leader directly, he said: “I am telling you that you can withdraw that letter to government and let the elections go ahead.”

When the time did finally come to vote, the result was 18 in favour of the motion and 28 against, with two abstentions.

The motion was not carried.

Earlier in the evening, Cllr Fitzgerald had mused on the question of “Who would be a councillor?”

It may well have been a sentiment quite a few councillors were mulling over as they finally filed out of Sand Martin House late last night.