Bristol's Mayoral Referendum: Everything you need to know
Ahead of the vote tomorrow we've put together a helpful guide on the arguments for and against a Bristol Mayor
Last updated 4th May 2022
Bristolians will have a chance to vote on Thursday (May 5) on whether they want to keep a directly elected city mayor, or not.
A referendum is being held on the position after city councillors voted in favour of one back in December, saying the current system is undemocratic because it gives them no say in how the city is run.
However, current Mayor Marvin Rees who represents Labour argues the system is democratic, because it gives every Bristolian the chance to vote for their leader and vote them out if they are seen to have underperformed.
Ahead of the vote, here we will provide some context and analyse the arguments for and against the mayoral system.
Bristol's mayoral model: A history
A decade ago, on 3 May 2012, nine English cities held simultaneous referendums on whether or not to adopt a mayoral model.
Those cities were Nottingham, Manchester, Coventry, Bradford, Wakefield, Sheffield, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Birmingham and Leeds, while Doncaster, which already had a mayor at the time, voted on whether or not to keep the system.
Voters in Bristol were asked, "how would you like Bristol City Council to be run?
"By a leader who is an elected councillor chosen by the other elected councillors. This is how the council is run now, or by a mayor who is elected by voters?"
Of all 10 cities, Bristol was the only one to vote for a mayoral system, by 53 per cent to 47 per cent, with a 24 per cent turn out.
Six months later Bristol's first mayor, independent candidate George Ferguson was elected, with 6,094 more votes than his nearest rival, which happened to be the current mayor Marvin Rees.
Marvin Rees becomes mayor
Four years after Bristol adopted the mayoral model, in 2016, Labour's Marvin Rees took on the role after winning a significant majority of 68,750 votes compared to Ferguson's 39,577.
In his victory speech he claimed he would be an inclusive leader and share power on his council cabinet with other political parties, which as an independent, George Ferguson had also done before him.
A year later though, in 2017, then Green cabinet member Fi Hance and Conservative cabinet member Claire Hiscott were removed and replaced with Labour members, with Marvin blaming the behaviour of opposition parties and saying it made the inclusive arrangement untenable.
Four years later in 2021 Marvin was re-elected as mayor at the same time as a wider election was held for seats on the city council, during which Labour lost its majority.
In a surprising result the Green Party became the joint largest in Bristol alongside Labour with 24 seats, up from 11, but despite that the mayor continues to exclude them and all other opposition parties from his cabinet.
His decisions, both in 2017 and more recently have fuelled the argument that the mayoral system places too much power in one person.
How the council works
Currently, under the mayoral system, all major policy decisions taken by Bristol City Council are made by the mayor, with the help of his cabinet.
The mayor is voted in every four years during a city wide election.
The wider council is made up of 70 councillors, representing 34 wards, with each councillor voted in by residents in their ward.
As things stand it is the mayor's job to set the council's policy agenda, propose the council's annual budget and generally provide leadership in the city.
The wider council, in particular opposition councillors who are not from the same party as the mayor, have little power to influence policy.
They are able to propose amendments through full council and push the mayor to act on issues of concern, but the mayor has the ability to ignore these suggestions, as was shown earlier this year over the city council's budget.
Marvin's plans were initially turned down but passed at the second attempt, after the mayor agreed to adopt several amendments from opposition parties, while rejecting others.
If Bristol was to vote to abolish the mayoral model, then when Mr Rees' current term ends in 2024 the council would adopt a committee system.
Under that system decisions are taken by various different committees made up of councillors from all parties and a ceremonial council leader is voted in by their peers.
Either way, Mr Rees has already stated he intends to stand down in 2024.
The arguments against a mayor
The most vocal opposition to the mayoral model in Bristol has come from within the council itself.
Opposition councillors, in particular those representing the Greens and Liberal Democrats, claim it has taken democracy away from citizens because the councillors residents have voted in are unable to do much to influence policy, unless they sit on the mayor's cabinet.
Carla Denyer, a Green council member for Clifton Down who is also co-leader of the party nationally, has repeatedly stressed her view that the mayoral system "is an unhealthy concentration of power in the hands of one person".
Those who want to scrap the mayoral model say a committee system gives every councillor influence.
They also argue it leads to better decisions that reflect the entire city's needs and that there is less chance of decisions being scrapped by future administrations because they cannot pass without broad support.
Heather Mack is the leader of the Green group on the council.
She has stated publicly that "having more voices involved means we make better decisions".
While the referendum is about the mayoral position rather than the person holding the role, concerns have also been raised by some that Mr Rees is exploiting the powers of the mayor to implement an authoritarian style of leadership.
He has been accused of bullying and shutting down debate by members of his own party including former councillor Jo Sergeant, who defected to the Greens last year.
He has also been criticised for using a patronising tone in council meetings when addressing the quality of debate and for ridiculing a journalist from the Local Democracy Reporting Service during a meeting in 2019.
Mr Rees has rejected all allegations of bullying and in response to the controversial 2019 meeting, a spokesperson for Mr Rees said a journalist "should not complain when they get tackled" if they "enter the field of play".
During the meeting in question the mayor had insinuated the journalist present was biased.
Another argument goes that having a city mayor for Bristol is unnecessary and creates confusion, because Bristol also falls under the jurisdiction of the West of England regional mayor.
That position is currently held by another Labour man Dan Norris and did not exist in 2012.
It gives the holder authority to create regional policies on major issues like transport and the environment, covering Bath and North East Somerset and South Gloucestershire as well as Bristol.
Former Bristol city mayor George Ferguson is among those who thinks both roles are not needed.
The arguments for a mayor
The arguments for retaining a mayor in Bristol are two fold.
Firstly, those in favour of a mayor say the position gives the city clear leadership and a single person to hold accountable because they can be voted out every four years.
Secondly, the argument goes that concentrating power in one person allows the council to get more things done.
In 2000 a new law largely abolished the committee system of local government, which many Bristol City Councillors want to adopt once again.
The law was brought in partly because committees were seen too often as groups of opposing politicians who struggled to agree.
In 2011 however, another Act of parliament reversed the move from 2000 and stated councils could once again adopt the committee system if they so wished.
Bristol's Labour MP Kerry McCarthy has been quoted as saying the old committee system has been "tried, tested and failed", while in an opinion piece recently written for Bristol 24/7 Labour's Ellie King, who sits on Mr Rees' cabinet, said abolishing the mayor would relegate Bristol "to the status of a parish council".
On leadership, those in favour of a mayor say the position has helped put Bristol on the map.
During his time in the role Mr Rees has spoken at the UN in New York and G7, while he is a member of a group called Core Cities, which brings together the leaders of the UK's 11 largest cities to better promote their economic potential.
His predecessor George Ferguson also met the Pope and then Secretary General of the UN Ban Ki-moon.
It is not just an assumption that having a mayor creates more visible leadership though.
A study, carried out by Centre for Cities in partnership with the University of Bristol before and after a mayor was introduced in 2016, found a huge change once Bristol had a mayor.
In 2012, before George Ferguson took on the role, 24 per cent of Bristolians asked said they thought the city had visible leadership, which jumped to 69 per cent in 2014 once Mr Ferguson had been in the role for two years.
Among community and business leaders the difference was even more stark, going from 25 per cent to 97 per cent.
"Why does visibility matter," a write up on the Centre for Cities website reads.
"A key argument is that it offers greater accountability.
"If you don’t know who is making decisions how can you hold them to account?"
A smaller but significant third argument has also been made, that the city has already had a vote on whether to keep a mayor.
In last year's mayoral election two candidates stood on a mandate of abolishing the position and lost.
Mr Rees argues that shows Bristolians want a mayor, but it is worth noting turnout was less than half, at 41 per cent.
Thursday's vote
Polls will open on Thursday at 7am and close at 10pm, with counting set to take place overnight into Friday (May 6).
A result is expected in the early hours of Friday morning.
Whatever happens Bristol will retain a mayor until at least 2024 when the current mayoral term ends.