Worcestershire County Council Election manifestos review
So we’ve got another local election coming up on the Thursday the 1st May 2025, voting in representatives to make decisions about the services provided by Worcestershire County Council. Here at Bike Worcester HQ we’re super interested in this one, because we’re all about enabling and encouraging more people to make more journeys by bike, and the most successful way of doing this is to provide more high quality segregated infrastructure for people riding bikes, which falls under the remit of the County Council Highways department.
Now remember, back in 2020 when the Government started to allocate money to Local Authorities (LAs) to do exactly that (Emergency Active Travel Fund), a leaked presentation from the County Council stated in no uncertain terms that no road space would be taken away from motor vehicles and allocated to cycling. Since then we’ve had two changes in the Cabinet Member responsible for Highways, and we’ve been told that the unwritten policy categorically does not exist, and more recently that of course it exists. A Freedom of Information request confirmed if there was a policy, it wasn’t written down. Bonkers. But that’s why we’re here; we love finding a thread and giving it a tug. The point is it’s a tiny example of why this local democracy malarky is so important, particularly if you’ve got the cognitive capacity and the elbow grease to try and enact positive change that benefits everybody.
Anyway, I digress. This is a simple blog. We’ve done similar before. It’s a review of the local party County wide manifestos with particular interest in all things active travel (which will also spill over into other transport methods), which I’m expecting to communicate their vision and planned leadership, including specific details of how they would approach governance differently to the current administration (which can include views from the current administration), or indeed, what they think is currently spiffing and don’t need no change. If you hadn’t seen it we published a blog a few weeks ago brim full nay overflowing with active travel suggestions for candidates to lap up, masticate, swallow, digest and regurgitate into their manifestos and campaign literature (this just to short cut the ‘OK smart arse, what do you suggest?’ conversation). Of course, keen eyed readers of these blogs (of which there are many #FACT) will already know that the benefits of increasing rates of active travel cross over into other areas of governance (environment, education, physical and mental health etc.) so with one eye on the word count I may peak under the covers at the other sections of manifestos as well.
It’s also even more interesting (no, stay with me) because as a result of changes from central government this will be the last election of the County Council prior to the 2 tier system of Governance (in our patch Worcestershire County Council and Worcester City Council taking on different responsibilities) being merged into a Unitary Authority (UA). So I’m expecting some commentary in the manifestos as to what their thoughts are regarding how they might engage with this process, and what influence they intend to bring to the table in how the UA will be structured and will operate.
Right. Let’s get started. We’ve had meetings with representatives from some parties, have checked for content online, and have reached out via email for some more information as appropriate. Comments are open below (but will be moderated), and we reserve the right (ooooo, check us) to modify the blog if we have any corrections pointed out, more information becomes available, or if tomorrow I get out the other side of bed.
3…2…1…BLOG!
Conservative Party
I thought I’d start with the Conservative Party, as they currently run the show, insofar as they have 37 of the available 57 councillors. In fact they’ve had control of the council since 2005, and a Conservative member has been leader of the Council since 2001.
Unfortunately no manifesto that I can unearth. I’m speechless. Actually that’s a lie. Take your pick from bemused, astonished, frustrated, angry, disappointed.
I’ve reached out to individuals and the party for a comment, but have heard nothing back to date. I’ll update the blog with a dated revision if I hear anything.
Given Worcestershire continues to miss out on central government funding, falls behind more forward thinking LAs (that’s pretty much everywhere) in the conception and delivery of active travel infrastructure, languishes as the lowest rated LA in the country with an Active Travel England (ATE) score of 1 out of 4 (based on plans for, delivery of, and political leadership regarding active travel), I guess all we can expect is more of the same. But who knows? Maybe more enlightened and progressive members such as St John’s candidate Bertie Ballinger are now pulling the strings (we had a meeting with Bertie to discuss our blog, and he’s pledged many of the suggestions on a Facebook post)?
The trouble is, even if Bertie is now having influence within the local Conservative Party how do we know if he’s a lone voice or there’s a consensus within the group, let alone whether they would intend to make positive changes on the basis of the consensus if elected and maintaining their majority?
I mean, a good way to communicate the collective views of a party and what they intend to enact if elected might be, errr, to take the time to thrash it out internally and write it down in a manifesto?
Labour Party
OK. Better. Although a bit confusing. There’s a text document downloadable here via the Worcester Labour Party website, but something a bit flashier comes up in a Google search in Wyre Forest Labour…ah OK, it’s 2021 - 2025.
Right, there’s a section on Transport and Highways with 14 paragraphs, and a number of mentions of cycling, with more mentions of making things better for people walking.
The headlines (not necessarily in this order):
“We will work closely with district councils to make greater cycling a reality recognising that it is a practical means of removing cars from our roads as over 70% of all car journeys are under five miles, whilst improving health outcomes for our poulation.”
“Remove barriers which discourage people from walking and cycling short distances or impede users of personal disability vehicles. This includes promoting a ‘share with care’ ethos to use of our highways, increasing highway space for sustainable transport, improving crossings and dropped kerbs over main roads and providing more safe cycle parking spaces.”
“Labour will introduce a coherent policy to create more cycling lanes…”
Also 20 mph, park and ride, air quality, school zones, play streets, cycling proficiency, a new shared use bridge in Bewdley (Clive will be happy), a possible nod to tackling pavement parking (ensure highways and footpaths are clear of obstacles and obstructions to enable safe movement of pedestrians), improved public transport provision, and EV charging.
The not so good is “Labour will lobby central government for a full northern ring road”. I perhaps need to take the time write a coherent position for Bike Worcester on this, but in short building more roads is simply not an answer to anything, other than to enable more journeys by car. I can say this with good authority; it’s pretty much all we’ve tried in the UK for decades, and car usage and ownership continues to increase. It would also cost hundreds of millions of pounds which is money that should be invested elsewhere. Also there’s a mention of abolishing car parking charges on County owned land. Boooo.
Dipping into other sections, there’s no cross pollination of active travel sneaking into Health, Environment, Children’s Services, or Cooperatives and Social Enterprises. Footpaths are mentioned in Rural Life and Countryside Access but no mention of improved connectivity for bikes (despite that already being large parts of existing County policy in Local Transport Plan 4 (LTP4), and there’s a wee mention of active travel in the Business section.
So that’s Labour. Some of the text is a sign the person(s) writing it are a bit out of touch with the current best practice language used around active travel, but even so, it’s a pretty good effort. It reads as being a County document (although no County website, but same download available from Wyre Forest), shows a clear change in direction, vision and leadership, with enough detail to ask questions about lack of progress in the future. It’s not in the slightest bit flashy, so smacks a little of a lack of time or resources, but rest assured we’ve downloaded a copy for future discussions.
Green Party
A google search brings up the Worcester Green Party website, and a drop down takes you to the manifesto, which has ‘Worcester’ on the front cover. 3 results down in the Google search is Malvern Hills Green Party, where I can’t find a link to a manifesto. From this I’m guessing this is therefore not a coordinated County wide manifesto, which I’m a little surprised at (I mean, is it assumed y’all just going to agree about everything if you get elected?). But there’s a manifesto! Bravo.
Out the box it looks great. Clearly they’ve taken it seriously, and it’s an early front runner.
There’s an early mention in the Climate and Nature Emergency section, they’re going to try to support staff and councillors to walk and cycle. I’m a little underwhelmed, but at times like this I’m often called padentic.
In Improving Health and Wellbeing of Residents it makes the link between being active and good health, mentions lack of car ownership but misses an opportunity to also mention the benefits of modal shift (it’s not just about enabling active travel for people without cars). There’s an aim to improve air quality but no mention of how. There’s then a section on their successes which is always impressive when you’re a small minority on the council, so more spending on footways, more benches (we love a bench), and real time air pollution monitors are all to be applauded.
There’s an important mention in the section on Learning Education and Schools, where the manifesto states “Implement School Streets”. This is a basically a no brainer for all the political parties, and Worcestershire is now an outlier in not having so much as a proposed trial. What’s not so good is the next bit of the sentence “where people want them”, which opens the door for protracted procedures, pseudo opposition, prevarication and no actual School Streets. My suggestion for future manifestos? ‘We will implement a School Street trial in every District, with the aim of demonstrating success and rolling out further trials across the County.’ You’re welcome.
There’s also mention of a Wheels to Education programme, which is the first I’ve heard the term, and nowt comes on a quick Google search. So I’m none the wiser.
OK, Transport. There’s a sensible and well written introduction. The first 5 priorities are all about buses (which is fine) but I suspect there are more easily implemented policies around active travel. We’ve then get 20 mph (again with the caviat of where people want them rather than trials), a dedicated annual budget for walking and cycling with the aim of hitting the 50% of journeys in Worcester (I mean it’s great this is a priority, but it’s already official UK government policy which is repeated in County and City documents; I’m more interested in local policies on how we achieve this), support Bike Buses to all schools in Worcester (no arguments there), then pavement maintenance and dropped kerbs, 3 park and rides, and EV charging.
And yes, Green Party councillors and members most definitely have helped set up and run Bike Buses (yes, it deserves capital letters dag nammit) and are a regular part of the volunteer group that support them city wide, so a huge thanks for that (and all the other non party affiliated volunteers to boot).
Oh. I genuinely just tried to scroll down to continue reading the manifesto, but that’s the end.
Post blog note: it’s been pointed out to us that Green group leader Matt Jenkins wrote a blog here, where he endorses our blog which contains the suggestions for party manifestos. We know Matt well. He was helped set up Bike Worcester and was our first Treasurer, so frankly we’d be surprised if he didn’t agree with most of our suggestions. Question is, how come more didn’t make it into the Green manifesto?
Liberal Democrats Party
OK, back down to earth with a bump. I’ll keep it brief. There doesn’t appear to any coordinated County output. Landing on the Worcester Liberal Democrat page the first mention of an election is to introduce the candidates for the City election in 2024. Scroll down a little further and there a snazzy countdown to the election, which is great, but not what I’m after. A bit further and there’s the candidates standing in Worcester divisions.
Super easy to find the manifesto with a single click from the home page here, and...sorry, is that it...?! 10 bullet points of text on a web page. I mean, maybe they figured less time on manifesto = more time for campaigning.I've just read the whole thing, and not a single mention of walking, cycling, or active travel (other than having a pop at the County Council's plans). Harrumph. In an attempt to find the good in everything and with a glass is half full mentality, there are some references of issues that active travel are most definitely part of the solution (clean air, safe place, carbon neutral, pavement parking) but strange it wasn't mentioned directly:
Worcester Liberal Democrats want to see Worcester as a vibrant community-focused City with clean air, innovative green industries, and a safe place for residents and visitors alike
We want integrated sustainable public transport, more green spaces, support for community projects and housing for everyone with carbon neutral solutions built into the specifications
We want to prepare for the electric transport revolution that is coming and to support the development of alternative forms of transport to the car. This conservative Government castigated the Conservative led County Council’s plans for developing cycling as “lacking ambition”
We want to explore innovative parking schemes that prioritise residents and stop commuter on-street parking. We want to prioritise pavements for people not cars
OK. This feels a little unfair to the other parties, as I've literally just copy and pasted 40% of the manifesto into the blog, but I think that says more about the document, so it stays.
But why have you just written a load of text in a colour that’s a close proximity to the Lib Dem branding? Well, truth be told I didn’t write it, I copied it from the blog I wrote for the City elections last year. Because the manifesto hasn’t changed, neither as a result of time, or the type of election. No worries.
Reform UK
So Reform are riding high in the polls, and I guess might win some seats in this election in Worcestershire, certainly tempting Alan Amos across the zebra crossing to join the party after jumping ship from the Conservatives offers them a possibility as a local personality. Sorry, ‘personality’. At the very least they may disrupt some of the seats enough to influence the result. So I’ll check them out.
Unfortunately I can’t find anything resembling a locally updated website, let alone a local manifesto. There’s a national manifesto here which has no mention of walking or cycling at all, but does have a section “Stop the War on Drivers” and mentions ‘woke’ twice with a negative connotation.
Enough!
Summary
In discussing this with a few people a common reason for not putting effort in creating a manifesto is that no one reads them. I’m happy to pedantically prove that 100% incorrect in the reading I gone done in writing this blog.
Regardless of the perception of how many people read them, they are (should be) incredibly important documents. It’s a method to communicate vision, a direction of travel (pardon the pun), a review of services provided and how they might be improved or paired back. It’s also an opportunity to communicate to the electorate how local government works, is funded, what services are and aren’t provided.
The act of documenting the manifesto requires discussion of policies and forces collaboration of individuals within parties. It will help steer discussions post election (for example if there is a requirement for a coalition), and should aid cross party collaboration on important issues. It also can be used as a tool for scrutiny, by average Joes like me, but also by opposition Council members during debate, and can be used to call out a change of policy, which then might affect trust in future elections or provide news stories.
If parties and individuals are serious about local politics, then they should have a manifesto covering the entire area of the authority for any given election which all candidates of that party stand by and support. Equally not having a manifesto should be called out as not being serious, or being deliberately vague and misleading. Stop taking part in dumbing down our democracy, instead put some effort in, create something you’re proud of, and shout about it.
Yes, getting individuals to have a collective view on a broad spectrum of issues and services is difficult, and producing a well written document which looks great takes time and effort. But you’re trying get elected to make decisions that affect hundreds of thousands of people, and manage a budget of hundreds of millions of pounds. If you can’t take the time and effort to work with like minded people to document your plans and ideas, what makes you think you can work with people when elected? Treat it like warm up for the real gig, and stop treating the electorate like mugs.
And breathe.
Scores on the doors
I think for active travel content and a County(ish) document Labour cross the line first by a nose. It’s a close call though. Ditch the populist BS about the northern relief road, and talk about increasing parking charges and your mark would have been higher. 3 out of 5.
The Greens’ document looks great and they appear to have put in the most effort, but it’s clearly not a County document, and cut the ‘try’ and tell us what you’re going to do! Also having a document which isn’t just text (Labour) means there’s less space for words, so not a like for like comparison; hey ho. The dedicated budget for walking and cycling is good, but it’s cycling that currently gets the raw deal, and is it 0.1% or 10% of the Highways budget? I’m going 3 out of 5 as well, but for hoots sake, you’re the Green Party! Why aren’t I giving you 5 out of 5? Go and stand in the corner.
The Lib Dems scrape a 1 out 5. And consider yourselves lucky. The manifesto hasn’t changed in a year. And it’s rubbish. Poor show.
The Conservatives and Reform both get 0 out of 5, due to the fact there is no manifesto. Shame on you. If I was a candidate standing against you I’d nonchalantly but metaphorically slap it round your face at every opportunity. Why should anyone cast a vote for your parties when you don’t have the courtesy to write down what your intentions are if elected?
Anyway, that’s me for now. Comments are open below. Stay woke.
Revisions:
22/04/25 Minor modifications
26/04/25 Reference to Matt Jenkins blog
