Whilst I remember there is another questionable practice about this election.
Normally when an election is called existing elected members stand down effective immediately.
During the election period we have no MPs or MSPs.
For a reason ERC refuse to explain the period for nominating candidates until the AGMs is > 5 weeks.
I am currently a CCllr under the 2009-2013 election result.
Can I call myself a CCllr for the period 2013-2017?

I must assume so but I don't officially take up office until the 9th. September.
Very confusing I think and badly thought out. There was no need for the protracted period.
We know who the CCllrs will be yet the outgoing CCllrs could spend all of this years minuscule grant leaving the incoming CC bereft of money.
The whole thing makes no sense to me yet I'm part of it.

Who should a resident with a problem approach? The outgoing CCllr with a lifespan of only 5 weeks or the incoming CCllr who cant theoretically do anything for 5 weeks.

Both the Returning officer and the Head of Democratic services have refused to explain. The Convenor should step forward and demand an explanation from those officers under her control and issue strong repriments at the very least, to ensure such a guddle never happens again.
Strangely, breweries come to mind!

NOW we have had an opportunity to analyse the results we can report our findings. It may not come as a surprise that we will be replicating this post in 'An expose of how PR works in East Renfrewshire' Thread.

THE ERC PR machine states "And membership across the board has increased by 17 per cent."

and Convener for community safety and community services, Councillor Mary Montague, said “I am sure they will make a real difference for their areas."




What do the N&S Community Council think of Cllr Montague, and will she allow new community councilors to make a difference in their areas.

The community councillors unanimously agreed that Councillor Montague’s behaviour at this meeting, and indeed at previous meetings, had been inappropriate and that action was required to prevent her from interfering with the progress of the meeting and generally trying to dominate and organize the meetings to suit her.

A 17% increase still means that only 121 of the 162 places have been taken up, out of a population of 89,000.

We cannot even manage a meagre 162 out of 89,000 - why?

Apathy? Many would point the finger at ERC and the convenor for community services and their alleged lack of proper and committed community engagement, rather than just paying lip service to date.

Lets look behind the 17% increase headline.

Many Community Councils lost experienced and long serving members who refused to stand again for election.

Barrhead lost 4 which is a 33.33% loss
Busby lost 2 which is a 22.22% loss
Clarkston lost 2 members which is a 22.22% loss
Eaglesham & Waterfoot lost 4 members which is a 28.57% loss
Giffnock lost 4 members which is a 57.14% loss
Neilston lost 2 members which is a 16.66% loss
Netherlee & Stamperland lost 2 members which is a 22.2% loss
Newton Mearns lost 5 members which is a 45.45% loss
Thornliebank lost 2 members which is a 18% loss
Uplawmoor lost 2 members which is a 28.5% loss

A loss of 30 members out of an original total of 102.

Barrhead now has 18 members which is an increase of 50%
Busby now has 8 members which is a DECREASE of 11%
Clarkston now has 9 members which is NO CHANGE
Eaglesham & Waterfoot now has 12 members which is a DECREASE of 14.28%
Giffnock now has 15 members which is an increase of 114.28%
Neilston now has 14 members which is an increase of 16.66%
Netherlee & Stamperland now has 11 members which is an increase of 33.33%
Newton Mearns now has 17 members which is an increase of 54.54%
Thornliebank now has 10 members which is a DECREASE of 9%
Uplawmoor now has 7 members which is NO CHANGE

5 out of 10 have either decreased or had no change