PROPOSALS to slash the number of councillors in Worcester and go to just one election every four years have been scrapped, it has emerged.

In March last year we revealed how Worcester City Council was looking at some drastic changes in a bid to save taxpayers £75,000 a year.

It included ending the tradition of having elections three out of every four years and a boundary review to consider axing some councillors' seats.

But the idea, which came about during a period when Labour controlled the city council, has been abandoned.

The Conservative administration says with the finances looking healthier it does not believe the measures are needed - nor would it help the public.

At the moment there are 35 city councillors, each of whom represent around 4,000 people.

Councillor Marc Bayliss, deputy leader and cabinet member for the economy, city centre and riverside, said: "The Labour proposals were driven by finance and I don't believe we are over-governed, I also don't think you can put a value on democracy.

"Britain already has the lowest rate of elected representatives of nearly all the European countries, if you look at countries like France and Germany they have a lot more.

"Having elections three in every four years keeps us all very honest, in touch with the public to understand their views and aspirations, and people get the chance to have their say regularly.

"I don't think a once-in-four-years cycle is good for democracy."

He also pointed to Wyre Forest District Council, which had a cull of councillors to take it from 42 to 33.

Population-wise the two districts are broadly the same, and the only political difference is that Worcester has two extra city councillors.

The stance has prompted a mixed reaction from the city's other political parties.

Councillor Adrian Gregson, Labour group leader, said: "Nobody ever did the investigation so we will never know what it could have saved, or what proposals would come from it.

"But we do need to think about, how small does the council's service delivery shrink to until you look at it seriously."

Lone Green Councillor Neil Laurenson said: "I can see the argument of having elections once every four years to save money - but argument against would be for smaller parties it'd be hard to keep up any momentum.

"If we don't get in one year we can try the next, but if we deprive people of being able to vote for three of every four years, is that healthy - people may lose enthusiasm for it.

"In terms of the councillors too, I wonder what we'd lose in terms of democracy. I wasn't convinced."

At the moment one third of the 35 seats are up for grabs in every set of elections.