A CAMPAIGN group is hoping to use new legislation to force Herefordshire Council into holding a referendum on the future of five care homes for the elderly.
Herefordshire Council proposes to transfer control of Froome Bank in Bromyard, Leadon Bank in Ledbury, Orchard House in Withington, Woodside in Ross-on-Wye and Waverley House in Leominster to a not-for-profit care provider - but has met with opposition from the pressure group RAGE (Relatives Action Group for the Elderly)
Referenda can only be called to change a council's constitution - not policies.
But RAGE believes it can get the authority to hold the poll under powers established by the Local Government Act 2000.
Steve Grist, chairman of RAGE's Herefordshire branch, claims the council has not looked properly at keeping the homes under local authority control.
"We asked them to consider what they would be losing and our concern is that they have never looked at that fully, and it has never been fully and properly debated," he said.
Signatures
RAGE believes it has to collect signatures of support from a proportion of registered Herefordshire voters to force a referendum and started its quest in Ledbury town centre on Saturday.
But a spokeswoman from the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) said electors can only force a referendum to change a council's system of governance - from a cabinet system to one with an elected mayor for example - not a specific policy issue.
Following a review of Herefordshire Council's proposals, under which it would retain ownership of the homes but would hand over the administration, full council decided to continue negotiations with its chosen provider, Shaw Homes.
However, final recommendations are not expected to go before the cabinet until after the summer.
Other authorities have already transferred their residential homes to other providers because they wanted to maintain standards, but did not have access to the funds to do that.
Sue Fiennes, director of social care and strategic housing for Herefordshire Council, said the council had reaffirmed its position to continue negotiations with a not-for-profit care provider.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article