Cllr Will Calverley represents Tiptree Ward on Colchester City Council.

Democracy is not a policy preference. It is not an optional extra, to be wheeled out when convenient and quietly shelved when it proves awkward. Democracy is the foundation stone of our political system, the means by which the public grant consent to be governed, and the safeguard that prevents power hardening into entitlement. When elections are cancelled, postponed, or hollowed out for political expediency, it is not “good governance” on display. It is a failure of courage – and an insult to the electorate.

Across history and around the world, the erosion of democracy rarely begins with tanks in the streets. It begins with excuses. The timing is inconvenient. The finances are tight. The public might make the “wrong” choice. The institutions need “reform” first. Each justification is presented as sensible, temporary, and necessary. And each chips away at the simple, essential truth: the people must be allowed to choose.

In Britain, we rightly pride ourselves on a long democratic tradition. We hold elections regularly, peacefully, and with integrity. But that tradition survives only because each generation defends it. It is not self-sustaining. When decisions are taken to cancel or defer elections – particularly local elections, where the connection between voter and representative is most immediate – we should be alarmed. Local democracy is not a nuisance to be managed; it is the frontline of accountability.

Those who argue that elections can be postponed “just this once” underestimate the damage such decisions cause. Elections are not merely about outcomes; they are about trust. Voters accept decisions they disagree with because they know they will have another chance to make their voice heard. Take that away, and cynicism flourishes. Participation falls. Extremes grow louder. The quiet majority – hard-working, decent people who play by the rules – feel ignored.

Some will say that cancelling elections can be justified in exceptional circumstances. Of course, genuine emergencies exist. War, natural disaster, or a clear and present threat to public safety may require extraordinary measures. But the bar must be exceptionally high, the reasoning transparent, and the duration strictly limited. Convenience, administrative reform, or political calculation do not meet that test. If the state can continue to collect taxes, enforce laws, and exercise power, then it can face the electorate.

Local government, in particular, must never be treated as a second-class democracy. Councils make decisions that affect daily life: planning (for now), housing, waste collection, local roads, and community services. Councillors are not appointed managers; we are elected representatives. Our mandate comes from the ballot box, not from Whitehall, not from quangos, and not from internal party manoeuvring. When elections are cancelled, that mandate withers.

As Conservatives, we should be especially clear-eyed about this. Our tradition is rooted in institutions, continuity, and the consent of the governed. We believe in responsibility, not rule by decree. We believe that power should be earned, exercised with restraint, and regularly renewed. Cancelling elections cuts across those principles. It suggests a lack of faith in the public – and a lack of confidence in one’s own case.

There is also a practical argument that is too often ignored. Cancelling elections does not make difficult issues disappear. It merely defers them, often making them worse. Decisions taken without fresh democratic endorsement are more likely to be contested, legally challenged, or reversed. Public buy-in matters. Elections provide it. Without that legitimacy, even well-intentioned reforms struggle to land.

We should also be honest about the precedent such actions set. If one tier of government can have its elections cancelled for administrative convenience, why not another? If one set of voters can be told to wait, why not others? Democracy does not erode in one dramatic act; it frays at the edges. Each exception becomes the template for the next. Before long, what was once unthinkable becomes normalised.

That is why I say this plainly: those who cancel elections deserve to be cancelled themselves – not in anger, not through mob justice, but through the democratic process they seek to deny others. If you believe in your arguments, make them to the electorate. If you believe your reforms are necessary, seek a mandate. If you fear the verdict of the voters, the problem is not the voters.

In Tiptree, and across Essex, people expect straight talking and fair play. They understand that politics is hard and that compromises are sometimes necessary. But they also understand something more fundamental: their right to choose their representatives is not negotiable. It is not a bargaining chip in administrative reshuffles or political strategies. It is their voice.

We must resist the creeping temptation to manage democracy rather than serve it. Elections are not an inconvenience to be postponed until conditions are perfect. They are the means by which the public judges whether those in power have earned another term. That judgment can be uncomfortable – but it is essential.

If we truly believe in democracy, we must practice it consistently, even when it is difficult, even when the outcome is uncertain. Especially then. Because once we start treating elections as optional, we invite a future in which consent is assumed rather than earned. And that is a future none of us should accept.

Democracy is not a choice. It is the choice that makes all others legitimate.

The post Will Calverley: Cancelling elections does not make difficult issues disappear appeared first on Conservative Home.