COUNCILLORS have reiterated their opposition to plans which could see two councillors axed and Musselburgh become home to a single local government electoral ward.

The Local Government Boundary Commission (LGBC) announced plans for a review last year, with proposals revealed earlier this year that would see East Lothian Council’s wards and councillor numbers changed.

Currently, East Lothian Council is home to seven multi-member wards: Musselburgh West; Musselburgh East and Carberry; Fa’side; Preston, Seton and Gosford; North Berwick Coastal; Haddington and Lammermuir; and Dunbar and East Linton.

Each ward is home to three councillors, with the exception of Fa’side and Preston/Seton/Gosford, which have four each.

However, that could all change under the proposals, with East Lothian Council asked for their thoughts by May 19.

LGBC propose the Musselburgh wards merge into one ward, with only four councillors, down from six, while boundary changes would see Prestonpans, Seton, Gosford include Macmerry, and Fa’side taking in Wallyford.

The local authority has already asked for the consultation period to be extended to June 24, citing the “imminent General Election” as a reason for the continuation.

However, if that is denied, council officials will write a response outlining their opposition to a cut in councillors from 23 to 21 and the alteration of council wards.

Members were united at a council meeting on Tuesday in Haddington.

Council leader Willie Innes labelled the situation “ridiculous”.

He highlighted that a public consultation ran last year about the idea of reducing Scotland’s total number of councillors from 1,222 to 1,217, with a considerable number of East Lothian residents airing their views.

Mr Innes said: “I cannot understand for the life of me why they have not listened to the people of East Lothian.” Councillor David Berry was another of those criticising the plans to cut councillor numbers.

He said: “We are one of the fastest, if not the fastest, growing areas in Scotland. We are getting a proportion reduction greater than anywhere else. It seems, if it ain’t broke, why on earth are we fixing it?” A cross-party steering group met at the end of last month where there was a “strong and unanimous” view that the council should maintain its opposition to the proposed reduction in the number of councillors.

Kirstie MacNeill, service manager of licensing, administration and democratic services, said: “The cross-party group was particularly concerned that the workload of councillors in the wards most affected by the proposed boundary changes would increase, given the larger electorate and the larger number of community organisations they would be expected to work with.

“It is notable that the wards most affected by the proposed boundary changes are the wards which have the greatest number of areas of deprivation so that, perversely, the number of councillors representing these wards would reduce by two, even though the LGBC proposals are meant to be based on the need to increase representation in areas of deprivation.” Concerns were also raised at the meeting that the new ward boundaries would cut across existing high school catchment areas and “sever” long-standing local ties.

In contrast, LGBC claim the proposals would “improve” local community ties in Musselburgh and address projected disparities in the existing Musselburgh West ward.

John McNeil, a councillor for that ward, described the planned changes as “bizarre”.

He said: “You have the biggest town in the county, the biggest populous, a growing populous, an extra amount of houses and you are going to reduce to four councillors.”