These are some of the words of senior Plymouth City Council officers, caught red-handed trying to dodge democracy in bombshell emails sent to Plymouth Plus. But the real scandal here is how Plymouth residents have been lied to and exploited by the very officials meant to serve them.
Top Plymouth council officials conducted a months-long pressure campaign to coerce Angela Rayner’s department into cancelling Plymouth’s Mayor referendum, seeing it as a “huge political distraction” that threatened their backroom deals.
The damning evidence shows 15 emails sent to Angela Rayner’s office, one desperate Microsoft Teams meeting where officials called the referendum an “enormous political distraction”, and one Plymouth Council officer even volunteering to help draft the bill that would kill Plymouth’s democratic choice. All of this was orchestrated after Labour leader Tudor Evans spoke to a Government Minister about Elected Mayors being abolished.
The conspiracy began on Christmas Eve 2024 and escalated through March 2025, with increasingly frantic emails from senior Plymouth City Council officers who asked civil servants if they could simply ignore the Mayor petition altogether, complained about the cost of democracy, sought “flexibility” to bypass legal requirements, and begged for confirmation that Directly Elected Mayors would be abolished - confirmation that never came as it didn’t exist.
The emails were sent to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government. The Ministry is headed up by Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner as Secretary of State and Jim McMahon, the Minister who announced the government would try to block Plymouth's choice.
Under current law, a valid petition with sufficient signatures automatically triggers a referendum on having a directly elected mayor - there is no discretion for councils to ignore it.
A 15 minute Teams Call took place on the morning of 10th January 2025. The invitation called the petition a "significant risk" that would distract from delivering the English Devolution white paper and "an enormous political distraction for the city.
Things stepped up a gear a month later on the 7th February 2025 when the council's Monitoring Officer wrote to Angela Rayner's office for further clarifications. Notably, the letter states the council understood that Directly Elected Mayors would be abolished and asked Angela Rayner to confirm that this would be the case. Although the council chased up to confirm receipt on the 24th February 2025, no response was ever received.
By March 2025, council officers were in full panic mode at having to follow this legal requirement following the submission of a valid petition that had triggered Plymouth’s Mayor referendum.
On the 20th March 2025 the council asked MHCLG for an urgent discussion about whether Directly Elected Mayors were going to be abolished. This email is particularly notable as they state who was behind the claims: Tudor Evans, who discussed this with a Government Minister. This will raise further concerns about the involvement of Tudor Evans in the government blocking Plymouth's democratic choice for a Mayor.
The smoking gun email on the March 24th reveals their desperation: “Once we publish this notice, we can’t stop it…”
Central officials in Whitehall finally shut them down at 9 PM, coldly stating: “I appreciate it’s not what you’ll want to hear, but that’s the law and we can’t advise you to do anything other than follow the law.”
This led to a two month break in emails, which restarted on the 23rd May 2025 when the Council's Head of Local Government Reform and Devolution asked when the English Devolution bill was likely to be published and volunteered to assist with the wording around governance approaches.
This offer was repeated on 4th June 2025 alongside another question about the government's approach, referring to local MP Rebecca Smith's written question about the matter. At the time, Ms Smith called out Ministers over their lack of straight answers.
When civil servants didn't reply, they sent one last desperate chase.
Two weeks later, the government announced that it would try to block Plymouth's democratic choice for Mayor if the vote doesn't go their way.
The emails reveal that Labour leader Tudor Evans discussed the referendum with a Government Minister, raising serious questions about whether elected officials were coordinating with unelected council officers to subvert democracy. This represents an attack on Plymouth’s democracy as unelected council officials - who are supposed to remain politically neutral - actively worked to kill a legitimate democratic process supported by over 10,000 Plymouth residents. The referendum was triggered by a valid petition under current law, which gives councils no discretion to refuse or delay it.
The council officers tried to ignore the valid petition, and their trustworthiness is now in serious question. These emails completely exonerate Angus Forbes and the Mayor for Plymouth campaign, who were accused of pushing ahead despite knowing the role would be scrapped. The emails prove no such advice was ever given.
Plymouth Plus gave Plymouth City Council a right to reply, and when confronted with this damning evidence, their spokesperson sent us their spin on the facts present. A Plymouth City Council spokesperson, said:
“As part of the Full Council debate regarding the Directly Elected Mayor on 28 April, the Chief Executive explained that Council officers have been liaising with officials from MHCLG to seek factual clarification on a number of technical issues related to local government reorganisation (LGR).
“This included understanding the potential implications of LGR on future unitary council governance models, as well as the timing and content of any forthcoming legislation that could affect the scheduling and arrangements for a referendum.
“This engagement was solely to ensure the Council had accurate and up-to-date information. Following the receipt of a petition for a Directly Elected Mayor for Plymouth, it was entirely appropriate and responsible for the Council to ask these questions.”
After all, it is important that officials ask appropriate questions and follow proper procedures to ensure they met their legal obligations to Plymouth residents. Some may argue that what this really shows is council officials asking routine questions about legal requirements and then following the law when told to do so - hardly the conspiracy being claimed. The emails do show officials seeking clarification about timing during a difficult period of government reorganisation - albeit the tone of the emails was completely wrong. Officials ultimately acknowledged they must follow the law, not try to circumvent it.
But the emails expose this as complete spin. “Factual clarification”? Officers asked if they could ignore the petition entirely. “Technical issues”? PCC complained about the democratic cost. “Appropriate and responsible”? They called the referendum a “huge political distraction”. “Up-to-date information”? They volunteered to help draft the bill to kill Plymouth’s choice.
The council’s sanitised response crumbles against the raw evidence of their officers’ actual words, revealing systematic attempts to subvert democracy, dodge legal obligations, and silence Plymouth’s voice. Plymouth residents now know the truth: their own council officials saw their democratic rights as an expensive inconvenience and worked behind closed doors to kill their choice for a Mayor.
The question now is: will Plymouth voters remember this betrayal when they cast their ballots on the 17th July? With momentum building behind the yes campaign, Plymouth Labour’s attempt to silence democracy may prove to be their biggest miscalculation yet.
These revelations show exactly why Plymouth needs a directly elected mayor - to end the backroom dealing and give residents a voice that can’t be ignored by unelected officials who see democracy as an expensive inconvenience. However, there’s no evidence of any actual betrayal - the referendum proceeded as legally required, which is the opposite of silencing democracy albeit that the government will try and block the result.
The choice on 17th July is now crystal clear: vote yes for democracy, or let the council officers who tried to kill your voice continue calling the shots.
This has now become far bigger than a vote for a mayor, this is about our democracy being threatened and our trust abused and subsequently lost by our Labour Government, Labour Council and most shockingly our city council officers who are meant to remain politically neutral.
Plymouth Plus has contacted the Mayor for Plymouth campaign for comment.
Sign up for free below to get notified with all the latest breaking news from Plymouth Plus.
