Cllr Steve Norman

Don’t miss out!

Get all the most important news and events to your inbox.

Protect our independence - donate now

£
£
£

Your contribution is appreciated.

Our non-for-profit, independent community journalism is produced by volunteers and survives thanks to your regular contributions.

The Labour leader for Lichfield and Burntwood has predicted that her predecessor will return to the local political scene sooner rather than later.
Cllr Steve Norman
Steve Norman lost out on a seat in the Summerfield and All Saints ward at the recent local elections. As a result his wife, Cllr Sue Woodward has stepped up to take over the leadership of the party on Lichfield District Council after she retained her seat. But she insists this won’t be the end of his political life. “There were some interesting and unexpected results at the election and obviously Steve’s was disappointing on a personal level for me,” she said. “But reports of his political demise are greatly exaggerated!” Cllr Woodward added that her husband was spending more time with his family in the wake of the May 7 results and said that he had no regrets about contesting the ward he did. “There have been many comments about Steve’s contribution to the council and they have been greatly appreciated. “Whether people agreed with his political views or not, Steve always worked hard to make the right decisions for the people of Lichfield District. “He always knew that Summerfield and All Saints ward would be a tough one following the boundary review. But Steve had always represented Summerfield and he was never going to jump ship for an ‘easier’ election.” Among those to pay tribute to Cllr Norman at a recent meeting of the council was Conservative Cllr Richard Cox. He said: “In scrutiny he knew what he was doing and I learned a lot from him.”

Ross

Founder of Lichfield Live and editor of the site.

5 replies on “Labour group leader vows predecessor will make political return”

  1. I didn’t see any people mentioned.
    Things must be good in Walsall Wood if you’ve got time to poke your nose in our business.
    Is Brownhills still full of cyclists and tourists from Lichfield?

  2. “Lichfield Resident” clearly knows more about why people voted the way they did than anyone else and I look forward to his, or her, evidence. My evidence in this matter may be a little more sound mind.
    Thanks to the pressure we put on the Cabinet a formal consultation exercise was carried out last year which revealed that whilst 30.7% of respondents supported the current subsidy 39.0% wanted it cut back and 27.6% wanted it stopped altogether.
    In the new ward of Summerfield and All Saints I stood for about 79% wanted cutbacks on the Garrick subsidy and that was confirmed on the door step.
    Lichfield candidates Colin Greatorex and his Stowe colleagues said in their newsletter that they were against any reduction in subsidy – even though he has voted for it – so let’s see if they vote to reinstate the £663,200 subsidy of last year. Interestingly 19% of the respondents in my old ward of Summerfield said that they used the Garrick (as do I) whereas only 16% of Stowe Ward respondents did.
    Readers (including Ross) may also be surprised to know that in only ward was there 100% support for the Lichfield Garrick subsidy. In fact it was the same ward where 50% of respondents wanted to keep the District Chairman’s car and Chauffeur and 50% wanted to get rid of it. Okay there were only two respondents in Stonnall ward and of course I have no idea who they were.
    The replacement for the Civic Hall promoted by the then Leader, David Smith, as not just a Regional Theatre but a Regional Conference Centre as well that businesses would flock to during the day, had to have another £199,831 of LDC money spent on it over the years to reduce the cost to Burntwood and Lichfield (and Fazeley) taxpayers.
    And whilst you will not find a reference to it in the minutes of the District Council’s scrutiny meeting that supposed to have scrutinised the Garrick Trust in January this year the Trust let it be known that the design was still flawed and limited their ability to present bigger productions.

Comments are closed.