A bid to save Three Rivers taxpayers thousands of pounds by holding all-out elections every four years was rejected by politicians on Tuesday night.

Opposition leader, Ralph Sangster, submitted a motion at the district’s full council meeting calling for an end to the current system, which sees councillors elected in thirds.

But the suggestion was heavily criticised by members of the Liberal Democrat administration who said the yearly elections of councillors was more democratic and keeps politicians and council staff "on their toes".

Councillor Sangster, Conservative representative for Rickmansworth Town, said: "This council has for many years elected its council by thirds. This calls for elections three years out of every four.

"The alternatives are to elect in halves, every two years, or all-out elections once every four years. The motion calls on the council to consult with the residents whether we move to all out elections every four years."

Councillor Sangster said the annual cost of local elections stands at about £75,000 and, if Three Rivers was to move to all-out elections, they could save up to £150,000.

He also questioned the effect the cost could have on the district’s frontline services, which is estimated to cost £1.2million every year.

The Conservative leader said: "Elections by thirds are a drain on the council’s resources and we need to give our residents a voice on their preferred alternative."

The Liberal Democrats defended the current system, saying it was democratic that members have to answer to the public yearly.

Representative for Abbots Langley and Bedmond, Matthew Bedford, said: "Annual elections are a vital element in local democracy.

"Now I know that the Conservatives take a different view and I know they run Herts County Council in a different way and their view appears to be that politicians should able to do what they want for three years and only have to face residents in the fourth year. Our view remains that the council administration should face the electorate every year."

Councillor Sangster’s motion was seconded by Conservative representative for Moor Park and Eastbury, Reena Ranger, who said the extra expenditure of elections by thirds was "morally wrong", especially considering that all levels of government are having to "reign in expenditure".

Councillor Stephen Giles-Medhurst said he found the accusation that annual elections are morally wrong "offensive" and "incredibly insulting".

The representative for Leavesden said: "The most recent consultation in Hertsmere, which I think cost some £20,000, how many replied? 77. And, rather like the Scottish referendum on Thursday, the result was too close to call.

"Is the Conservative opposition seriously suggesting we should spend £20,000 or more on consulting 77 residents to what their views are?"

The motion was thrown out, with only the Conservatives backing the scheme.