JUST 25 per of Hampshire residents know who their county councillor is, a poll has revealed. And 42 per cent of those asked for the MORI poll agreed or strongly agreed that Hampshire County Council rarely considers the views of residents when making decisions that affect them. A further 51 per cent said it should be a priority for the council, and its partners, to listen to residents, and 32 per cent said that it was either fairly or very unsuccessful at doing that. And 46 per cent of those questioned said that the council was remote and impersonal, with more and more people describing it as "bureaucratic", "faceless" and "unresponsive". The findings were presented to council members at a recent full council meeting, where they considered proposals to improve the way the authority operates. Introducing Hampshire Action Teams (HATs) to work in communities, alongside existing organisations, to tackle local needs and priorities and improving communication with residents and councillors, who are not in the cabinet, on forthcoming decisions were among the changes proposed by officers. Others included improving the scrutiny process and slashing the number of members' meetings and pre-meetings and briefings. In a report to the council, Peter Robertson said the changes would provide a number of benefits. "Local government for many years has commonly been described as being steeped in bureaucracy, driven by process rather than outcomes and resistant to radical change," the report said. "The recommendations will require significant change and improve the county council's democratic process whilst at the same time increasing efficiency. The changes will need to not only be in processes but also behaviours and culture of both members and officers and these do not change easily and quickly without strong drivers and investment in the future. "This investment also has to be balanced by removing some of the structures, processes and activities that have taken up valuable time and energy over the years. Some of these losses may feel painful but are as important to making the future work as is the investment. "The outcomes Hampshire are aiming for include: reducing the cost of bureaucracy, focusing resources, including councillor and officer time, on things that matter and make a difference for the people of Hampshire, making clearer and more accessible routes for the public and non-executive members to know about and influence decisions that affect them and the people they represent." Work has already begun on a new online service giving early warning of proposals that affect residents. The system will enable people to search for items by subject or location and find out how to comment on the proposals Speaking after the meeting, council leader Ken Thornber said the large geographical areas that county councillors covered could be to blame for many residents not knowing who their representatives were. He said: "I think county hall in a large county like Hampshire is a bit remote unless you happen to live in the Winchester area, but secondly I do think that county councillors, and there are exceptions, are generally less well known. The average population per county division is 13,300 and I think it is clearly more difficult to be known to 13,300 people than the average district area of around 2,000. "What we are now trying to do is to say there is a way in which county councillors can be more visible by having local area committees - HATs. They would be comprised of the local county councillors and in much greater contact with the people within that area, consult much more with those people and accountable to them for various strands of county activities such as schools, social care, environment - road and traffic management - and recreation and heritage. They would be a conduit between the county and the people. "The HATs could also have co-opted district and parish councillors and leading members of voluntary organisations on them. "The problem is because we were forced into a cabinet system and the abolition of the committee system that took decisions four to five years ago, our own members now feel divorced from decision making. "I can't replace the power of the vote, the government has taken it, but what I can do is to say there is a much more positive local role for members, and if you reflect back to us what people in your local community are worried about and what their wants and needs are, that is a very positive way to try and replace, although never fully, the power of vote that you once had."