Birmingham's 120 councillors are gearing up for a clash with the Local Government Boundary Commission over plans to cut their numbers.

Talks between the council and commission over a major shake up of local elections are now under way following the damning Kerslake review of Birmingham City Council published in December.

Government civil servant Sir Bob Kerslake, as part of a major shake up of elections in Birmingham, suggested the size of the council be reduced to 100 members, meaning 20 would lose out.

And the Boundary Commission is to use Kerslake's view as a starting point for its review of councillors over the next few months.

Although the Commission said no decision had been made, a spokesman said: "We can't ignore the evidence from Kerslake."

Birmingham's councillors now have until May 22 to make their case to retain their numbers and argue Sir Bob's proposed cut contradicts his view that councillors should be closer to their communities.

A final decision will be made in June.

Lib Dem group leader Coun Paul Tilsley said: "We are opposed to the reduction in councillors because already Birmingham's electors are among the least represented in the whole of the country, even with the existing 120 of us.

"To cut it by ten to 20 per cent would make that situation even worse."

Tory leader Rob Alden said he would be consulting with his group before taking a view but added the number of councillors was not the problem.

He said: "The problem has not been a council of 120 people but a Labour council leader who does not want to devolve any real power to rank and file councillors and has twice led the council into special measures."

The Labour group is understood to also take the view that there should not be a reduction.

A Labour source said: "Members are firmly of the view a reduction would make it harder for councillors to perform their roles as community leaders as outlined by Kerslake."

The councillors are also opposed to suggestions three-member wards should be replaced with a single-member format, or a mix of single-, two-and three-member wards being considered by the commission.

But there is a broad consensus elections once every four years are preferable to the current annual elections which Kerslake said cause instability of leadership.

Chairman of the commission Max Caller CBE said: "We are currently gathering evidence about the way the council is run and how decisions are likely to be taken in the future. This information will help us take a view on the number of councillors to be elected to the council in the future.

"In the summer, we will ask local people to have their say on the future of their council when we will invite proposals for a new pattern of council wards.

"We will ask people about the shape of their communities and how their interests and identities can best be reflected in our warding pattern.

"We have an open mind about the future pattern of wards for Birmingham but we know that things will change. The change in Birmingham's electoral cycle means that there is no longer a requirement for three-member wards for the city."

Timeline for Boundary Commission review of Birmingham:

Council size review

April 17: Draft council submission

May 22: Final council submission

June 16: Council size decision

Ward pattern and boundaries review

June 23 - Aug 31: Consultation

Nov 17: Draft recommendations published

Nov 17 - Jan 11: Further consultation

April 2016: Final recommendations published

May 2016: Boundaries confirmed

May 2017: Election held

Current council structure

120 elected councillors - each serves a four-year term

40 wards - three councillors per ward

One election each year for three years, then a break

Average ward size: 27,000 people (9,000 per councillor)

Kerslake's proposal

100 elected councillors - each serves four-year term

100 single member wards

Elections every four years

Average ward size: 10,000 people (10,000 per councillor)