Agenda item

The Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007 (Part 4) devolved power from the Secretary of State to principal councils to carry out community governance reviews and put in place or make changes to local community governance arrangements.

The Council commenced a review following the Council decision in October 2024 at which the terms of reference and timetable were approved.

Cabinet is asked to consider the draft recommendations of the Task and Finish Group and to make a recommendation to Council.

The Lead Member of the Task and Finish Group presented a report, a copy of which had been circulated to each Member and a copy of which appears as Appendix 'A' to these Minutes in the Minute Book. The Board was informed that the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007 (Part 4) devolved power from the Secretary of State to principal councils to carry out community governance reviews and put in place or make changes to local community governance arrangements. The Council commenced a review following the Council decision in October 2024 at which the terms of reference and timetable were approved. Cabinet would be asked to consider the draft recommendations of the Task and Finish Group and to make a recommendation to Council. The Lead Member explained the rationale behind some of the recommendations outlined in the report which may be viewed as by some as contentious. The Board considered the recommendations for each of the Parishes outlined in the report by areas across the conurbation.

 

Christchurch Area - There was support from both Ward Councillors and Board Members for all of the recommendations outlined in the report in relation to the Christchurch Area Town and Parish Councils which were broadly in line with the current Councils.

 

1.       RESOLVED that the O&S Board Recommend to Cabinet that the draft recommendations of the Task and Finish Group relating to proposals for Burton and Winkton (A), Hurn (B), Highcliffe & Walkford (C) and Christchurch Town (D) be recommended to Council, for approval for publication and consultation, without amendment.

 

Voting: Unanimous

 

Poole Area – Ward Councillor spoke in opposition to the consultation, due to the additional layer of bureaucracy and additional Council Tax precept and the confusion that arises from this consultation.  It was noted that the Charter Trustee system could work better if improved. Conversely others noted that in reality there were lots of things which the Council was unable to provide, and there may be services and buildings which would not be able to be supported in the future. These issues would be able to be addressed by a Town Council and it was welcomed that it was a larger size Town Council which would be democratically accountable.

 

The Board reflected that the heritage of the three distinct towns was important. It was felt that it was important that Poole was its own distinct entity and areas where there is a Town Council have a better sense of identity and therefore it should go out for further consultation.

 

Concerns were raised regarding submissions which covered areas such as Hamworthy and Canford Cliffs which were dismissed by the working group in favour of a greater Poole Town Council area. Poole proposals received were for the whole of Poole including those areas which were now removed such as Broadstone. There were concerns raised in the way in which the working group operated in suggesting new areas. However, it was confirmed that the working group could put forward these as recommendations. It was noted that this was a starting point and there was a need to proceed with this process. It was suggested that those in areas around the edge of Poole may not feel the same loss of identity that some more central areas did but there did appear to be a strong drive within central Poole for a Town Council.

 

The issues around the demand expectations from the public, and the current Council Tax burden were highlighted.

 

2.       RESOLVED that the O&S Board recommend to Cabinet that the draft recommendations of the Task and Finish Group relating to Broadstone (F) and Poole Town (J) be recommended to Council, for approval for publication and consultation, without amendment.

Voting: 11 in favour, 2 against

 

Bournemouth Area - The Chair advised that Bournemouth area proposals would be taken for discussion collectively across Bournemouth but that there may need to be a vote on each area separately.

 

A ward member advised that parishing did not appear to be necessary for the Bournemouth area and suggested that all recommendations for Bournemouth be rejected. It was felt that there was no appetite in Bournemouth for parishes and that there would unintended consequences to having a consultation on them. It was suggested that the starting point should be to ‘do nothing’ but that the working group process seemed to have moved beyond this. It was suggested that parishes introduce false boundaries and unnecessary conflict, reducing community cohesion.

 

Members commented that thee was not enough support for this within the Bournemouth area and the current process felt directed from BCP Council rather than community supported. It was suggested that the creation of Parish Councils would fulfil services which were currently being provided by BCP but which were under threat due to the current financial situation.

 

 

 

It was suggested that the proposals indicated a failure in the Local Government Reorganisation process with services being cut down to minimal levels. It was noted that the overriding concern was to ensure that the public had a say in the proposals and it was confirmed that even if the proposals for Bournemouth were changed it would not save any money as this would still need to be consulted on.

 

Board members noted that there was no submission which suggested a ‘rest of Bournemouth’ Town Council and that there appeared to be strong feelings that there wasn’t a desire for town/parish councils in other areas of Bournemouth. Further concerns were raised regarding the additional precepts which would be incurred by parishing different areas. It was hoped that any communications circulated to residents would have greater engagement across political parties/groups. Concerns were raised regarding the mayoralty and the way in which this may be eroded by the proposals.

 

It was suggested that there may also be impacts if some areas of Bournemouth became parish councils but not all and may lead to some areas wanting a Town or Parish Council later on. It was clarified that different Parish Councils may be put forward following the consultation process and there would still be an opportunity after formation of the Parish Councils for certain areas to put forward proposals for a different parish area.

 

The Lead member of the Task and Finish Group advised that they could only put forward positive recommendations and the residents of BCP should be consulted on the recommendations. However there could be no recommendations made at all. It was felt that the Council did not have a strong record on responding to consultations and it was therefore more appropriate to not put a proposal forward that wasn’t based on a suggestion received.

 

3.       RESOLVED that the Board recommend to Cabinet that that the recommendation for Bournemouth (K) not be forwarded to Council.

 

Voting: 6 in favour 5 against, 2 abstentions

 

- The meeting adjourned between 7:54pm and 8:04pm -

 

The Board discussed the proposals for the separate parish Councils within the Bournemouth area, the current proposals to draw a boundary between Southbourne, Boscombe and Pokesdown. A Ward Councillor suggested that there were no positive benefits for drawing up division between areas. These were dense residential areas where the communities blended into each other. The Guidance suggests that the boundaries between the areas should be easily identifiable, and this was not the case within the Southbourne/Boscombe/Pokesdown areas.

 

It was noted that the boarder between Southbourne and Boscombe was potentially an issue as there was not a clearly defined division and many residents would not be able to identify a specific boarder. It was felt that it was important to keep a commercial area within the suggested Parish. Others commented that the proposed Southbourne Community Council was a well thought up proposal.

 

It was moved and seconded to recommend to Cabinet to not put the Southbourne area forward for consultation. The vote on this was put and lost.

 

Voting: 4 in favour, 7 against, 2 abstentions

 

4.       It was then RESOLVED that the O&S Board recommend to Cabinet that the draft recommendations of the Task and Finish Group relating to Southbourne (I)) be recommended to Council, for approval for publication and consultation, without amendment.

 

Voting: 7 in favour, 4 against, 2 abstentions

 

The Board went on to discuss the proposals for Boscombe. A ward Councillor advised that none of the four Ward Councillor for the Boscombe area were in support of a parish council for this area.

 

A Ward Councillor supported the removal of a part of polling district EC1 from the proposal. It was suggested that there was no evidence that people within the area wanted this parish and it was suggested that momentum could take this forward without this really being desired by the residents of the area. Board members commented that there were proposals put forward for these areas and therefore these submissions should be reflected in the consultation process which was taken forward.

 

RESOLVED that the O&S Board recommend to Cabinet that the draft recommendations of the Task and Finish Group relating to Boscombe and Pokesdown (H) be recommended to Council, for approval for publication and consultation, without amendment.

 

Voting: 9 in favour 4 against

 

Note: An amendment to this recommendation was put and lost to remove

that the section of EC1 polling district from the proposed boundary of the parish.  It was noted that this was part of the original community submission.

 

Voting: 4 in favour, 9 against

 

The Board was advised that there were no proposed changes to the existing Throop and Holdenhurst Parish Council.

 

RESOVLED that the O&S Board recommend to Cabinet that the draft recommendations of the Task and Finish Group relating to Throop and Holdenhurst (E) be recommended to Council, for approval for publication and consultation, without amendment.

 

Voting: Unanimous

 

The Board considered the proposal for the Redhill and Northbourne area. The Chair suggested an amendment to incorporate an area which self-identified as Northbourne. It was confirmed by the Deputy Monitoring Officer that the proposals could be amended slightly to accommodate the changes in elector numbers. There was debate as to whether the Kinson area Councillors supported this proposal. This amendment was moved and seconded but lost.

 

Voting: 4 in favour 6 against 3 abstentions.

 

It was then RESOLVED that the O&S Board recommend to Cabinet that the draft recommendations of the Task and Finish Group relating to Redhill and Northbourne (G) be recommended to Council, for approval for publication and consultation, without amendment

 

Voting: 9 in favour 3 against 1 abstention

 

The meeting adjourned at 9.07pm and resumed at 9.19pm.