To receive any public questions, statements or petitions submitted in accordance with the Constitution. Further information on the requirements for submitting these is available to view at the following link:-
https://democracy.bcpcouncil.gov.uk/ieListMeetings.aspx?CommitteeID=151&Info=1&bcr=1
The deadline for the submission of public questions is midday 3 clear working days before the meeting.
The deadline for the submission of a statement is midday the working day before the meeting.
The deadline for the submission of a petition is 10 working days before the meeting.
Minutes:
One Public Question and 2 public statements were received as follows in relation to agenda Item 6 – Community Governance Review – Final Recommendations:
Question from Mr B Lister
We already have 76 Councillors Representing 33 wards.
If All Those Represented Their Ward Constituents Properly With Funded Laptops, Constituency Meetings, CIL Funding & Generous Return For Part Time Work.
Town Councillors Would Get Exactly What??
Why DO We Need Them, How Many Would They Be?
WHAT would the Taxpayers Precept Charge Be In Years 2026 & 2027?
Response from Cllr O Walters as Chair of the Task and Finish Group:
To clarify, there are 76 councillors representing BCP Council, however, there are also a further 53 councillors representing the existing town and parish councils of Burton and Winkton, Hurn, Highcliffe & Walkford, Christchurch and Throop & Holdenhurst.
If the recommendations are approved there would be an additional 50 councillors created.
The vast majority of town and parish councils do not provide IT equipment and do not normally receive allowances.
Parish and town councils can play a vital role in supporting and representing local communities, individuals and events, act as statutory consultee on a number of regulatory matters and act as the first point of contact locally.
BCP Council will be required to agree a first year anticipated budget for the new councils which will be worked on over the coming months if the recommendations are approved. It will be for the new councils, once elected, to agree their actual budget for 2026 and for all future years.
Statement from Mr H Seccombe, Chair of the Boscombe and Pokesdown Community Forum:
Boscombe has spent 15 years building genuine community-led governance — a Forum, a Towns Fund Board managing £20million in grant funding, a Neighbourhood Plan with
community-distributed CIL, and transparent local decision-making.
Imposing a Bournemouth Town Council will dismantle all of this. Residents rejected the proposal not out of apathy, but because Boscombe already has trusted, functioning systems. To override that rejection — while denying Boscombe its own parish — suggests a pre-determined agenda, not genuine localism. This is not parity. Throop is permitted a parish; Boscombe is denied one.
The consultation process was flawed: many residents were unaware that rejecting a Boscombe parish could lead to forced inclusion in a larger one. This directly contradicts the aim of “strengthening local voices.” It risks silencing one of the strongest and undoing years of hard-won community progress. We urge councillors to reject the recommendation and support a separate Boscombe parish or leave Boscombe out altogether.
Statement from Mr H Seccombe in a personal capacity:
Southbourne is a proud, distinct, and community-minded area with its own forum, coastline,
independent shops, and a long record of civic participation. It has the identity and infrastructure to support a parish council — just as much as the already approved Throop.
To deny Southbourne a parish while imposing a larger Bournemouth Town Council is a serious democratic failure. It overrides local identity in favour of administrative convenience, and risks silencing the very voices parish councils are meant to strengthen. Residents were not clearly informed that rejecting a Southbourne parish could lead to forced inclusion in a wider Bournemouth council. This flaw undermines the legitimacy of the process and contradicts the principle of consent.
If this new model must go ahead, it must include space for genuinely local parishes like Southbourne — not just subsume them. At the very least, Southbourne should be permitted its own parish council or left out altogether.