Agenda item
Public Issues
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 mid-day Wednesday 8 October 2025 (mid-day, 3 clear working days before the meeting).
The deadline for the submission of a statement is mid-day Monday 13 October 2025 (mid-day the working day before the meeting the working day before the meeting).
The deadline for the submission of a petition is Tuesday 30 September 2025 (10 working days before the meeting).
Minutes:
The Chairman advised Council that given the significant number of questions and statements received the time limit for public questions and statements would be extended to 30 minutes.
Public Questions
Public Question from Barry Smith
Would BCP surrender the lease on Scott’s hill lane play park and land on adjacent side of the road to allow Christchurch town council to take up a new lease with the freeholder and BCP council renew the lease owned by the freeholder on Purewell crossroad only? My question from the previous meeting had false information so could I have true facts please.
This is all to allow us to rejuvenate the play park which has been dilapidating for the past 4 years.
Response by the Portfolio Holder for Communities and Partnerships, Councillor Sandra Moore
Yes, BCP Council is exploring the available options with the landowner regarding the lease of Scott’s Hill Lane play area, plus the other relevant land, to try to provide a solution which could then lead to the play area being improved in the future.
I would also like to confirm that BCP council is open to these discussions, and this work is continuing, but it is all very complicated given the nature of the land holdings and the lease agreements.
However, the Deputy Leader of the Council who is also the ward councillor for the area where the play park is sited, has spoken personally with the landowner and has been assured that a solution is in sight.
Public Question from Joanne Keeling
Predetermination & Legal Consultation
In the recent “Leader Live” broadcast, Cllr Millie Earl stated that it is the democratic right of elected members to deliver their mandate, including the creation of Town and Parish Councils, as reflected in official campaign literature. The first Gunning principle requires that consultations occur at a formative stage and that outcomes are not predetermined. If the Council proceeds despite consultation responses demonstrating overwhelming public opposition, does this indicate a predetermined decision, potentially rendering the consultation unlawful? Will the Leader confirm that the Council fully accepts its legal duty to comply with the Gunning principles, and explain how the current process ensures proposals remain genuinely open to influence before any final decision is taken?
Response by the Leader of the Council, Councillor Millie Earl
May I thank Ms Keeling for her question and confirm that the council recognises the Gunning principles and seeks to adhere to them at all times. The process by which the consultation on the Community Governance Review has taken place and been considered as part of the decision making process has followed the advice of our professional officers, and the recommendations before us come from a cross-party Task and Finish Group, commissioned by the council to undertake the detailed work, which has taken time to evaluate the consultation responses, as set out in the substantial report we are considering this evening. Their recommendations have been subject to public scrutiny by the Overview and Scrutiny Board, which is both cross-party and exempt from party political influence, which had a full and open debate and which voted to support the recommendations. They have been publicly considered by the Council’s Cabinet, which agreed to recommend the recommendations to this public meeting of the Council. It remains open, this evening, for issues to be raised that may support the recommendations or argue against them, and it is for individual councillors to vote as they see fit in the light of the consultation responses, the recommendations of those committees and the debate that will shortly take place.
With regard to the proposals being open to influence, should Ms Keeling care to compare the recommendations of the Task and Finish Group that were put to residents within the consultation exercise, with those that Council is considering this evening, she will note that these have already changed substantially in the light of the consultation responses, which have already influenced which town councils are being recommended, and which are not, have influenced the numbers of councillors proposed for each town councils, and have influenced the boundaries, sizes and names of the wards in the proposed town councils. It remains open to the Council to make further amendments to the proposals this evening, if that is the Council’s wish.
Public Question from Daniel Parkin
- The Christchurch Town Council repurchase of a car park highlights the complexity of assets transfer and if the town councils went ahead will BCP transfer any assets free of charge to these councils as they have for Christchurch, and how will the purchase costs of high-value assets be allocated to residents? And can you produce a list of said assets for the public today? As for the assets that will not be transferred, will the Town Councils be liable for maintaining, repairing, or developing assets they do not own? Clear definitions of ownership, liability, and cost allocation are essential at these early stages.
- Can the Council confirm the exact legal and financial arrangements to prevent new councils from being exposed to unforeseen obligations.
Response by the Portfolio Holder for Finance, Councillor Mike Cox
1. Daniel. Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to highlight the fantastic achievement of Christchurch Town Council in purchasing a car park in the centre of Christchurch which the previous Conservative Council wanted to sell to a private equity company. The car park has been financed by Public Sector borrowing and will cost the Council circa £50k a year in interest or about £4 per household per year. A fantastic value for money to keep such an important anchor tenant in the centre of Christchurch.
Apart from the Allotments BCP has no plans to transfer any other properties at the moment to any Town Councils but I am sure if you have been paying attention you would have heard about the great working being done by our Community Asset Transfer team which looks to transfer community assets BCP can no longer afford to maintain.
It goes without saying that any Town Council will not be liable to maintain an asset it does not own – I can’t understand where you could have go that from or maybe I can.
- All Town and Parish Councils are governed by their own constitutions and strict financial regulations and framework models of which are available from National Association of Local Councils.
Public Question from Judith Parkin read by the Daniel Parkin
The cost of electing Town/Parish Councillors and establishing each separate Town/Parish Council remains unclear.
Will it fall on new councils, potentially placing them in debt before operation or will it be borne by BCP??
Additionally, BCP Council will need to set the first-year precept. How will these costs be calculated to ensure fairness, transparency, and affordability??
How strong must public opposition be for the Council to respect consultation results rather than proceeding with predetermined policies?
Residents need assurance that financial and democratic safeguards are fully in place.
Response by the Portfolio Holder for Transformation, Resources and Governance, Councillor Jeff Hanna
Thank you to Ms Parkin for her question. As portfolio holder for governance and elections, may I confirm that, if the council agrees to create all three proposed new town councils, the total cost of the elections for all three in 2026 is estimated to be £933,500. The cost would be borne by the town councils themselves. Based on the numbers of properties in all three areas, this would make the precept, the extra Council tax, for a Band D property, just over £7 a year. In future years, with no elections needed, that small amount, some sixty pence a month, would generate the best part of one million pounds to be spent on local improvements and community activities across those new town councils. One million pounds that would benefit our residents, in Broadstone, Poole and Bournemouth. If agreed this evening, the first year’s actual recommended precept will be calculated by the Task and Finish Group which will need to follow the wording in the recommendation, to do this on the basis of minimal transfer and precept, with their report to come to a meeting of the Full Council, to be debated publicly before finally being set.
Question from Jason Keeling read by Joanne Keeling
Competence of Allowance-Paid Councillors
Unitary authorities operate with professional officers, consultants and strong budgetary oversight to ensure accountability and compliance. Town and Parish Councils, while smaller, would still be run by councillors who receive allowances but may have little or no relevant experience. How can the public be confident these councillors will manage funds responsibly, deliver statutory services effectively, and avoid errors or overspending? In an authority already under financial strain, inexperienced councillors risk being set up to fail, passing financial and operational risks onto residents. What training, oversight, and safeguards will be in place to ensure councillors can meet their statutory, financial, and operational responsibilities and maintain public trust?
Response by the Portfolio Holder for Transformation, Resources and Governance, Councillor Jeff Hanna
Thank you to Mr Keeling for his question. As portfolio holder for governance, may I assure Mr Keeling that town councils will be supported by competent town clerks, potentially part-time, and such other officers as they see fit.
Training will be made available to all elected councillors either directly by the clerk to the council, or via the local association of parish and town councils or through the national association of local councils.
In our democratic system, there is no guarantee of competency for any future town councillors, or current or future BCP councillors, or any district and county councillors, elected Mayors, Members of Parliament or Prime Minister. That absence of a guarantee of competence was so clearly demonstrated recently by the former Conservative Prime Minister, Liz Truss. Nevertheless, we remain a democratic country. The assumption is that many of those elected will bring their experience in other walks of life to the role, and, collectively, with the professional advice available, and such training as is provided, some good decisions willbe made that will benefit the communities they serve.
Public Question from Jane Newell
Would the Leader of the Council explain the anticipated cost to be borne by BCP Council taxpayers in 2026/27, being the proposed first year of Town Councils for Poole and Bournemouth, given that the costs for year one set-up, the holding of elections in May 2026, and other costs or aspirations will effectively be recharged in advance through a precept on Council Tax bills for 2026/27.
Response by the Leader of the Council, Councillor Millie Earl
Thank you to Ms Newell for her question. May I refer her to Cllr Hanna’s answer to the very similar question from Ms Parkin a few minutes ago, when he explained the costs involved.
Public Question from Gabi Sanger-Stevens
In May 2024, Overview & Scrutiny unanimously recommended reviewing the consultation process after repeated petitions and responses were ignored. No report has been presented, and similar engagement patterns persist. Lawful consultation requires conscientious consideration of all responses. This consultation returned overwhelming opposition to Town and Parish Councils, alongside serious concerns regarding uncapped costs, unclear service responsibilities, and transparency.
How does this consultation avoid previous failings and ensure residents’ views are genuinely considered? Will the Council commit that the concerns and preferences of residents will be genuinely reflected in the final decision? If ignored, will the Council use public funds to defend against legal challenges arising from failure to respect consultation principles? Finally, how will the Council restore public confidence, rebuild engagement, and demonstrate that participation influences final decisions, reassuring resident that their engagement is meaningful and that the consultation is not just a token gesture to justify a predetermined outcome?
Response by the Portfolio Holder for Transformation, Resources and Governance, Councillor Jeff Hanna
Thank you to Ms Sanger-Stevens for her question. With regard to the consideration of the consultation responses, may I refer her to the Leader’s answer to the very similar question from Ms Keeling. It would be inappropriate to comment on how the council would respond to any legal challenge. In terms of public confidence in consultations, the Overview and Scrutiny Board is reviewing the consultation process, and we await their advice.
Public Question from Mrs S Sandwell
Will the new Town and Parish Councils be given a meaningful role in promoting active travel and sustainable transport, including walking, cycling and innovative options such as electric trams or monorails? What authority and resources will they have to influence local transport planning and ensure communities can help shape greener, low-carbon solutions?
Response by the Portfolio Holder for Climate Response, Environment and Energy, Councillor Andy Hadley
Mrs Sandswell, thank you for your question.
If creation of Parish and Town Councils gets the go-ahead, It will be for those bodies to define their interests, and how they allocate their precept, raise funds from grants or elsewhere, or to aim to influence others.
I do have a relevant example from our neighbours. Last week, I was invited to a joint meeting of the Wimborne, Corfe Mullen and associated Town and Parish Councils, because they collectively want to see a solution to enable people to walk or cycle safely across Julians Bridge and the A31 junction between Corfe Mullen and Wimborne.
Dorset Council continues as the Transport authority to be responsible for highways, and a Dorset Council officer was present to answer their queries and take back recommendations to be considered. The A31 is managed by Highways England, who would also be a decision maker in respect of their junction.
I was invited as the parishes recognise the flows between Merley/Bearwood towards Wimborne Shops and Schools, and for children from Wimborne and Corfe Mullen to attend Corfe hills school, and shop or work in Broadstone and Poole. Such measures need to be done in partnership.
I hope this illustrates the role of Parish and Town councils on Transport matters. Similarly, Christchurch Town Council were consulted recently on bus priority measures in Purewell, including a ride on a bus to experience the problem first hand.
When it comes to innovations like Electric Trams or Monorails, it is likely that a Town or parish council would be a consultee. The current Government aim is to devolve some powers for strategic investment to regional mayoral authorities, and that may give us more chance to promote such large schemes, if the funding follows.
The local voice is important in ensuring that communities can help shape and benefit from greener, low-carbon solutions, as you suggest, and indeed any enhancements to their area. The resources that they put into it will be for them to decide.
Public Question from Rick Ashcroft
A majority of respondents oppose Town Councils and the associated precept. If substantial numbers refuse to pay in protest, how will the Council respond? Will payment enforcement, penalties or service adjustments be applied? How will essential services be maintained without penalising compliant residents? Residents require clarity on legal and financial consequences of refusal and a framework outlining enforcement, liability, and service continuity before precepts are imposed.
Response by the Portfolio Holder for Transformation, Resources and Governance, Councillor Jeff Hanna
Thank you to Mr Ashcroft for his question. Whilst a taxpayer may disagree with specific decisions by the council, there is no ability to withhold all or part of their Council Tax on that basis. A Council Tax bill is compiled from different charges, but it is not an itemised bill. Therefore, the withholding of any Council Tax will not result in a reduction of payments to a Town Council. The Council has a legal requirement to charge and recover unpaid Council Tax and whilst it may be disagreeable, recovery action would have to be taken if Council Tax is not paid. It would be inappropriate to comment on exactly what process is followed in this situation, other than to reassure Mr Ashcroft that the council does have appropriate processes in place.
Public Question from Susan Lennon read by the Chief Executive
BCP Council if we are to have Parish councils does that mean our services already outsourced by Council will get worse or better?
Will Parish councils have to raise money to pay for services badly dwindling?
Why are Parish councillors not paid, but Council ones are?
Who will make Parish Council decisions them or you on Policy?
Response by the Portfolio Holder for Transformation, Resources and Governance, Councillor Jeff Hanna
Thank you to Ms Lennon for her question. Services provided by parish and town councils are in addition to those provided by unitary councils such as BCP, so their creation will unquestionably improve the overall services provided to residents, in contrast to the situation where no parish or town council exists. Parish and town councils make their own decisions as to what services they provide and do so independently of unitary councils. They do need to raise funds, through a precept, an increase in the Council Tax, to meet the costs of services they provide. I have already exemplified that a precept of some 60 pence a month could generate some one million pounds of benefits to residents across Broadstone, Poole and Bournemouth. Allowances received by councillors on unitary councils reflect the level of responsibilities they hold. Few parish and town councils provide services at a level that warrants allowances being given to their councillors.
Public Question from Trevor Muddimer read by the Chief Executive
I have a leaflet from 1998 which talks of Light Rail (trams) as a solution to increasing congestion across our area (the DARTS Scheme).
Many councils have taken this route, so when will this or something similar be implemented?
Response by the Portfolio Holder for Climate Response, Environment and Energy, Councillor Andy Hadley
Trevor, thank you for your question, this was a blast from the past, that leaflet was actually produced by me, with a small group of volunteers meeting at my house nearly 30 years ago, aiming to try and seek solutions to our traffic congestion problems. In addition to briefing councillors and MPs, it made a 2 page article in the Evening Echo, and the Meridian news.
The DARTS scheme consisted of 3 parts.
1) An integrated Transport Authority to ensure co-ordination rather than competition between different modes of public transport
2) Integrated ticketing, to enable frictionless travel on any form of public transport
3) Higher frequency of trains across the conurbation, and light rail/Trams to link up to Wimborne and the Airport, down to Bournemouth, Poole and Christchurch town centres, and potentially to connect to the Ferry Port and to Swanage Railway.
It was then included in the current Local Transport Plan 3 documents as a “long-term ambition”.
In response to being asked about your question, the Director of Investment and Development for BCP Council highlighted to me last week, that “Buses need to be replaced every 7 years. Routes are always dependant on commerciality and funding, whereas a tram lasts 30 years, and anchors new developments. Over its life cycle, trams can be a lot better value for money.”
We have a great local bus company, and we buck the national trends on bus-usage, but Trams increase capacity significantly and do attract different users.
I am very aware of the short-term disruption that installation of such a system brings, but we are one of the largest conurbations in the UK without mass transit. In France, Germany and even the USA, many towns have Light rail/trams on their highly used routes. Regional Devolution may provide the means to finally make progress.
I cannot give you a timescale. 30 years ago, we estimated £55M and 15 years. Costs will of course have multiplied hugely, and little has changed beyond congestion getting ever worse. There has though been some progress:
Network Rail recently undertook a study of adding one or two trains per hour through the area (the Dorset Metro concept). We have also been working with the bus company on integrated ticketing ideas, and I am keen that Officers look again at the feasibility of light rail in the mix, both in terms of land assignment in the Local Plan and taking steps to make a viable start on a Mass Transit scheme for the BCP area.
Public Question from Susan Chapman
The Stockholm Resilience Centre warns that humanity has breached seven of nine planetary boundaries. The planetary boundaries framework highlights the rising risk from human pressure on nine critical global processes that regulate the stability and resilience of the Earth. Crossing boundaries risks generating "large-scale, abrupt or irreversible environmental changes" for which, dangerously, none of us are as yet prepared.
Please will BCP ensure they include this illustrated information in their newsletter and publications as well as telling us how we can all help maintain a safe operating space for humanity in our decision-making?
Response by the Portfolio Holder for Climate Response, Environment and Energy, Councillor Andy Hadley
Soo, thanks for your question and the clarity of your warning. The severe consequences of the shocks to planetary systems are increasingly stark, creating a very uncertain future for life on Planet Earth, whatever the populist politicians may do or say.
Planetary boundaries - Stockholm Resilience Centre
Globally, only one of the 9 planetary boundaries identified in their research has been controlled. International action on Ozone depletion has seen a reversal and a mending of the Ozone Layer since the 1980s. This provides a faint hope for humanity when we all work together.
In the social media age, I’m afraid so many people are ignoring the science and choosing their own version of reality, to suit continued inaction, based on echo-chamber discussions.
We have known of the dangers of Climate Change since at least the 1991 Earth Summit. Councils across the UK, and much of the civilised world are doing their bit, and yet changing habits and our reliance on fossil fuels it seems, is too hard, particularly against the powerful vested interests. Changes to our weather systems are evident locally with drier summers and sudden heavy rainfall causing localised flooding.
We have seen with microplastics and pesticides, examples of the dangers of Novel entities in the environment. More unintended consequences of synthetic substances will emerge.
Ocean acidification, through CO2 absorption threatens marine life, with corals, molluscs and crustaceans evidently struggling, and so the marine food-web that depends on them is also threatened.
These factors are all inter-related and global. As a Council and a community, we cannot resolve them in isolation. We can highlight the challenges, and step up individually and together, on Climate and environmental responsibility, which helps to reduce the pressure on the stability and resilience of life on Earth.
This isn’t a middle class or woke obsession, it is about adaptation and survival of the species. Our Biodiversity Net gain work, planting trees as identified in the BCP Urban Forest strategy, the work on our heathlands and natural spaces are all forces for good.
Individually, we all need to consider changing
· how we heat our homes,
· how we generate and use power,
· how we collect and use water,
· how and where we travel for work and leisure,
· what we buy,
· what we plant, and its impact on nature
· what we eat and
· what we reuse, repair, recycle and throw away
This all helps. The Council will do what we can to help people to make responsible choices for themselves and the common good, at this practical level.
Public Question from Mark White
This administration doesn’t listen to its residents pure and simple with 80% of respondents saying no to town councils.
With our MPs bar one all raising concerns over the total lack of democratic process, there is now a very large growing concern raised by all over what appears to be a breach of the Gunning Principles in this consultation. Specifically, the principle requiring that proposals be at a formative stage seems to have been disregarded, with outcomes appearing predetermined prior to public engagement. This undermines the integrity of the consultation and public trust in the process. with the large volumes of evidence of the leader stating elections will take place in May 2026 prior to the opening of the consultation
Could the leader please clarify how she ensured compliance with all four Gunning Principles, particularly regarding the openness to influence before decisions were made?
Public Statements
Public Statement from Mark White
Dorchester has a population of 23,000 a town council budget of £2.2 million, a staff of 22 with offices costing a total £965,000 & £24,400 of councillor’s allowances. Dorchester increased precepts twice in 2024 hitting pockets of residents by £210 providing the bare minimum of events, allotment and facilities.
Poole and my ward Hamworthy a population of 151,000 with high areas of deprivation compare that to Highcliffe with a population of 14,000 with low or nil deprivation.
We all know these councils will not just take on the allotments it will end up taking more BCP services. Residents are not silly, we know you cannot compare the £50 precept of Highcliff to that of Poole, we know it will cost more then Dorchester.
Public Statement from Nick Greenwood
Encouraged by local Councils, Climate change has become the perfect trojan horse for global elites to push centralised, authoritarian control. The UN flag frequently flies outside; Proved.
Framed as an existential crisis, it demands urgent action that bypasses local democracy and justifies intrusive regulation, surveillance, and top-down mandates. Carbon markets, energy tracking, and global “green” policies expand State and Corporate intrusions into everyday life, all in the name of saving the planet. Public fear and moral pressure silence dissent, making centralised control appear not just necessary, but virtuous. Under the banner of climate, national sovereignty erodes, and decision-making shifts to technocrats and multinational bodies, creating a globalised governance model that few truly debate.
What begins as environmental concern morphs into an excuse to concentrate power, limit freedoms, and reshape societies according to the dictates of a distant elite—an urgent crisis manufactured to normalise authoritarianism under the guise of morality.
Public Statement from Susan Chapman
An important, detailed report by the defence chiefs concerning the climate crisis threatening the UK's national security was unexpectedly not launched in London last Thursday.
Governance at all levels should be preparing us for the destabilising impacts of the climate and nature crises. The looming collapse of vital natural ecosystems, food shortages and economic disaster are just years away. We're over-dependent on imports.
A robust system of protections must be implemented before dangerous changes accelerate, governments fall and there's social disorder.
Developers mustn't be allowed to commodify nature in new planning laws. Ancient woodlands, wetlands, and species-rich grasslands aren't interchangeable. Once they're destroyed, they cannot simply be recreated elsewhere.
Habitats carry centuries of ecological complexity that cannot be replicated by planting trees or designating land somewhere else. One in seven UK species faces extinction. 41% are declining. Nature must be respected if we're to survive.
Public Statement from Bob Cooper
The Reports you have had are misleading.
Requests received for activities which BCP cannot provide do not justify these Councils. I could ask for a Christmas tree in Talbot Village However if it meant a Town Council with a cost approaching £300 per year with no cap, I would say no thanks
To argue that Bournemouth and Poole already have a two-tier local government with Charter Trustees is both misleading and wrong. We don’t. Legally they are not a local authority.
Not mentioned in reports, the ward boundaries for Town Council’s and BCP Wards differ. One side of Wallisdown Road would be in Poole the other in Bournemouth. A recipe for confusion and inequality.
The consultation showed less than 1% of the population want Town Councils
Don’t be taken in by a misleading report. Recognize that there is minimal support for these Councils and don’t proceed with them.
Public Statement from Pat King
Digital payments offer convenience, but a fully cashless approach excludes and disadvantages many residents.
Older and younger people, those with disabilities, and individuals on low incomes often depend on cash for budgeting and daily spending. For many, it remains essential, not optional.
Councils have a duty to keep services accessible to all, not only the digitally connected. Cashless systems are fragile — network failures halt payments, and digital transactions risk privacy and data security. Visitors and tourists may also be unable to pay.
Under the Equality Act 2010, councils must ensure access and avoid indirect discrimination. Going cashless breaks that principle.
True inclusivity demands both cash and digital options — protecting fairness, accessibility, and public trust in council services, not eroding them.
Public Statement from Bill Hoodless
Since local government reorganisations are invariably costly, good justification is needed. The reported 78% level of objections is significant here.
Extra costs would arise from further buildings for further staff leading to reduced productivity of existing staff who would do less.
The new employees would have to learn on the job, involving liaison with the previously responsible officers and do various new administrative tasks.
There would be debates between BCP and town councils regarding responsibilities - a costly misuse of time.
More bureaucracy, higher taxes.
Typical households’ tax increase estimate is £400, yet without proof of better services.
I support the petition (signed by more than 2,000) calling for any decision on this whole matter to be postponed until after the May 2027 local elections in order to allow effective democratic consideration before voting. The petition’s understandable concerns include higher taxes, bureaucracy and division within communities.
Public Statement from Roy Pointer
The proposal to set up new town councils as an extra tier of local government within BCP area should be rejected for many obvious reasons including the following:
1. More widespread publicity should have been given prior to consultation.
2. Consultation responses were overwhelmingly against proposals.
3. This radical change should be subject to a local referendum.
4. ‘Back to the future’ - 60s style administration; this was swept away in 1974.
5. Extra layer of government confuses communication and responsibilities.
6. Set up costs, new members, staff transfer, new staff needed, premises, transport, IT configuration and utility costs.
7. Increased ongoing uncapped costs to taxpayers.
8. Better to liaise with LGA and Government to justify extra resources for these responsibilities within current arrangements.
9. BCP already has poor record on capturing benefits from its own reorganisation.
10. Review the proposals after next local elections to test stakeholder appetite then.
Public Statement from Peter Schroader on behalf of Branksome Park and Canford Cliffs Residents Association
· This proposal should be rejected for many reasons, including;
· The proposed extra tier of local government within BCP will do nothing to solve the problems we face of
# Lack of a clear vision for BCP especially concerning Tourism, the key to future prosperity
# The ongoing neglect of our environment; the Chines, footpaths, the esplanade etc
# Inconsistences in planning decisions and inadequate monitoring of their implementation
· The consultation was badly handled including the exclusion of any discussion of cost
· BCP should concentrate on making its own creation work
· Before implementing such a radical and backward development a proper referendum is needed
Public Statement from Elizabeth Glass
As I have been unable to find the council’s reasons for wanting to introduce town councils,
I surmise that –
a. Council feels unable to manage all local services required. Certainly, the area desperately needs revitalising. Introducing town councils would essentially be reverting to pre 2019 when BCP was formed, an option which should be considered.
b. Council needs more finance to deliver these services. Further finance could be available for local services if less money was spent on pursuing net zero globalist policies.
Public Statement from Mark White
The administration has made statements over the last few months. you believe in localism, just so long as its on your own terms.
You believe in restoring trust in local government but then undermine it with constant flawed consultations going against the 80% that say no.
You believe in listening to local voices, just as long as they say what you want to hear.
You believe in democracy but won’t allow a referendum as No offends you.
This is not localism, its another word.
Council, there are those in the administration who have told me privately they have deep doubts about this, scared to voice concerns and are whipped to toe the line. But vote with your heart and not by the party whip.
Listen to your MPs, examine the consultation results, but most importantly its time to listen and vote how your residents have indicated, vote down town councils.