Agenda item

Councillor Henry Clarke, Peakirk Parish Council provided a presentation on the Ward Boundary Review, from A Rural Parish Perspective. The key points raised were:

• The aim to have three Councillors per Ward did not make sense in rural wards which had lower population density.
• Following these guidelines, there would be two ‘super wards’ of 20 by 15 miles.
• The Peterborough City Council proposal was to have two Wards (Newborough and Eye & Thorney, and Northborough and Glinton & Wittering) with three Members and to leave Barnack as a one Member Ward.
• Councillors should know their Ward communities and be able to travel around the Ward easily.
• An alternative would be to combine Newborough and Northborough to make a new two Member Ward.
• Make sure you feedback on the draft recommendations before 6 October 2014.

Mike Rowan, Interim Head of Legal Services at Peterborough City Council advised that, while the Boundary Commission would have the final say, it was important that Parish Councils formed their own opinions on the proposals. Consultation responses could be made directly or through the Council or Ward Councillors. It was key that those with suggestions submitted responses to the consultation.

The following questions were put to Councillor Henry Clarke and Mike Rowan:

If a previous representation had been submitted in the last round of consultation, would this have been taken into consideration and would a further representation need to be submitted for the second round of consultation?

All previous representations received should be referred to in the Commission’s report. As the process had several stages, further submissions could be made at each stage.

Having three Ward Members in rural Wards presented geographical problems as it would be difficult to cover the whole Ward area.

 This was a situation faced by numerous Local Authority Councillors and Members of Parliament. The alternative was to have a higher number of Councillors in the Ward, which would result in a disproportionally heavier weighting for that Ward.

Where did the notion of three Ward Councillors come from? Was this just for electoral reasons?

A three Member Ward was necessary for a cyclical election process, where one Councillor was elected in each year for three years, with a one year break. It was also identified in the statute for review.

Councillor Marion Brown, Ufford Parish Council, explained that Barnack Ward was geographically self-contained and the Parishes had worked together to establish a sense of cohesion in the Ward. If Barnack were to have its number of Ward Members increased, it would lose this sense of unity and a submission from the Ward as a whole had set out as such.

Was the review more focused on getting the correct number of residents in Wards than what would be best for the communities involved? What numbers were being used for the review?

The Commission were using projected numbers for 10 years’ time, to take into account the expect growth in the area. The Commission were trying to achieve 2,400 residents per Ward Councillor, however geography would also be considered.

Would it be appropriate for a group submission to be made from the Parish Council Liaison group?

A group submission would be acceptable, however it was advisable that individual Parish Councils also make their own submission to the Commission.

It was agreed that William Morrison would be asked to attend a Parish Council Liaison meeting before the deadline for consultation responses. A special meeting would be arranged if necessary.