If you are reading this page using a screenreader, we support ARIA landmarks for quick navigation too

Agenda and minutes

Venue: Online Meeting

Contact: Kieran Elliott  01225 718504, Email: kieran.elliott@wiltshire.gov.uk

No. Item


Election of Chairman

To elect a Chairman for the forthcoming year.


Nominations were sought for a Chairman for the forthcoming year. It was,




To elect Councillor Richard Clewer as Chairman for the forthcoming year.


Election of Vice-Chairman

To elect a Vice-Chairman for the forthcoming year.


Nominations were sought for a Vice-Chairman for the forthcoming year. It was,




To elect Councillor Gavin Grant as Vice-Chairman for the forthcoming year.



To receive any apologies or substitutions for the meeting.


Apologies were received from Councillors Clare Cape and Christopher Newbury.


Councillor Cape was substituted by Councillor Ruth Hopkinson.


Minutes of the Previous Meeting

To approve and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 24 March 2020.

Supporting documents:


The minutes of the meeting held on 24 March 2020 were presented for consideration, and it was,




To approve and sign the minutes as a true and correct record.


Declarations of Interest

To receive any declarations of disclosable interests or dispensations granted by the Standards Committee.


There were no declarations.


Chairman's Announcements

To receive any announcements through the Chair.


There were no announcements.


Public Participation

This meeting will be available to view live via a Microsoft Teams Broadcast Link as shown below. A public guide on how to access the meeting is included below.


Access the online meeting here


Public guidance for accessing meetings online is available here



Members of the public who wish to make a statement against any item on this agenda should submit it to the officer listed above no later than 5pm on 10 August. Up to three speakers may make a statement against each item.



To receive any questions from members of the public or members of the Council received in accordance with the constitution which excludes, in particular, questions on non-determined planning applications.


Those wishing to ask questions are required to give notice of any such questions in writing to the officer named on the front of this agenda no later than 5pm on 6 August 2020 in order to be guaranteed of a written response. In order to receive a verbal response questions must be submitted no later than 5pm on 10 August 2020.


Please contact the officer named on the front of this agenda for further advice. Questions may be asked without notice if the Chairman decides that the matter is urgent. Details of any questions received will be circulated to Committee members prior to the meeting and made available at the meeting and on the Council’s website.


Statements were received under Item 8 – Community Governance Review.


Community Governance Review

To consider the responses to the consultation on the Draft Recommendations of the Committee which ran from 15 May 2020 – 10 July 2020.

Supporting documents:


Public Participation

A statement from Francis Morland was received.

Clive Blackman made a statement regarding Recommendation 3.

Annie Spilsbury made a statement regarding Recommendation 3.

Nick Westbrook made a statement regarding Recommendation 12.


At its meeting on 24 March 2020 the Committee agreed proposals to be included in Draft Recommendations for the Community Governance Review 2019/20 to be consulted upon. The consultation, which was extended as a result of Covid-19, took place from 15 May 2020 to 10 July 2020. Details of all responses received were included with the report.


The Committee received the responses and determined which Recommendations it considered should be put before Full Council as a Final Recommendation.


Prior to debate on the Recommendations, a statement was read out from Mr Francis Morland regarding use of electorate projections and interpretation of statutory guidance. In response it was stated that reading the whole guidance in context supported the position taken by the council and set out in the report.


The Committee debated each Recommendation, discussing the responses which had been received and arguments which had been made in support and objection. Full reasoning for any recommendation would be included in the Final Recommendations.


In relation to Recommendation 1 to transfer the Netherhampton East ward to Salisbury Harnham West, the Committee upheld its Draft Recommendation. The proposal was supported by both parish councils, and the area’s character and interests would appropriately fit with the city more than the parish. The Committee did not consider there was grounds to seek to amend the area to be transferred as suggested in one response.


In relation to Recommendation 2 to merge two Salisbury City Council wards into a single ward coterminous with the Electoral Division of Salisbury Milford, the Committee upheld its Draft Recommendation. The situation was clearly anomalous compared to every other city ward. The Committee did not consider there were grounds to change the name of the City parish as suggested in one response.


In relation to Recommendation 3 to transfer the Rawlings Farm and Barrow Farm wards of Langley Burrell Without to Chippenham Monkton and Chippenham Hardenhuish, and the Showell ward of Lacock to Chippenham Lowden and Rowden, statements in opposition to the Lacock proposals were received from Clive Blackman and Annie Spilsbury, highlighting opposition by local residents in Rowden Lane and historic connections with Lacock.


The Committee considered all responses and relevant information, noting that all the parish councils involved supported the proposals. The objections to the Lacock proposals was noted, however during debate it was considered that the changing character of the Showell ward as a whole, the isolation from any remaining part of Lacock, and reasons of effective and convenient governance in respect of parish and Division boundaries, meant that the proposals should continue to be recommended to Full Council. However, the Committee did consider that the precise line between the two parishes, and Divisions, could possibly be reviewed again in the future as the situation development further.


In relation to Recommendation 4 to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 24.


Parish Name Change Review

To receive a report on proposals to change the names of several parishes under S75 of the Local Government Act 1972.

Supporting documents:


In July 2019 three parishes or parish councils requested that their name or name of their parish council be amended by Wiltshire Council. At its meeting on 31 October 2019 the Committee agreed to progress the requests under S.75 of the Local Government Act 1972.


The proposals from the three parishes or parish councils were advertised in briefing notes and online surveys, as detailed in the report.


The Committee discussed the report and the responses which had been received, as well as the reasoning provided for each request. They agreed with the reasoning provided for each change, and agreed to recommend Council amend the parish names accordingly.




To recommend Council approve the following parish name changes:


·       Fittleton to Fittleton cum Haxton

·       Fyfield and West Overton to Kennet Vallet Parish Council

·       Cheverell Parva to Little Cheverell.


Area Board Boundary Review

To receive a report on preparing proposals for consultation on Area Board Boundaries.

Supporting documents:


Following the Electoral Review of Wiltshire Council the Area Boards as presently constituted would no longer align to the Electoral Divisions that would come into effect for the May 2021 local elections. Accordingly, it would be necessary for the Council to adopt alternative arrangements.


At its meeting on 21 July 2020 Full Council amended the terms of reference of the Committee to enable it to make recommendations in respect of the boundaries of Area Boards throughs uch processes as it considered appropriate.


In July 2020 representatives of the Committee arranged sessions for each Area Board to discuss the changes to Electoral Divisions and potential options and implications for any future Area Board arrangement.


The Committee reviewed each existing Area Board and the impact of the incoming Divisions, as well as considering if any historical arrangements were no longer the most suitable. Some of the points raised in debate included but were not limited to:


·       Agreeing that wherever possible parishes should not be split between Area Boards as this led to inefficient and sometimes contentious arrangements;

·       Considering whether the Division of By Brook might be suited to an Area Board other than Chippenham, but concluding it remained the most appropriate place for the Division.

·       It was noted that the Local Government Boundary Commission had split two parishes between Divisions in the South East of the council area and in order to avoid splitting any parishes between Area Boards there were Three Divisions which therefore would need to be incldued together. On balance, it was agreed that those Divisions should be included with the current Southern Area Board.

·       It was accepted that the Devizes Rural West Division, which included significant areas previously within the Melksham Area Board, should be included with the Devizes Area Board.

·       It was noted that three community areas in the East of the council area now had only Three Divisions. The Committee did not feel it was appropriate that those areas be merged in a single area board, so agreed that all would be included in a single Area Committee, which would appoint the Area Boards. This would enable them to have their own Chairs and make their own decisions, whilst allowing substitution arrangements to deal with any issues of quorum. The Committee did feel the area committee should itself still meet from time to time to ensure the benefits of community cooperation.

·       It was agreed the expanded Lyneham Division should remain in the Royal Wootton Bassett Area Board, and the expanded Holt Division in the Bradford on Avon Area Board.

·       For Amesbury Area Board it was agreed the parishes of the Avon Valley looked to the town and should be included within it, with the Bourne Valley area included in the Southern Area Board.

·       It was agreed the Salisbury Area Board should comprise only Salisbury City Divisions.

·       Other than to align to the new Divisions, there were no other proposed changes for the Corsham, Trowbridge, Westbury, Warminster, South West Wiltshire, or Tidworth Area Boards.


The Committee agreed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 26.


Polling District and Polling Place Review

To receive a report on the future review of Polling Districts and Polling Places

Supporting documents:


At its meeting on 26 November 2019 Full Council had undertaking a review of polling districts and polling places. This had been required to be completed under the Electoral Registration and Administration Act 2013 as it had been five years since the previous review.


As the review had taken place prior to implementation of the new unitary electoral divisions that would come into effect on May 2021, it had been noted that a further review would need to be taken to reflect those new boundaries, although there was no legal requirement to conduct a further review.


A report from the Head of Elections advised that as the boundaries would not be in force until May 2021, and as a result of impacts arising from the COvid-19 situation, it was proposed to conduct the further review to reflect the new boundaries after the May 2021 elections. This would also enable the Council to reflect any changes from the ongoing Community Governance Review.


It was also noted that as a result of constitutional changes, a future Polling District and Polling Place Review could be approved by the Committee without reference to Full Council.


The Committee discussed the report, seeking details of the process and timescales for updating polling districts and polling places, and noting that a further report would follow the 2019-20 Community Governance Review  with a schedule of necessary changes in advance of May 2021 as required.




It was,


1)    Agreed to postpone the Polling District and Polling Place review until after the May 2021 elections;

2)    to consider the need for a Polling District and Polling Place review if there is lack of feedback from the May 2021 elections that changes are required;

3)    To note that a revised schedule of necessary changes to polling districts will be submitted for approval in Autumn 2020.



Forward Work Plan

To consider a proposed work plan for future Community Governance Reviews.

Supporting documents:


The Committee received a report on outstanding Community Governance Review requests, which due to their number were not able to be included in the 2019/20 review.


It was agreed that the next review would take place after the May 2021 elections, and that the remaining requests would be grouped in order of priority to enable two or three reviews to allow implementation ahead of the May 2025 elections.




That the next Community Governance Review would commence post May 2021, and for officers to prioritise the list of forthcoming reviews for consideration by the Committee at that time.


Date of the Next Meeting

To confirm the date of the next scheduled meeting as 27 October 2020.


The date of the next meeting was scheduled for 27 October 2020. This would be rescheduled around the consultation on the Area Board Boundary Review, ahead of consideration by Full Council on 24 November 2020.


Urgent Items

Any other items of business which the Chairman agrees to consider as a matter of urgency.


There were no urgent items.




This website