Agenda item

To consider the Final Recommendations of the Electoral Review Committee.

 

Councillor Ian Blair-Pilling, Chairman of the Electoral Review Committee, introduced the recommendations and set out the process which had been followed during the 2021/22 Community Governance Review (CGR).

 

Councillor Blair-Pilling set out the background to the Final Recommendations of the Committee, detailing the legal criteria the council must follow, and in particular the multiple public consultations and engagements with local councils which had taken place to refine the recommendations. It was noted that some of the recommendations, if approved, would required the consent of the Local Governance Boundary Commission for England to enact.

Councillor Blair-Pilling referred throughout to details and reasoning for changes as set out in the Final Recommendations document attached to the Summons. During his various comments for the item he thanked officers and the Committee for their hard work developing proposals.

 

The Chairman agreed that each recommendation would be discussed and voted on separately.

 

Recommendation 1 - Charlton St Peter & Wilsford

This was a proposal to group two parishes under a single council. This was supported by the parishes involved, Charlton St Peter and Wilsford, as they already operated as a single entity and the recommendation was to formally confirm this arrangement.

 

The Chairman then invited comments from Group Leaders.

 

Councillor Richard Clewer, Leader of the Council, stated he was happy to support the recommendation. Councillor Gavin Grant, on behalf of the Leader of the Liberal Democrat Group, supported the recommendation. Councillor Ian McLennan, on behalf of the Leader of the Labour Group, also supported the proposal.

 

The item was then debated. During debate the local Division Member, Councillor Paul Oatway QPM, noted his support for the grouping of the two parishes.

 

At the conclusion of debate, with no further comments from the Committee Chairman, and following a vote, the recommendation was supported.

 

Recommendations 2-7 – Calne Without and surrounding parishes

Councillor Blair-Pilling set out the background to these interrelated recommendations at length. A petition had been received in 2019 from hundreds of residents of Calne Without requesting establishment of a new parish at Derry Hill & Studley. Following a review, the Council had determined at its meeting in September 2020 that a broader review encompassing all surrounding parishes was needed.

 

Councillor Blair-Pilling set out the existing set up of parishes in the area, the requests that had been received from many of them, and the very detailed examination the Committee had undertaken, looking at each in accordance with the statutory criteria of community identity and interests and effective and convenient local governance. The Committee had amended its proposals several times in response to representations made in consultations, and Councillor Blair-Pilling noted all the parish councils of the Calne Community Area expressed support for the latest proposals.

 

Recommendation 2 – Calne Town

This was a proposal to move two areas of existing development and an area of current development from Calne Without to Calne Town, and amend the unitary boundaries accordingly for two of them, as set out in the report.

 

Councillor Richard Clewer, Leader of the Council, stated that he would comment once on behalf of Recommendations 2 – 7 relating to Calne and surrounding parishes. He was happy to support the proposals which had been reached following extensive consultation, commending the excellent piece of work carried out by the Committee.

 

Other Group Leaders also confirmed that they would comment once on behalf of Recommendations 2 – 7.

 

Councillor Ian Thorn, Leader of the Liberal Democrat Group, supported the recommendations and noted the detail that went into the work and recommendations of the Committee. Councillor Ian McLennan, on behalf of the Leader of the Labour Group, also supported the proposals.

 

The item was then debated. During debate it was noted that unlike some previous reviews there were no public representations at the meeting raising concerns, and that the report and process indicated that communities had been fully consulted and listened to, through a high level of engagement, arriving at a suitable proposal. 

 

It was noted that the Committee worked in a nonpartisan way and adopted core principles, which were reflected in the recommendations, such as when to recommend urban extensions be included within a town.

 

The Cabinet Member for Governance, Councillor Ashley O’Neill, noted that a CGR was a very comprehensive process involving a huge amount of work. He confirmed that he was satisfied that the proposals were the best solution possible.

 

At the conclusion of debate, with no further comments from the Committee Chairman, and following a vote, the recommendation was supported.

 

Recommendation 3 – Bremhill

This was a proposal to transfer a small area of land from Calne Town to Bremhill parish, and transfer a larger area of land from Calne Without to Bremhill, as well as small changes relating to Langley Burrell Without and Christian Malford, as set out in the Final Recommendations.

 

The item was then debated. During debate it was clarified that the CGR process was compliant with strict criteria, which prohibited any consideration of the impact on council tax precept, and could only consider impact of potential future development within the next five years. In addition the geographical scope of a CGR is limited to those parishes named on the Terms of Reference for that year.

 

At the conclusion of debate, with no further comments from the Committee Chairman, and following a vote, the recommendation was supported.

 

Recommendation 4 – Compton Bassett & Hilmarton

This was a proposal to transfer a small area of land from Calne Without to Hilmarton, and some other areas of land from Calne Without and Cherhill to Compton Bassett, as set out in the report. All the parishes were in agreement.

 

No further points were raised for debate following the detailed introduction of the Committee Chairman.

 

At the conclusion of debate, with no further comments from the Committee Chairman, and following a vote, the recommendation was supported.

 

Recommendation 5 – Cherhill

This was a proposal to transfer an area of Calne Without to Cherhill, and amend the warding arrangements of Cherhill accordingly, including the number of councillors.

 

No further points were raised for debate following the detailed introduction of the Committee Chairman.

 

At the conclusion of debate, with no further comments from the Committee Chairman, and following a vote, the recommendation was supported.

 

Recommendation 6 – Heddington

This was a proposal to transfer an area of land from Calne Without to Heddington, with associated changes to warding arrangements and number of councillors, as well as requesting changes to the unitary division boundaries by the LGBCE.

 

No further points were raised for debate following the detailed introduction of the Committee Chairman.

 

At the conclusion of debate, with no further comments from the Committee Chairman, and following a vote, the recommendation was supported

 

Recommendation 7 – Calne without (Derry Hill & Studley)

Following the agreement of recommendations 2-6, the area remaining of Calne Without was proposed to be renamed Derry Hill & Studley to better reflect its identity. As such, it was not the creation of a new parish, but was broadly the area requested in the initial petition received in 2019. It was also proposed to create a new warding arrangement for the renamed parish, adjust its councillor numbers, transfer a small area of land into it from the parish of Bromham, and request the LGBCE amend unitary boundaries to align to the new parish boundaries. The support of the Calne Without Parish Council was noted.

 

The item was then debated. During debate it was clarified that a ward could have the same name as the parish it was contained within, and was confirmed  further that only known residential development within the set timeframe (5 years from start of review) and matters of maters of community cohesion and effective governance could be considered when carrying out a review. Any other type of development such as solar farms were not material considerations. It was noted that one of the wards proposed had the same name as that in a neighbouring parish

 

At the conclusion of debate, with no further comments from the Committee Chairman, and following a vote, the recommendation was supported.

 

Recommendation 8 – Malmesbury, St Pauls Malmesbury without and Brokenborough.

This was a proposal to amend the warding arrangements for the town of Malmesbury, to transfer a small area of land from Brokenborough to St Paul Malmesbury Without, and amend the warding of St Paul Malmesbury Without. The Committee Chairman set out the background to the recommendation, and the adjustments made by the Committee to its initial proposals.

 

The item was then debated. During debate it was noted that the public meeting held in Malmesbury during the review had been well attended and had persuasively argued a case which led to the Committee changing its views. The Division Member for Malmesbury town, Councillor Gavin Grant, thanked the effort of those that had worked to try and establish a boundary change that would work for all involved, although despite a lot of effort agreement had not been able to be reached on a different logical dividing line between the parishes.

 

The Division Member for Sherston, Councillor Martin Smith, which included St Paul Malmesbury Without, noted the difficulties which had arisen during attempts to find a satisfactory option for a transfer, giving thanks to the Committee for the hard work carried out for the area.

 

At the conclusion of debate, with no further comments from the Committee Chairman, and following a vote, the recommendation was supported

 

Following the debates and votes on each individual recommendation, and a  then a procedural vote for resolutions 2) and 3), it was then,

 

Resolved:

 

1)     To Approve the Final Recommendations of the Electoral Review Committee for changes to community governance arrangements, as set out in the report regarding the areas below:

 

i. Recommendation 1 – Charlton St Peter

ii. Recommendation 2 – Calne Town

iii. Recommendation 3 – Bremhill

iv. Recommendation 4 – Hilmarton and Compton Bassett

v. Recommendation 5 – Cherhill

vi. Recommendation 6 – Heddington

vii. Recommendation 7 – Derry Hill & Studley (Calne Without)

viii. Recommendation 8 – Malmesbury, St Paul Malmesbury

Without, and Brokenborough

 

2)     To authorise the Solicitor of the Council to take all necessary measures to make and approve the Community Governance Order(s) to bring into effect for 1 April 2025 all of the changes detailed under resolution 1, subject to any required consents by the Local Government Boundary Commission for England;

 

3)     To authorise the Electoral Registration Officer to make any necessary changes to polling districts to bring them into line with the agreed governance changes at the appropriate time, to be reported to the Electoral Review Committee.

 

In accordance with the Constitution there were recorded votes on each recommendation.

 

Recommendation 1

For:                        75

Against:                  0

Abstentions:            0

 

Recommendation 2

For:                        75

Against:                  0

Abstentions:            0

 

Recommendation 3

For:                        76

Against:                  0

Abstentions:            0

 

Recommendation 4

For:                        72

Against:                  0

Abstentions:            1

 

Recommendation 5

For:                        73

Against:                  0

Abstentions:            0

 

Recommendation 6

For:                        75

Against:                  0

Abstentions:            0

 

Recommendation 7

For:                        76

Against:                  0

Abstentions:            0

 

Recommendation 8

For:                        75

Against:                  0

Abstentions:            1

 

Procedural Vote (Resolutions 2 and 3)

For:                        75

Against:                  0

Abstentions:            0

 

 

Full details are attached to the minutes.