Agenda item

The forum will debate and provide collective observations on the impact on community and accountability of the Local Government Boundary Review for B&NES. 

This item will be opened by a short presentation provided by Jeremy Boss.

A public request to make a statement on this topic has been received from Bryn Jones.

Jeremy Boss gave a Local Government Boundary Commission Draft Proposals short presentation about Local Government Boundary Commission Draft Proposals which would see changes to ward boundaries in Bath.  Jeremy felt that the draft proposals do not meet the stated objectives and principles. Whoever has put together these proposals has done a good job in terms of cutting the number of councillors to the wanted 59 (from 66), but a “lousy job” in terms of reflecting local communities and there has to be a better understanding of local knowledge.

The University of Bath is distorting the position for the South of Bath. The proposed ward for Claverton Down has no real basis.

Jeremy recommended that the Bath City Forum ask the Commission to revisit its proposals for Bath by:

·  Staying within the City boundary

·  Placing a greater emphasis on community identity and cohesion (noting submissions from local groups and residents)

·  Reconsidering the position for the University / Claverton Down

·  Seeking for wards to be predominantly with 2 Cllrs

Bryn Jones from Lambridge ward said the proposals meant there would be seven single-member wards in the north of Bath. (Full details of these representations are included in the minute papers)

“You’d have to put all your money on one horse.”

He said Fairfield Park would disappear into Walcot.

“This is an example of a lack of respect for community integrity in the Lambridge area.”

Cllr Rob Appleyard said: “We need to build from the bottom upwards. It is about communities.”

Jeremy Boss thought the forum should go back to the Boundary Commission and ask them to take better account of communities.

Cllr Rayment said he thought the main point should be about the overall boundary of the city as the split between parished and unparished areas would cause problems.

Cllr Anthony Clarke felt that it was virtually impossible now for politicians to have an effect on the outcome as they had already had there opportunity.

Cllr Dine Romero disagreed on this point as local parties can still contribute.

Virginia Williamson explained that Bear Flat would be split through the heart of the community by the new ward boundaries proposed. Virginia had looked at the notes on the website on how communities should respond and where resident associations are set up representation is easier. The areas without a group will need some level of help from their Ward Councillors in making their representation.

Cllr Shaun Stephenson-McGall had no issue if the whole of the authority had single-member wards because it’s very easy for members that contribute very little to hide behind a good member covering the same ward.

Cllr Shaun Stephenson-McGall was not bothered by changes to the City boundary.

The university issue is link to national registration on 1 December, a date which means university students are not captured.

The changing ward boundaries do not, ultimately, matter. It just meant wards would have to work on cross-boundary matters, as they do now.

Cllr Joe Rayment said the forum represents the unparished area of B&NES, so keeping the city boundary is good for the future of the forum.

Cllr Andrew Furse said 59 was not necessarily the right number of councillors
and remained neutral on whether one and two-member wards, this does however need to be driven by communities

Cllr Bob Goodman felt that the proposals have got this badly wrong, the Bath boundary needs to be kept intact and communities need to go back with their concerns

Cllr Bob Goodman explained that Harry Patch, who is the most famous person in Combe Down, would no longer be in Combe Down if this were to go ahead.

The forum voted that they were in favour of a letter being written to the Electoral Boundary Commission. (17 - Yes / Nil - No)

The forum voted on three points that they wished to have included in the letter being written to the Electoral Boundary Commission

(i)  Staying within the City boundary (Yes - 15 / No - 0)

(ii)  Placing a greater emphasis on community identity and cohesion (noting submissions from local groups and residents) (Yes - 17 / No - 0)

(iii)  Seeking for wards to be predominantly with 2 Cllrs (Yes - 12 / No - 3)