PAPER B

Committee:    FULL COUNCIL

 

Date:               16 MAY 2007

 

Title :               SUBMISSION TO THE BOUNDARY COMMITTEE

 

REPORT OF INTERIM DIRECTOR OF LEGAL AND DEMOCRATIC SERVICES

PURPOSE

 

1.                  To approve the Council’s submission to the Boundary Committee recommending a reduction (as from the 2009 local elections) in the number of electoral wards to 40 from 48. A copy of the draft submission has been provided to each member and is available from the Council’s web site at: www.iwight.com/boundaryreview. The detailed plans of the proposed new Wards are available from the same page on the web site, or for inspection in the Electoral Services Office on floor 4, County Hall. They will also be displayed at the meeting.

 

OUTCOMES

 

2.                  If the Boundary Committee accepts these recommendations and they are then implemented there will be a streamlining of the Council, coupled with greater community involvement primarily around the enhanced role of the Parish and Town Councils, which will lead to more effective local democracy on the Island.

 

BACKGROUND

 

3.                  In March 2004 the Boundary Committee, which is required to review electoral wards every 5-10 years, concluded that there were significant electoral imbalances on the Isle of Wight and therefore intended to undertake a review around that time. However with the close proximity of the 2005 local elections this review was deferred until this year when the review formally commenced on 13 February 2007.

 

4.                  The review is undertaken in 3 phases:

 

·               Submission of proposals from interested parties (from 13 February to 4 June 2007).

·               Publication of the Boundary Committee’s 1st draft for consultation as from approximately September 2007.

·               Publication of the Boundary Committee’s 2nd draft for final consultation in spring 2008.

·               Publication of the final report in late spring 2008 for implementation by the Electoral Commission for the 2009 Council elections.

 

5.                  It is the Electoral Commission that will make the final decision based on the recommendations of the Boundary Committee that will be developed from the various submissions and comments made throughout the process. The Isle of Wight Council is one of any number of individuals or organisations who can submit comments.

 

6.                  At this stage the Council is being asked to agree its submission to the Boundary Committee. The Council will have further opportunities to comment on the 1st and 2nd drafts of the Boundary Committee’s reports.

 

STRATEGIC CONTEXT

 

7.                  With the current 48 seats there is large disparity between the number of electors in the wards. Although the average is 2281 electors per Ward one Ward is 27% higher than this and another is 33% smaller, 30 of the 48 varying from the average size by more than 10%. Consequently the Boundary Committee would undertake this review in any case so as to address these imbalances.

 

8.                  The recently approved “One Island” Strategic review lists a number of projects and the review of the Electoral Wards is one of them so as to retain effective administration and good community identity at the same time as reducing the number of members and associated costs .

 

9.                  The Aim High Corporate Plan had as an objective a reduction of members to 32. This target was reviewed by the full Council at its meeting on 18 October 2006 when Council agreed that there should be a “significant reduction in the number of Isle of Wight Councillors”.

 

10.             The proposed submission complies with both the national and the local strategic context and explains how effective administration could be achieved with 40 members.

 

CONSULTATION

 

11.             A draft of the submission was prepared and circulated on 16 March to:

 

·           All elected Members

·           The main political parties on the Island

·           Staff Representatives

·           Town/Parish Councils and Management Committees

·           IW NHS PCT

·           Hampshire Police Authority

·           IW Chamber of Commerce

·           IW Rural Community Council

·           The Member of Parliament and the Members of the European Parliament for the Isle of Wight

·           The Island Strategic Partnership

 

12.             Additionally the draft submission was placed on the Council’s web site and members of the public were encouraged to submit their own views either to the Council or direct to the Boundary Committee.

 

13.             The consultation period concluded on 13 April and we received a total of 22 comments. From this process a number of drafting errors in the draft submission were identified (and these have been addressed in the final version) but there were comments around the following three specific areas that have been addressed in the proposed submission:

 

·           Brading - the comments raised objected to splitting this area between two electoral wards – this has been resolved and it is no longer proposed that Brading be split – although this has led to a small area of Bembridge now being included within the proposed Sandown North area.

 

·           Gurnard and Northwood - the comments raised also objected to these areas being split the way proposed – the boundaries have now been altered to prevent the split of the two areas within themselves, but does treat them as separate areas and to meet the 10% threshold some areas of Cowes have been included in the new boundaries.

 

·           East Fairlee – comments related to request to reduce the number of IW Councillors representing the Havenstreet and Ashey Parish Council area – this has been achieved by revising the boundaries.

 

14.             The full detail of the comments received and an assessment of them is included in Appendix 4 to the submission.

 

FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPLICATIONS

 

15.             None with the preparation of this submission other than officer time that had been considered as part of the team planning and service planning process for this year.

 

16.             If the proposals are accepted by the Boundary Committee and then implemented by the Electoral Commission for the2009 elections there will be a saving (including on costs) of about £68,000 in members allowances (as there will be 8 fewer Members).

 

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS

 

17.             Process is the Electoral Commission’s (through the Boundary Committee) and there is no legal requirement for the Council to submit any proposals.

 

18.             But Boundary Committee are governed by clear guidance from the Electoral Commission that they have to have regard to and these are:

 

·           The need to secure equality of representation (and this means that no wards should differ from the mean by more than + or- 10%)

·           The need to secure effective and convenient local government

·           The need to reflect the identities and interests of local communities

 

19.             Submission has been prepared to fully comply with these – however this inevitably causes an element of compromise in some areas that is considered later in this report.

 

HUMAN RIGHTS AND DIVERSITY

 

20.             The  right to participate in democracy is a basic Human Right, and is unaffected by the proposals. However the proposals will address the large electoral imbalances that currently exist thereby improving human rights as each vote will carry much nearer to the same impact.

 

21.             The proposed submission has a specific reference to the diversity of the Island and it is believed that these are not adversely affected by the proposals.

 

OPTIONS

 

22.             To either:

 

(a)               Approve submission as printed;

 

(b)               Not submit any proposals; or

 

(c)               Make a completely new set of proposals.

 

EVALUATION

 

23.             Option (a):

 

This explicitly meets all three criteria set out by the Boundary Committee, has been extensively consulted on and amendments made to reflect the views received.

 

This option also satisfies the Council’s objective of a significant reduction in members (from 48 to 40).

 

However the element of compromise to satisfy the Boundary Committee criteria has identified a number of areas that have very minor boundary changes to accommodate the +/- 10% criteria.

 

24.             Option (b):

 

The review would continue however the Isle of Wight Council would have missed the opportunity to contribute to the debate at an early stage.

 

25.             Option (c):

 

The current submission has been developed following lengthy and detailed discussions and consultations with a range of individuals and organisations. The submission must be submitted to the Boundary Committee by 4 June. Therefore additional resources would need to be identified to achieve this deadline.

 

RISK MANAGEMENT

 

26.             Five main risks have been identified with this report – these are detailed below with the “Measures to Manage the Risk” identified in the right hand column:

 

Relevant Option

Risk

Risk likelihood (if measures implemented)

Measure to Manage the Risk

(b)

1. No proposal submitted.

Very unlikely

Project team established, resources allocated and submission and report prepared for this Council meeting.

(c)

2. Submitting proposals without widespread support.

Unlikely

The proposals have been prepared following extensive consultation (and have been amended to reflect the comments received). However there is still the chance that not everyone will support these proposals – but they are entitled to submit their own proposals to the Boundary Committee.

(a) and (c)

3. Proposals submitted without evidence

Unlikely

Submission has been developed on an “evidence based” approached.

(a) and (c)

4. Risk multi member wards being imposed

Unlikely

The Boundary Committee has always indicated (and indeed has elsewhere – even against the wishes of the Local Authority) that it would recommend multi-member wards if insufficient community identities or boundaries are submitted by the Local Authority. The proposed submission includes both of these.

(a) and (c)

5. Risk of the Electoral Commission not implementing proposals for the 2009 local election.

Unlikely

This is entirely a matter for the Electoral Commission – however close contact will be retained with both the Boundary Committee and the Electoral Commission to ensure that the timetable will be maintained – but if it slips early warning and explanation will be provided.

 

 

RECOMMENDATIONS

 

27.             THAT the proposed submission and maps, as available at:  www.iwight.com/boundaryreview,  be approved as the Council’s submission to the Boundary Committee (option a)

 

BACKGROUND PAPERS

 

28.             Guidance to the Boundary Committee. Feedback from the consultation.

 

Contact Point :     Chris Mathews, Democratic Services Manager, tel 823280 email: [email protected]

 

 

ALISON LOWTON

Interim Director of Legal and Democratic Services