Agenda item

(Members are reminded this is a debate, not a question and answer session)

To consider the following recommendations to Council:

i           Cabinet: 1 August 2017

RESOLVED: The following recommendations were approved:

            CAB41: Non Domestic Rates Discretionary Reliefs

ii          Special Cabinet: 9 August 2017

Council was invited to consider the proposals put forward in CAB53: Boundary Review of the Borough of King’s Lynn and West Norfolk.  The Leader of the Council, Councillor Long reminded Members that Council had already agreed that the amount of Members be reduced to 54 and this had been accepted by the Boundary Commission.  Work had now been carried out on the technicalities and mathematics of the Ward Boundaries.  The Leader asked for his thanks to be recorded to the Members of the Task Group, those who had put forward representations as part of the process and the officers involved, notably Tony Yates, Electoral Administrative Assistant.

The Leader appreciated that not all were in support of the divisions in the proposed submission document and that if Members or members of the public felt that the Council’s submission was not technically compliant or they felt that the makeup of communities would be adversely affected by the proposals they could submit comments or alternative proposals to the Boundary Commission for consideration.

The Leader proposed the recommendations as set out in the report, which was seconded by Councillor Lawrence, who reserved his right to speak.

In debating the recommendations Councillor Smith made comments about the proposals for Gaywood North Bank Ward.  He felt that some of the divisions made no sense and felt that it needed to be left as a three Member Ward and that parts of Gaywood had now been separated into other Wards.  He felt that too many changes had been made at the last minute and the Council needed to be aware of natural communities. 

Councillor John Collop stated that he had sat on the Boundary Review Task Group and commented that had Councillor Smith attended the meetings, he could have made representations.  Councillor Collop supported the idea of single Member Wards where possible.  He commented that officers had worked hard on the proposals, and it had not been easy to put the maps together.  Councillor Collop explained that he lived in Gaywood North Bank Ward, which had previously been a three Member Ward, and he felt had not worked very well as there was sometimes a conflict of who to contact and some Members may be more proactive than others resulting in varying workloads for each Member.  He felt that the division into single Member Wards would work much better.

Councillor John Collop commented that the Ward he represented was currently a two Member Ward and it was proposed to split this into two single Member Wards, which he supported.  He commented that he hoped that the proposals were taken forward.

Councillor McGuinness commented that he agreed with the comments made by Councillor John Collop with regards to single Member Wards.  He felt that the Ward Member would be able to represent the whole community and bring communities together.  Councillor McGuinness commented that the South Lynn area had now been split between three different Wards and he felt that this would not help community relations.  He explained that there had already been lots of change within the community and provided examples of the new community centre and school.  He felt that South Lynn was a close knit community and did not want this to be taken away.

Councillor Wareham commented that if Members of the Council or public were unhappy with the Councils proposed submission there was still time to make representations direct to the Local Government Boundary Commission for consideration.

Councillor Mrs Watson stated that she would be abstaining from the vote.  She explained that the Parishes she currently represented were unhappy that they would be split into two different Wards. 

Councillor Pope felt that there had been issues with the information made available on the proposals, and up until recently the maps had not been very clear.  He also queried if Councillors had been fully engaged in the proposals as the Task Group had only met a handful of times and he did not feel that meetings had been well attended.  He referred to the three statutory criteria as set out by the Boundary Commission and queried how constituents would receive the same level of service if a three Member Ward was changed to a single Member Ward, especially in the rural areas of the Borough.  He referred to the isolated areas such as Welney and felt that it should remain within Upwell ward.  Councillor Pope also made reference to the size of some of the more rural Wards.

Councillor Pope also raised concern that under the Financial Implications section of the Cabinet Report, it currently stated that there were no Financial Implications, he felt that there would be and that Members should be informed of the implications.  He stated that it was like the Devolution process, it had been rushed through and he would be abstaining from the vote.

The Leader of the Council, Councillor Long commented that he appreciated the input from Councillors and it was a shame that representations and concerns had not been made in advance, to the Task Group or by attending meetings under Standing Order 34.  He felt that most of the points raised related to fine tuning, however, if Members had a technically compliant alternative solution he urged them to make representations to the Local Government Boundary Commission before the submission deadline.  The Leader stated that he felt that the Council’s submission was technically compliant.  He also explained that the review was necessary due to the disparity between the small and large Wards.

RESOLVED: The recommendations from the Special Cabinet Meeting on 9^th August 2017 were approved.