Appendix B to be circulated separately.
The Chairman invited the Executive Director (Strategy and Governance) to introduce the report and recommendation to Council, setting out the Boundary Review draft proposals by the Local Government Boundary Commission for England and the District Council’s draft response, both of which had been circulated prior to the meeting.
The Council then received an update from the Data and Intelligence Manager on the methodology used and data collated in compiling the Council’s draft response, and on the additional representations on the proposed boundary changes received from Councillors since publication of the reports.
The Chairman then invited Councillors to put forward any further matters they wished to bring to the officers’ attention for inclusion in the Council’s submission. During the course of the debate the following points were raised:
· Strong emphasis on community cohesion as demonstrated through ward Councillors’ contributions;
· Revised proposals, to be incorporated within the Council’s submission, in respect of Alton welcomed by all the ward Councillors as important in preserving local community identity;
· Steep and Stroud should be co-located within the same ward in recognition of their close ties through shared community facilities and jointly funded projects;
· Officers to report back on the impact on the number of electors in Liss Ward arising from the inclusion of Greatham;
· Further advice to be sought from the Boundary Commission in relation to adjustments to parish boundaries and to what extent this might lead to a delay in progressing the current proposals;
· Projections for increased number of electors arising from new housing completions in Whitehill and Bordon anticipated by 2023 to be reconfirmed;
· Importance of maintaining the integrity of Hogmoor, Pinewood, Deadwater and Chase communities either side of the A325 supported by ward Councillors;
· Boundary Commission’s suggestion that moving Grayshott Laurels into Lindford ward would create an unviable parish ward perceived as illogical by the ward Councillors and should be queried;
· Clarification to be sought around the possible need for a Community Governance Review arising from the proposed boundary changes for Horndean and Rowlands Castle;
· Bramshott and Liphook, miscellaneous provision on continuing with the three-councillor ward to be reinforced;
· Request for consideration of a new name for Selborne/Binstead/Bentley to reflect the diversity of the communities in the proposed new ward;
· The Council’s submission should highlight the need to protect the particular culture and characteristics of very rural wards.
The Portfolio Holder, Councillor Julie Butler, thanked members for their contributions, both prior to the meeting and during the debate, and reminded all Councillors that any remaining representations should be forwarded to the officers by no later than Wednesday 6 December, ahead of the final submission deadline of 11 December.
At the conclusion of the debate, and on behalf of all members of the Council, the Chairman took the opportunity to thank the officers for their support to individual ward Councillors and for the extensive work undertaken
in collating all the necessary data to compile the Council’s draft response to the Boundary Commission.
Proposed by Councillor Shepherd and seconded by Councillor Glass, it was
RESOLVED that the finalisation of the Council’s formal response to the Local Government Boundary Commission’s ‘Draft Recommendations on the new electoral arrangements for East Hampshire District Council’, in corporating points raised in debate at this Council meeting, be delegated to the Executive Director (Strategy and Governance).