Issue - meetings

The Executive Board will be meeting on 13 October 2011 to consider the attached report:-

The RECOMMENDATION will be reported to Council.

The Executive Board had considered a report of the Strategic Director, Policy and Resources, on the Parliamentary Boundary Review.

The Boundary Commission had completed the first stage of a review process and had published its initial proposals. Details of these proposals as they affected the North West, Cheshire and Halton were contained in the report with full details of proposals available on the Boundary Commission web site: http://consultation.boundarycommissionforengland.independent.gov.uk/

At its meeting on 13 October 2011, the Executive Board had made recommendations to Council, which were tabled at the meeting.

RESOLVED: That the Commission be advised that Council

1)      strongly opposes the inclusion of Hale and Ditton in the Mersey Banks Constituency for the reasons outlined in paragraph 4.6 of the Executive Board report;

2)      suggests that the Penketh and Cuerdley Ward remains within a Warrington based Constituency;

3)      supports the creation of a “Halton” Constituency containing the following Wards:

         Appleton, Beechwood, Birchfield, Broadheath, Hale, Halton Castle, Farnworth, Grange, Halton Brook, Halton Lea, Halton View, Heath, Ditton, Hough Green, Kingsway, Mersey, Riverside and Windmill Hill.

         (This Constituency would fit the Commission’s number criteria as it contained 79,654 electors);

4)      does not support the renaming of the Halton Constituency –Widnes and Runcorn – as, if the Council’s proposal in 3) above is accepted, then the Constituency of Halton would be substantially as it is now and therefore would not require renaming;

5)           Reluctantly accepts the inclusion of Daresbury, Norton North and Norton South in a Warrington South Constituency; and

6)           expresses its concern to the Commission in relation to the lack of publicity given to this important topic and the difficulty presented to third parties in doing so because of a potential conflict of interest.

            The Board considered a report of the Strategic Director, Policy and Resources on the Parliamentary Boundary Review.

The Board was advised that the Boundary Commission had the task of periodically reviewing the boundaries of all Parliamentary Constituencies of England. New rules, laid down by Parliament, involved a significant reduction in the number of constituencies in England from 533 to 502.

The Boundary Commission had completed the first stage of a review process and had published its initial proposals. Details of these proposals as they affected the North West, Cheshire and Halton were contained in the report with full details of proposals available on the Boundary Commission web site: http://consultation.boundarycommissionforengland.independent.gov.uk/

 The overall review process would be undertaken in five stages with final recommendations in place by 1 October 2013. The Board was reminded that the Council and any interested body had until 5 December 2011 to submit comments on the proposals.

RESOLVED: That Council be recommended to:

1)      strongly oppose the inclusion of Hale and Ditton in the Mersey Banks Constituency for the reasons outlined in paragraph 4.6 of the Executive Board report;

2)      suggest that the Penketh and Cuerdley Ward remains within a Warrington based Constituency;

3)      support the creation of a “Halton” Constituency containing the following Wards:

         Appleton, Beechwood, Birchfield, Broadheath, Hale, Halton Castle, Farnworth, Grange, Halton Brook, Halton Lea, Halton View, Heath, Ditton, Hough Green, Kingsway, Mersey, Riverside and Windmill Hill.

         (This Constituency would fit the Commission’s number criteria as it contains 79,654 electors);

4)      not support the renaming of the Halton Constituency – Widnes and Runcorn – as, if the Council’s proposal in 3) above is accepted, then the Constituency of Halton would be substantially as it is now and therefore would not require renaming;

5)           Reluctantly accept the inclusion of Daresbury, Norton North and Norton South in a Warrington South Constituency; and

6)           express concern to the Commission in relation to the lack of publicity given to this important topic and the difficulty presented to third parties in doing so because of a potential conflict of interest.