To consider and approve the proposed submission to the Local Government Boundary Commission for England, in respect of council warding arrangements for Herefordshire. 

Council was invited to consider and approve the proposed submission to the Local Government Boundary Commission for England, in respect of council warding arrangements for Herefordshire. 

The Leader of the Council presented the report.  He noted that whilst the Commission would change the detailed boundaries of wards he considered there was a major principle that he wished to recommend to the Commission.  This was that each ward should be represented by a single Member who would be accountable to the electorate for their performance.

Councillor MAF Hubbard proposed the following amendment to recommendation b in the report published with the agenda papers.

This Council recognises that warding arrangements as set out in Appendix 1 to the report do not take account of the flexibility for multi-member wards as explained in part 6 of appendix 2 to the report.

This Council further resolves that a request be made to the Local Government Boundary Commission to look specifically at Herefordshire’s urban areas and where evidence is brought forward that communities are being split they apply this flexibility.

Councillor Hubbard stated that the amendment was consistent with point 6 of the Electoral Review Warding criteria set out at appendix 2 to the report which had been agreed by the Electoral Review Working Group following hard debate.  The current proposals based on single ward representation clearly split communities.

Councillor PJ Edwards seconded the amendment. He expressed concern that the Council would lose credibility if it were now to abandon its previous position that there should be flexibility and argue instead for single Member wards across the whole County.  This would undermine the rest of the Council’s submission.

A number of Members expressed the view that single Member wards strengthened accountability and provided clarity to the electorate.  Others spoke in support of the flexibility of multi-member wards, the choice it offered to residents, and the ability to share the workload and pool skills and expertise.

Members commented that a number of proposals in the draft submission split communities.  Examples given included: Bromyard, Holmer, Ledbury, Leominster and Sutton Walls.

Another Member commented that the proposals for Hereford City were fundamentally flawed, highlighting conflict with parish boundaries within the City which would cause confusion when elections were held.

It was suggested that only one ward had actually needed to be changed and the Council should have left well alone and focused on more important issues.  The Leader challenged this point noting that the Commission’s criteria had necessitated change.

In summing up, Councillor Hubbard commented that the electoral review was about both accountability and effective representation.  He emphasised the wording of the motion, that where evidence was brought forward that communities were being split there should be flexibility.

A motion that the question be now put was carried.

A named vote was called on the amendment.

The following Members voted in favour of the amendment (24):  CNH Attwood, PL Bettington, WLS Bowen, AN Bridges, EMK Chave, PJ Edwards, KS Guthrie, J Hardwick, EPJ Harvey, AJ Hempton-Smith, MAF Hubbard, Brig P Jones CBE, JLV Kenyon, MD Lloyd-Hayes,  RI Matthews, PJ McCaull, NP Nenadich, C Nicholls, FM Norman, R Preece, SJ Robertson, P Rone, A Seldon, and GR Swinford

The following Members voted against the amendment (26):  PA Andrews, AM Atkinson, LO Barnett, CM Bartrum, AJM Blackshaw, H Bramer, MJK Cooper, PGH Cutter, BA Durkin, DW Greenow, RB Hamilton, JW Hope MBE, JA Hyde, TM James, JG Jarvis, AW Johnson,  JG Lester, G Lucas, JW Millar, PM Morgan,  RJ Phillips, GJ Powell, PD Price, P Sinclair-Knipe, J Stone, and DB Wilcox.

Councillors JF Knipe and DC Taylor abstained.

The amendment was therefore lost.

Council did not accept recommendation (a) in the report that the proposals for warding arrangements as set out in the summary of the Submission at Appendices 1 and 2 to the report be adopted.

A motion that recommendations c and d in the report should be combined was carried.  Council did not accept the combined recommendation.

RESOLVED: Thatthe Council requests the Local Government Boundary Commission to conduct the review so that the recommendations in due course will provide that all wards in the County should be single member electoral areas, and accordingly return one councillor in each case.

(Council accepted the Chairman’s proposal that any remaining business be agreed unopposed, with the exception of the final item on the agenda (agenda item 17).)