DOCSLIB.ORG

Local Elections Handbook 1999

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

LOCAL ELECTIONS HANDBOOK 1999 Colin Rallings & Michael Thrasher LOCAL ELECTIONS HANDBOOK 1999 The 1999 Local Election Results Colin Rallings and Michael Thrasher with the assistance of Brian Cheal and Lawrence Ware Local Government Chronicle Elections Centre University of Plymouth Local Elections Handbook 1999 © Colin Rallings and Michael Thrasher 1999 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise without the prior permis- sion of the publishers. Published by the Local Government Chronicle Elections Centre, University of Plymouth, Plymouth PL4 8AA ISBN 0 948858 25 7 Distributed by: LGC Communications, 33-39 Bowling Green Lane, London, EC1R 0DA Table of Contents Introduction ...................................................................................................................v Using the Digest ......................................................................................................... xii Aggregate Statistics for Local Authorities ....................................................................1 Metropolitan Borough Council Election Results ........................................................21 English Unitary Council Election Results...................................................................51 English Shire District Council Election Results .........................................................83 Scottish Unitary Council Election Results ................................................................277 Welsh Unitary Council Election Results ...................................................................319 Tables ........................................................................................................................349 aaaa Introduction The 1999 local elections saw contests in 362 councils across most of England and the whole of both Scotland and Wales. In 241 of these authorities, voters were electing the entire council membership. With more than 13,300 council seats at stake the elections provided a crucial test of the parties’ standing at both the local and national levels. A total of 33,842 candidates contested the elections. In the majority of cases these seats were last fought in 1995 when the Conservatives were particularly un- popular with the electorate. The party suffered one of its worst ever defeats, polling approximately 25 per cent of the national equivalent vote and losing more than 2,000 seats. Labour was the principal beneficiary, capturing an extra 1,800 seats with 47 per cent share of the vote. The Liberal Democrats, in making 500 gains in 1995 emerged with political control of 51 councils; four times the number of Conservative administrations. Boundary changes affected a considerable proportion of local authorities. All local authorities in Scotland had revised ward boundaries, over half of those in Wales, and more than 50 district and unitary councils in England.. In most cases, however, it proved possible to estimate the distribution of seats for the main parties on the new boundaries. Both Labour and Conservative strategists too tried to prepare the ground for expected gains or losses. Labour’s pre-election ‘spin’ began as early as autumn 1998 when an internal report was ‘leaked’ to the press. This spoke of losses reaching 2000 seats. The Conservatives’ own analysis stated that it would struggle to make 500 gains. In both cases the scale of gains/losses was designed such that the outcome was either not as bad as expected (Labour) or better than had been anticipated (Con- servatives). In the months prior to the elections Labour enjoyed a large opinion poll lead over the Conservatives of some 30 percentage points. Local by-election results, however, told a different story. Conservative candidates were capturing seats from both Labour and Liberal Democrats. Translating these results into national vote share figures suggested that Labour’s lead was of the order of just two percentage points. The narrowness of that lead, together with the relative position of the two parties in 1995, meant that the Conservatives could make in the region of 1400 seat gains. As with other recent contests, by-election results proved to be a more reliable indicator of the state of local electoral opinion. Indeed, our esti- mate of the national equivalent vote following these elections places Labour on 36 per cent, Conservatives 34 per cent and Liberal Democrats 25 per cent. v Table 1: Summary of Local Election Results, 1999 All Votes/ Wards Wards Seats Seats %share Contested Won Contested Won Conservative 3,444,713 6,817 2,505 9,457 3,781 27.6 75.8 27.9 71.1 28.4 Labour 4,220,829 7,237 3,084 10,364 4,816 33.8 80.5 34.3 77.9 36.2 Liberal Democrat 2,689,990 5,807 1,716 7,881 2,611 21.5 64.6 19.1 59.3 19.6 Nationalists 834,511 1,408 344 1,505 409 6.7 15.7 3.8 11.3 3.1 Independents 1,001,169 2,408 1,232 2,822 1,512 8.0 26.8 13.7 21.2 11.4 Greens 106,105 553 19 667 25 0.8 6.1 0.2 5.0 0.2 Other 189,394 617 92 743 147 1.5 6.9 1.0 5.6 1.1 Total 12,486,711 8,992 8,992 13,301 13,301 England Votes/ Wards Wards Seats Seats %share Contested Won Contested Won Conservative 3,036,978 5,865 2,347 8,397 3,598 32.9 85.0 34.0 77.7 33.3 Labour 3,052,438 5,647 2,208 8,420 3,703 33.1 81.8 32.0 77.9 34.3 Liberal Democrat 2,268,663 4,882 1,491 6,855 2,357 24.6 70.8 21.6 63.4 21.8 Independent 641,527 1,656 773 2,020 1,022 7.0 24.0 11.2 18.7 9.5 Green 97,697 523 18 635 24 1.1 7.6 0.3 5.9 0.2 Other 121,264 431 63 527 105 1.3 6.2 0.9 4.9 1.0 Total 9,218,567 6,900 6,900 10,809 10,809 Metropolitan Boroughs Votes/ Wards Wards Seats Seats %share Contested Won Contested Won Conservative 559,525 762 114 771 116 25.6 92.1 13.8 92.2 13.9 Labour 979,724 826 527 835 532 44.8 99.9 63.7 99.9 63.6 Liberal Democrat 536,516 717 170 722 172 24.5 86.7 20.6 86.4 20.6 Independent 41,883 114 9 114 9 1.9 13.8 1.1 13.6 1.1 Green 31,437 163 2 163 2 1.4 19.7 0.2 19.5 0.2 Other 39,231 139 5 140 5 1.8 16.8 0.6 16.7 0.6 Total 2,188,316 827 827 836 836 vi English Unitary Councils Votes/ Wards Wards Seats Seats %share Contested Won Contested Won Conservative 432,937 681 169 1,116 310 30.2 93.0 23.1 87.6 24.3 Labour 549,130 716 365 1,225 624 38.3 97.8 49.9 96.2 49.0 Liberal Democrat 357,985 619 170 993 293 25.0 84.6 23.2 77.9 23.0 Independent 56,677 127 21 156 35 4.0 17.3 2.9 12.2 2.7 Green 24,272 112 3 178 5 1.7 15.3 0.4 14.0 0.4 Other 11,853 54 4 67 7 0.8 7.4 0.5 5.3 0.5 Total 1,432,854 732 732 1,274 1,274 English Shire Districts Votes/ Wards Wards Seats Seats %share Contested Won Contested Won Conservative 2,044,516 4,422 2,064 6,510 3,172 36.5 82.8 38.6 74.8 36.5 Labour 1,523,584 4,105 1,316 6,360 2,547 27.2 76.9 24.6 73.1 29.3 Liberal Democrat 1,374,162 3,546 1,151 5,140 1,892 24.6 66.4 21.6 59.1 21.7 Independent 542,967 1,415 743 1,750 978 9.7 26.5 13.9 20.1 11.2 Green 41,988 248 13 294 17 0.8 4.6 0.2 3.4 0.2 Other 70,180 238 54 320 93 1.3 4.5 1.0 3.7 1.1 Total 5,597,397 5,341 5,341 8,699 8,699 Scottish Unitary Councils Votes/ Wards Wards Seats Seats %share Contested Won Contested Won Conservative 308,170 727 108 727 108 13.5 59.5 8.8 59.5 8.8 Labour 829,921 978 550 978 550 36.3 80.0 45.0 80.0 45.0 Liberal Democrat 289,236 609 156 609 156 12.7 49.8 12.8 49.8 12.8 SNP 655,299 1,058 204 1,058 204 28.7 86.6 16.7 86.6 16.7 Independent 172,297 337 195 337 195 7.5 27.6 16.0 27.6 16.0 Green 80 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 Other 30,342 111 9 111 9 1.3 9.1 0.7 9.1 0.7 Total 2,285,345 1,222 1,222 1,222 1,222 vii Table 1 contd. Welsh Unitary Councils Votes/ Wards Wards Seats Seats %share Contested Won Contested Won Conservative 99,565 225 50 333 75 10.1 25.9 5.7 26.2 5.9 Labour 338,470 612 326 966 563 34.4 70.3 37.5 76.1 44.3 Liberal Democrat 132,091 316 69 417 98 13.4 36.3 7.9 32.8 7.7 Plaid Cymru 179,212 350 140 447 205 18.2 40.2 16.1 35.2 16.1 Independent 187,345 415 264 465 295 19.1 47.7 30.3 36.6 23.2 Green 8,328 29 1 31 1 0.8 3.3 0.1 2.4 0.1 Other 37,788 75 20 105 33 3.8 8.6 2.3 8.3 2.6 Total 982,799 870 870 1,270 1,270 Table 1 provides an overview of the results as well as summarising the position for the different types of local authorities holding elections this year.
Recommended publications
  • Your Conservative Team Cliffs Ward

    Your Conservative Team Cliffs Ward

    REAL RESULTS FOR CANFORD YOUR CONSERVATIVE TEAM CLIFFS WARD May Haines Mohan Iyengar [email protected] [email protected] 07825 018078 07887 684174 HAINES, May May Haines was first elected in 2007. Previously she Mohan Iyengar was first elected in 2015. He has X worked in finance and banking. She has been Chair- lived in Poole for 18 years, is married to Tracey and The Conservative Party man and Vice Chairman of the Resources Committee has three teenage daughters. His previous career and Audit Committee. As Cabinet Member for spanned 28 years as a stockbroker, general IYENGAR, Mohan Finance, May oversaw the setting of three balanced manager with British Airways, and consultant with budgets despite the austerity challenges. PwC, IBM and Deloitte. The Conservative Party X May lives locally, and is passionate about the area. Mohan played a pivotal role in setting up the Canford She was instrumental in securing an extension to the Cliffs business forum - which recently secured £50k Branksome Park Conservation Area in funding to improve the look and feel of The Village. OUR LOCAL RECORD OUR LOCAL PROMISES CONSERVATIVES DELIVERING FOR YOU SANDBANKS PLAY AREA ● SUPPORTING RESIDENTS ● Major resurfacing of Lindsay/Ravine Rds ● Deliver continuing improvements to our May and Mohan successfully protected the much roads, paths, beaches and huts ON PLANNING MATTERS, TACKLING LONELI- loved Sandbanks play area. As well as safeguarding New pedestrian crossings in Lindsay and NESS AND ISOLATION, AND A 20MPH ZONE ● the popular facility, they have also secured its recent ● Work with local residents to combat Shore Roads, and The Village refurbishment along with landscaping improvements.
  • BH13 Local Area Guide – Branksome Park, Canford Cliffs, Penn Hill, Sandbanks, Westbourne & West Cliff

    BH13 Local Area Guide – Branksome Park, Canford Cliffs, Penn Hill, Sandbanks, Westbourne & West Cliff

    Local Area Guide Purbeck & Poole Local Area Guide – BH13 – Written by Sharon Westman Branksome Park, Canford Cliffs, Penn Hill, Sandbanks, Westbourne and West Cliff Welcome BH13 6 and BH13 7 cover the areas of Poole, including Branksome Park, Canford Cliffs, Penn Hill, Sandbanks, Westbourne and West Cliff. It is a delightful area, boasting beautiful beaches, tree lined streets, good local shops and restaurants, a bustling and thriving community. We hope that this guide helps you to get to know the area a little better, and also that it can help support the local businesses in your community. Contents • Area Map • Tried & tested - places we can recommend personally • Essential shops • Health and Emergency Contacts • Council Information • Transport & Car Parks • Education • Hair & Beauty • Food & Drink • Recreation (Open spaces, Play areas, Cinemas, Garden centre, Brownsea Island, Sports and Leisure, Village Hall • Services Sharon & Iain Westman Purbeck & Poole Branch 01929 450358 [email protected] This guide will be kept as up to date as possible, but sometimes places will close or they may change websites and links etc. that we may not always notice, so if you ever see anything that we have missed, please feel free to let us know. Local Area Guide – BH13 – Written by Sharon Westman Branksome Park, Canford Cliffs, Penn Hill, Sandbanks, Westbourne and West Cliff BH13 AREA MAP, BH13 6 & BH13 7 Local Area Guide – BH13 – Written by Sharon Westman Branksome Park, Canford Cliffs, Penn Hill, Sandbanks, Westbourne and West Cliff TRIED & TESTED DUNE Hairdresser - 29 Haven Road, Canford Cliffs, BH13 7LE - 01202 706661 When I moved to the area it was important for me to find a new hairdresser.
  • Parliamentary Debates (Hansard)

    Parliamentary Debates (Hansard)

    Tuesday Volume 512 29 June 2010 No. 23 HOUSE OF COMMONS OFFICIAL REPORT PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES (HANSARD) Tuesday 29 June 2010 £5·00 © Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons 2010 This publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Parliamentary Click-Use Licence, available online through the Office of Public Sector Information website at www.opsi.gov.uk/click-use/ Enquiries to the Office of Public Sector Information, Kew, Richmond, Surrey TW9 4DU; e-mail: [email protected] 697 29 JUNE 2010 698 almost identical to the chances in the rest of Europe. House of Commons Does the Secretary of State therefore believe that a one-year survival indicator is a good idea both for Tuesday 29 June 2010 encouraging early diagnosis and for matching the survival rates of the best in Europe? The House met at half-past Two o’clock Mr Lansley: My hon. Friend makes an extremely good point. When we set out proposals for an outcomes PRAYERS framework, I hope that he and others will respond, because that is one of the ways in which we can best identify how late detection of cancer is leading to very [MR SPEAKER in the Chair] poor levels of survival to one year. I hope that we can think about that as one of the quality indicators that we shall establish. Oral Answers to Questions Diana R. Johnson (Kingston upon Hull North) (Lab): I welcome the Secretary of State to his new position and wish him well in his role. I understand that he is keeping HEALTH the two-week target for seeing a cancer specialist, but abandoning the work that the Labour Government did on the one-week target for access to diagnostic testing.
  • Proposed Free School – Opening September 2018 Report on Section 10 Public Consultation 9Th June 2017-8Th September 2017

    Proposed Free School – Opening September 2018 Report on Section 10 Public Consultation 9Th June 2017-8Th September 2017

    Laurus Ryecroft Proposed free school – opening September 2018 Report on Section 10 public consultation th th 9 June 2017-8 September 2017 laurustrust.co.uk 4 October 17 Page 1 of 21 Contents Executive summary ............................................................................................................... 3 The proposer group ............................................................................................................... 4 Initial phase ........................................................................................................................... 4 Statutory consultation ............................................................................................................ 6 Stakeholders ......................................................................................................................... 7 Statutory consultation results and responses ........................................................................ 9 Other responses to the consultation .................................................................................... 18 Conclusion and next steps .................................................................................................. 21 Appendices: Appendix 1 – Section 10 consultation information booklet Appendix 2 – Consultation questionnaire Appendix 3 – Promotional material Appendix 4 – Stakeholders laurustrust.co.uk 4 October 17 Page 2 of 21 Executive summary Laurus Ryecroft is a non-selective, non-denominational 11-18 secondary school in the pre-opening
  • Canford Cliffs Produced by the Corporate Research Team, Borough of Poole – Mar 2016

    Canford Cliffs Produced by the Corporate Research Team, Borough of Poole – Mar 2016

    Ward Profile – Canford Cliffs Produced by the Corporate Research Team, Borough of Poole – Mar 2016 Ward Profile – Canford Cliffs 1 Purpose of this profile The ward profiles provide an ongoing information update on social and economic data for all of Poole’s sixteen wards. Each profile compares against average Poole figures. As far as possible the statistical information within this document is the most recently available at the time. Data sources are identified for each chart and table. These profiles use data from the 2011 Census however more in-depth Census Ward profiles were produced by the Corporate Research Team in August 2013. Please go to www.boroughofpoole.com/2011census for more information on the 2011 Census. Ward boundaries were changed slightly in 2014. These profiles are based on boundaries prior to this date. New profiles will be prepared for the new ward boundaries in due course. Overview Canford Cliffs Ward is located in the south east of Poole and shares boundaries Branksome East, Branksome West and Penn Hill. The residential area of Branksome Park (also a conservation area) makes up the majority of this ward with Canford Cliffs located to the south west and Sandbanks in the south. Branksome Park Wood, and Branksome Chine Gardens run down the centre of the ward, and Branksome Dene Chine gardens are located in the east of the ward. Sandbanks, Poole’s blue flag award winning beach is located in the south of the ward. Retail facilities are located along the northern boundary (North Road) and in the south (Haven road). There are no doctor’s surgeries or dentists located within the ward, however, a dentist is located within 250 metres of the boundary in Penn Hill, and there are several doctors’ surgeries in neighbouring Branksome West and Penn Hill Wards.
  • Parliamentary Debates (Hansard)

    Parliamentary Debates (Hansard)

    Tuesday Volume 553 20 November 2012 No. 71 HOUSE OF COMMONS OFFICIAL REPORT PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES (HANSARD) Tuesday 20 November 2012 £5·00 © Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons 2012 This publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Open Parliament licence, which is published at www.parliament.uk/site-information/copyright/. 421 20 NOVEMBER 2012 422 Mr Andrew Turner (Isle of Wight) (Con): Two weeks House of Commons ago, the Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office, my hon. Friend the Member for Norwich North (Miss Tuesday 20 November 2012 Smith), gave evidence to the Political and Constitutional Reform Committee, and said that political and constitutional reforms were worth while only when The House met at half-past Eleven o’clock there was a public appetite for them. Does the Deputy Prime Minister think there is a public appetite for any PRAYERS of the proposals he has just mentioned? The Deputy Prime Minister: Clearly, the priority for [MR SPEAKER in the Chair] all of us is to repair, rescue and reform the damaged British economy—the legacy left to us by Labour—but BUSINESS BEFORE QUESTIONS I have always been of the view that that does not mean that the Government cannot do more than two things at CITY OF LONDON (VARIOUS POWERS)BILL [LORDS] once. Those things could include mayoral elections, (BY ORDER) police and crime commissioner elections—which I know Second Reading opposed and deferred until Tuesday are close to the heart of the hon. Gentleman’s party—or 27 November (Standing Order No. 20). other political reform enthusiasms shared by my party.
  • 71 Creekmoor Lane Creekmoor Poole BH17 7BW Price Guide £250000

    71 Creekmoor Lane Creekmoor Poole BH17 7BW Price Guide £250000

    71 Creekmoor Lane Creekmoor Poole BH17 7BW Price Guide £250,000 - £255,000 Freehold A TWO DOUBLE BEDROOM DETACHED BUNGALOW SITUATED IN A POPULAR RESIDENTIAL LOCATION WITHIN EASY ACCESS OF LOCAL SHOPS 71 CREEKMOOR LANE, CREEKMOOR, POOLE. 2/ 71 CREEKMOOR LANE, CREEKMOOR, POOLE. 3/ ∗ ENTRANCE HALLWAY ∗ LOUNGE/DINING ROOM 21’11” (MAXIMUM) x 13’2” (MAXIMUM) ∗ SEPARATE DINING ROOM 10’1” x 9’9” ∗ MODERN FITTED KITCHEN 10’6” x 7’ ∗ CONSERVATORY/UTILITY ROOM 8’6” x 7’7” ∗ MASTER BEDROOM 10’1” (EXCLUDING BAY) x 9’9” ∗ GUEST BEDROOM 10’1” (EXCLUDING BAY) x 9’9” ∗ FAMILY BATHROOM 9’3” x 5’4” ∗ OFF ROAD PARKING ∗ GOOD SIZE REAR GARDEN ∗ GAS FIRED CENTRAL HEATING ∗ UPVC DOUBLE GLAZED 71 CREEKMOOR LANE, CREEKMOOR, POOLE. 4/ 71 CREEKMOOR LANE, CREEKMOOR, POOLE. 5/ 71 CREEKMOOR LANE, CREEKMOOR, POOLE. 6/ 71 CREEKMOOR LANE, CREEKMOOR, POOLE. 7/ ABOUT THIS PROPERTY A double glazed frosted front door with matching side screen gives access to the small entrance porch which in turn via a timber glazed door leads into the entrance hallway which has wood effect flooring and loft access via a hatch. The spacious lounge/dining room has TV point, telephone point and sliding patio doors to the rear garden. The separate dining room has partially frosted window to side aspect, wall mounted boiler and access in to the modern kitchen which has a range of wall and floor mounted cupboards, roll top work surfaces, nest of four drawers, single sink with drainer and mixer tap, integrated appliances include oven, four ring hob and extractor fan over.
  • Borough of Poole Unitary Authority Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment

    Borough of Poole Unitary Authority Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment

    APPENDIX 1 Borough of Poole Unitary Authority Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment Draft Final Report v3 June 2011 1. Executive Summary This report has been prepared to assist Borough of Poole in meeting their duties to manage local flood risk and deliver the requirements of the Flood Risk Regulations (2009). The Borough of Poole, as a unitary authority, is defined as a lead local flood authority (LLFA) within the regulations. This report represents the first stage of the requirements set out in the regulations. The Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment (PFRA) process is aimed at providing a high level overview of flood risk from local sources, primarily flooding from surface water, groundwater and ordinary watercourses. Flooding associated with the sea, main rivers and reservoirs is the responsibility of the Environment Agency and does not need to be considered as part of this report. The completed PFRA report must be submitted by Borough of Poole to the Environment Agency for review by 22 June 2011. The PFRA has been produced based on the Environment Agency‟s Final PFRA Guidance and Defra‟s Guidance on selecting Flood Risk Areas, both published in December 2010. Using the national methodology set by Defra, the Environment Agency identified indicative Flood Risk Areas across England. Of the ten areas identified, none of these fall within the Borough of Poole. This simply means that parts of the PFRA mandatory documentation is not applicable to Poole and therefore will not require completion. In order to gain a clearer understanding of the flood risk across the Borough of Poole, flood risk data and historic flood events were collected from local and national sources, the Environment Agency, water companies, emergency services and other risk management authorities.
  • Submission to the Boundary Commission for England 2013 Review North West Region Greater Manchester and Lancashire

    Submission to the Boundary Commission for England 2013 Review North West Region Greater Manchester and Lancashire

    Submission to the Boundary Commission for England 2013 Review North West Region Greater Manchester and Lancashire Andrew Teale December 4, 2011 Abstract This submission disagrees with and presents a counter-proposal to the Boundary Commission for England’s proposals for new parliamentary con- stituency boundaries in Greater Manchester and Lancashire. The counter- proposal allocates seven whole constituencies to the boroughs of Stockport, Tameside and Oldham, nine whole constituencies to the boroughs of Man- chester, Salford and Trafford, and twenty-four whole constituencies to the rest of the region. No comment is made on the Boundary Commission’s proposals for the rest of the North West region or for any other region. Contents 1 Introduction2 1.1 The statutory criteria.........................2 1.2 Splitting of wards...........................3 2 Theoretical entitlements4 3 Southern Greater Manchester5 3.1 Manchester, Salford and Trafford..................5 3.2 Oldham, Stockport and Tameside.................. 10 4 Lancashire and Northern Greater Manchester 14 4.1 Crossing the boundary between Greater Manchester and Lancashire 16 4.2 Rochdale................................ 17 4.3 Bolton, Bury, Wigan and Rossendale................ 18 4.4 South Lancashire........................... 22 4.5 East Lancashire............................ 23 4.6 North Lancashire........................... 24 4.7 Summary................................ 25 5 Closing remarks 28 1 1 Introduction This document is my submission to the 2013 Review of Parliamentary constit- uency boundaries. I should first introduce myself. I am the editor and webmaster of the Lo- cal Elections Archive Project (http://www.andrewteale.me.uk/leap/), the in- ternet’s largest freely available collection of British local election results. I have been for some years a contributor to election-related web forums, and this submission is based on material originally posted on the Vote UK forum (http://www.vote-2007.co.uk/) and in some cases modified in the light of comments made.
  • Tameside Locality Assessments GMSF 2020

    Tameside Locality Assessments GMSF 2020

    November 2020 Transport Locality Assessments Introductory Note and Assessments – Tameside allocations GMSF 2020 Table of contents 1. Background 2 1.1 Greater Manchester Spatial Framework (GMSF) 2 1.2 Policy Context – The National Planning Policy Framework 3 1.3 Policy Context – Greater Manchester Transport Strategy 2040 5 1.4 Structure of this Note 9 2. Site Selection 10 2.1 The Process 10 2.2 Greater Manchester Accessibility Levels 13 3. Approach to Strategic Modelling 15 4. Approach to Technical Analysis 17 4.1 Background 17 4.2 Approach to identifying Public Transport schemes 18 4.3 Mitigations and Scheme Development 19 5. Conclusion 23 6. GMSF Allocations List 24 Appendix A - GMA38 Ashton Moss West Locality Assessment A1 Appendix B - GMA39 Godley Green Garden Village Locality Assessment B1 Appendix C - GMA40 Land South of Hyde Locality Assessment C1 1 1. Background 1.1 Greater Manchester Spatial Framework (GMSF) 1.1.1 The GMSF is a joint plan of all ten local authorities in Greater Manchester, providing a spatial interpretation of the Greater Manchester Strategy which will set out how Greater Manchester should develop over the next two decades up to the year 2037. It will: ⚫ identify the amount of new development that will come forward across the 10 Local Authorities, in terms of housing, offices, and industry and warehousing, and the main areas in which this will be focused; ⚫ ensure we have an appropriate supply of land to meet this need; ⚫ protect the important environmental assets across the conurbation; ⚫ allocate sites for employment and housing outside of the urban area; ⚫ support the delivery of key infrastructure, such as transport and utilities; ⚫ define a new Green Belt boundary for Greater Manchester.
  • Boundary Review 2013 England Secondary Consultation

    Boundary Review 2013 England Secondary Consultation

    Boundary Review 2013 England Secondary Consultation Submission of the Labour Party Page 1 of 50 1) General Points a) Submission This submission is made on behalf of the Labour Party and the nine regional Labour parties within England. The submission represents the Labour’s Party’s response to the representations made to the Commission, both orally at the public hearings and in writing during the Initial Consultation Period and published by the Commission on 6 March 2012. The Labour Party made a detailed formal submission of its own which included a number of counter proposals. We have now considered the options further in each region, including those counter proposals submitted by others. We will refer to them in this response. While we are not formally amending our submission we will indicate those points and proposals with which we agree, and those with which we disagree. b) Factors to be considered In assessing the merits of different proposals we will as far as possible be guided by the stipulations of Clause 5 (1) of Schedule 2 to the Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Act 2011 which lays down the rules by which the Commission shall conduct the review. Under the terms of the Act1, the Commission may, in choosing between different schemes, take into account i) Special Geographical Circumstances, including the size shape and accessibility of a constituency ii) Local government boundaries iii) The boundaries of existing constituencies iv) Any local ties that would be broken by changes to constituencies 1 Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Act 2011, Schedule 2 Clause 5 (1).
  • COUNCIL 25 May 2021 Present: Councillors Kitchen (Chair), Affleck

    COUNCIL 25 May 2021 Present: Councillors Kitchen (Chair), Affleck

    COUNCIL 25 May 2021 Present: Councillors Kitchen (Chair), Affleck, Alam, Billington, Bowden, Bowerman, Boyle, Bray, Cartey, Chadwick, Choksi, Cooney, Cooper, Costello, Dickinson, Drennan, Fairfoull, Feeley, J Fitzpatrick, P Fitzpatrick, Glover, Gosling Gwynne, A Holland, B Holland, J Homer, S Homer, Huntbach, Jackson, Jones, Lane, Lewis, McNally, Martin, Mills, Naylor, Newton, North, Owen, Patel, Patrick, Pearce, Quinn, Reid, Ricci, Robinson, Ryan, N Sharif, T Sharif, M Smith, T Smith, Sweeton, Taylor, Ward, Warrington, R Welsh and Wills 1 ELECTION OF CIVIC MAYOR It was moved by Councillor Owen, seconded by Councillor Fairfoull and RESOLVED That Councillor Janet Cooper, be and is hereby elected Civic Mayor of the Metropolitan Borough of Tameside for the ensuing Municipal Year 2 ELECTION OF DEPUTY MAYOR It was moved by Councillor Choksi, seconded by Councillor Lewis and RESOLVED That Councillor Glover be and is hereby appointed Deputy Mayor of the Metropolitan Borough of Tameside for the ensuing Municipal Year 3. APPOINTMENT OF CHAIR OF COUNCIL BUSINESS It was moved by Councillor Warrington, seconded by Councillor Fairfoull and RESOLVED That Councillor Kitchen be appointed Chair of Council Business for the Municipal Year 2021/22. 4. DECLARATION OF INTEREST There were no declarations of interest. 5. COUNCIL MINUTES Consideration was given to the minutes of the meeting of Council held on 23 February 2021. RESOLVED That the Minutes of the meeting of Council held on 23 February 2021 be signed by the Chair of Council Business as a correct record. 6. ELECTION OF COUNCILLORS A report of the Returning Officer was received detailing the persons elected to the office of Councillor for the Wards of the Borough For details see Appendix A to the minutes.