DOCSLIB.ORG

Boundary Commission for England Fifth Periodical Report Cm 7032

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Boundary Commission for England Fifth Periodical Report Cm 7032 BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR ENGLAND Fifth Periodical Report Presented to Parliament pursuant to section 3(5) of the Parliamentary Constituencies Act 1986 Volume 1 Report Cm 7032 £120.00 Four Volumes. Not to be sold separately BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR ENGLAND Fifth Periodical Report Presented to Parliament pursuant to section 3(5) of the Parliamentary Constituencies Act 1986 Volume 1 Report Cm 7032 £120.00 Four Volumes. London: The Stationery Office Not to be sold separately © Crown Copyright 2007 The text in this document (excluding the Royal Arms and departmental logos) may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium providing that it is reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledged as Crown copyright and the title of the document specified. Any enquiries relating to the copyright in this document should be addressed to The Licensing Division, HMSO, St Clements House, 2-16 Colegate, Norwich, NR3 1BQ. Fax: 01603 723000 or e-mail: [email protected] CONSTITUTION OF THE COMMISSION In accordance with Schedule 1 of the Parliamentary Constituencies Act 1986 (as amended), the Commission was constituted as follows:- Ex-officio Member The Speaker of the House of Commons - Chairman Three other Members The Honourable Mr Justice Sullivan - Deputy Chairman appointed by the Lord Chancellor Mr Michael Lewer, CBE, QC - appointed by the Deputy Prime Minister Mr Robin Gray - appointed by the Deputy Prime Minister Assessors The Registrar General for England and Wales The Director General of Ordnance Survey Secretary Mr Robert Farrance of the Office for National Statistics Joint Secretary Mr Tony Bellringer of the Department for Constitutional Affairs i CONTENTS VOLUME 1 Page Chapter One Introduction 1 Commencement of the General Review 1 Reviews of Local Government 2 Information to the Public 3 Discussion with the Political Parties 4 Data Sources 4 Chapter Two General Principles 6 Electoral Quota 6 Theoretical Entitlement to Constituencies 7 County and Borough Averages 8 Number of Constituencies 8 Local Government Boundary Changes 11 Number of Electors 12 County and London Borough Boundaries 13 Districts 14 Wards 14 Special Geographical Considerations 15 Growth or Decline in Electorates 16 Rolling Registration 16 Local Ties 17 Local Inquiries 17 Second Inquiries 18 Assistant Commissioners’ Reports 19 Participation 19 Names of Constituencies 20 Designations 21 Chapter Three THE LONDON BOROUGHS Part One General Considerations Introduction 22 The electorates and theoretical entitlement to constituencies of the London boroughs 22 Rule 4 - London borough boundaries 24 Rule 5 - Constituency Electorates 26 Rule 1 - Number of Constituencies 27 Rule 7 - Local Ties 28 Local Inquiries 28 Conclusion 28 ii Page Part Two Description of the Reviews Barking and Dagenham and Havering 30 Barnet 36 Bexley and Greenwich 38 Brent, Camden, and Westminster (and the City of London) 42 Bromley and Lewisham 52 Camden (see Brent) Croydon 58 Ealing 60 Enfield 64 Greenwich (see Bexley) Hackney, Islington, Newham and Tower Hamlets 68 Hammersmith and Fulham and Kensington and Chelsea 76 Haringey 81 Harrow and Hillingdon 83 Havering (see Barking and Dagenham) Hillingdon (see Harrow) Hounslow 89 Islington (see Hackney) Kensington and Chelsea (see Hammersmith and Fulham) Kingston upon Thames and Richmond upon Thames 92 Lambeth and Southwark 94 Lewisham (see Bromley) Merton 98 Newham (see Hackney) Redbridge and Waltham Forest 100 Richmond upon Thames (see Kingston upon Thames) Southwark (see Lambeth) Sutton 104 Tower Hamlets (see Hackney) Waltham Forest (see Redbridge) Wandsworth 106 Westminster (and the City of London) (see Brent) Chapter Four THE METROPOLITAN COUNTIES Part One General Considerations Rule 4 – Metropolitan County Boundaries 109 Metropolitan Borough Boundaries 109 Theoretical entitlement to constituencies in the Metropolitan Counties 109 Rule 1 – Number of Constituencies 109 Local inquiries 111 Rule 5 – Constituency electorates 112 Part Two Description of the Reviews Greater Manchester:- 115 Bolton and Wigan 116 Bury 117 Manchester, Salford and Trafford 118 Oldham, Rochdale and Tameside 120 Stockport 121 iii Page Merseyside:- 132 Knowsley, Liverpool, and Wirral 133 Sefton 134 St Helens 134 South Yorkshire:- 145 Barnsley, Rotherham and Sheffield 146 Doncaster 147 Tyne and Wear:- 155 Gateshead and South Tyneside 156 Newcastle upon Tyne and North Tyneside 159 Sunderland 163 West Midlands:- 167 Birmingham 168 Coventry 177 Dudley, Sandwell and Wolverhampton 178 Solihull 182 Walsall 183 West Yorkshire:- 185 Bradford 186 Calderdale 188 Kirklees 189 Leeds and Wakefield 190 Chapter Five THE NON-METROPOLITAN COUNTIES Part One General Considerations Introduction 204 Rule 4 - County Boundaries 206 Rule 1 - Number of Constituencies 208 Rule 5 - Constituency Electorates 208 Local Inquiries 209 Part Two Description of the Reviews Bath and North East Somerset 210 Bedfordshire and Luton 213 Berkshire 218 Blackburn with Darwen (see Lancashire) Blackpool (see Lancashire) Bournemouth (see Dorset) Brighton and Hove (see East Sussex) Bristol 225 Buckinghamshire 229 Cambridgeshire and Peterborough 233 iv Page Cheshire and Halton 239 Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly 245 Cumbria 253 Darlington (see Durham) Derby (see Derbyshire) Derbyshire and Derby 261 Devon, Plymouth and Torbay 271 Dorset, Bournemouth and Poole 280 Durham and Darlington 286 East Riding of Yorkshire, Kingston upon Hull, North East Lincolnshire and North Lincolnshire 290 East Sussex and Brighton and Hove 295 Essex, Southend-on-Sea and Thurrock 301 Gloucestershire 313 Halton (see Cheshire) Hampshire and Southampton 318 Hartlepool, Middlesbrough, Redcar and Cleveland, and Stockton-on-Tees 326 Herefordshire 331 Hertfordshire 335 Isle of Wight 340 Kent and Medway 342 Kingston upon Hull (see East Riding of Yorkshire) Lancashire, Blackburn with Darwen and Blackpool 354 Leicester 365 Leicestershire and Rutland 368 Lincolnshire 372 Luton (see Bedfordshire) Medway (see Kent) Middlesbrough (see Hartlepool) Milton Keynes 378 Norfolk 381 Northamptonshire 389 North East Lincolnshire (see East Riding of Yorkshire) North Lincolnshire (see East Riding of Yorkshire) North Somerset 394 Northumberland 396 North Yorkshire 399 Nottingham 405 Nottinghamshire 408 Oxfordshire 414 Peterborough (see Cambridgeshire) Plymouth (see Devon) Poole (see Dorset) Portsmouth 420 Redcar and Cleveland (see Hartlepool) Rutland (see Leicestershire) Shropshire and Telford and Wrekin 422 Somerset 424 Southampton (see Hampshire) Southend-on-Sea (see Essex) South Gloucestershire 428 v Page Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent 433 Stockton-on-Tees (see Hartlepool) Stoke-on-Trent (see Staffordshire) Suffolk 443 Surrey 447 Swindon 451 Telford and Wrekin (see Shropshire) Thurrock (see Essex) Torbay (see Devon) Warrington 453 Warwickshire 456 West Sussex 462 Wiltshire 466 Worcestershire 472 York 476 Chapter Six The need for change 480 Deviation from the Electoral Quota 480 Disparity in the constituency electorates 483 Applying the Rules 483 Difficulties in applying the Rules 485 The representation period 486 The need for legislative change 487 Assessors 487 Secretariat 488 Commission membership 488 Recommendation 489 VOLUME 2 Appendices A Rules for redistribution of seats B List of statutory instruments C Schedule of recommendations D Meeting with parliamentary political parties E Newsletters F Existing constituencies – the number of parliamentary electors in 2000 and 2006 G Recommended constituencies:- i) in alphabetical order with parliamentary electors in 2000 and 2006 ii) in descending order of parliamentary electors in 2000 and 2006 H The number of parliamentary electors, the theoretical entitlements, and county and borough averages in 2000 and 2006 I Local inquiries held during the general review J Dates on which the provisional and revised recommendations were published K The Commission’s Secretariat L Glossary of terms vi VOLUME 3 Maps of the existing and recommended constituencies in the London boroughs and Metropolitan counties VOLUME 4 Maps of the existing and recommended constituencies in the Non- Metropolitan counties vii Boundary Commission for England Report on the Fifth General Review of Parliamentary Constituencies under the Parliamentary Constituencies Act 1986, as amended by the Boundary Commissions Act 1992 CHAPTER ONE The Right Honourable Lord Falconer of Thoroton, QC Her Majesty’s Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs Sir, Introduction 1.1 We, the Boundary Commission for England, constituted in accordance with the Parliamentary Constituencies Act 1986, as amended by the Boundary Commissions Act 1992, are required to keep the representation of England in the House of Commons under continuous review and periodically report to the Secretary of State. In reviewing the Parliamentary constituencies and making recommendations, we are required to give effect to the Rules for Redistribution of Seats which form Schedule 2 to the 1986 Act. The Rules are reproduced at Appendix A in Volume 2 of this report. 1.2 Our previous report on a general review (Cmnd 433-i) recommended 529 constituencies and was submitted on 12 April 1995. The recommendations were given effect by Order in Council made on 28 June 1995 (SI 1995 No.1626). Following that general review, two interim reviews were undertaken under Section 3(3) of the 1986 Act recommending alterations to constituency boundaries. The Orders in Council making these alterations are listed in Appendix B in Volume
Load more

Recommended publications
  • F!13Il-.-.; A:: It: Identification of Littoral Cells
    Journal of Coastal Research 381-400 Fort Lauderdale, Florida Spring 1995 Littoral Cell Definition and Budgets for Central Southern England Malcolm J. Bray, David J. Carter and Janet M. Hooke Department of Geography University of Portsmouth Portsmouth, POI 3HE, England ABSTRACT . BRAY, M.J.; CARTER, D.J., and HOOKE, J.M., 1995. Littoral cell definition and budgets for central southern England. Journal of Coastal Research, 11(2),381-400. Fort Lauderdale (Florida), ISSN 0749­ ,tllllllll,.e 0208. Differentiation of natural process units is promoted as a means of better understanding the interconnected . ~ ~ - nature of coastal systems at various scales. This paper presents a new holistic methodology for the f!13Il-.-.; a:: it: identification of littoral cells. Testing is undertaken through application to an extensive region of central ... bJLt southern England. Diverse sources of information are compiled to map 8. detailed series of local sediment circulations both at the shoreline and in the offshore zone. Cells and sub-cells are subsequently defined by thorough examination of the continuity of sediment transport pathways and by identification of boundaries where there are discontinuities. Important distinctions are made between the nature and stability of different boundaries and a classification of types is devised. Application of sediment budget analysis to major process units helps to clarify the regional significance of different sediment sources, stores and sinks. Within the study area, it is shown that sediments circulate from distinct eroding cliff sources to well defined sinks. Natural beaches are transient and dependent upon the continued functioning of supply pathways from cliff sources. Relict cells with residual circulations are identified as a consequence of interference.
    [Show full text]
  • Community Infrastructure Levy
    WINCHESTER CITY COUNCIL COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE LEVY INFRASTRUCTURE STATEMENT July 2013 Infrastructure Statement Introduction The Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 (as amended) require the City Council to submit “copies of the relevant evidence” to the examiner. The purpose of this statement is to set out the City Council’s evidence with regard to the demonstration of an infrastructure funding gap, confirmation of the Council’s spending priorities (the draft list), and clarification of its approach in respect of S106 contributions. The City Council is also seeking to comply with the Government’s Community Infrastructure Levy Guidance (April 2013) which sets out the more detailed requirements in respect of the funding gap at paragraphs 12 -14, and of the prioritisation and funding of infrastructure at paragraphs at 84 - 91. In respect of the latter, the principal aim of this statement is to provide transparency on what the Council, as a charging authority, intends to fund in whole or in part through the levy, and those known matters where S106 contributions may continue to be sought (CIL Guidance, paragraph 15). Infrastructure Funding Gap The Government’s CIL Guidance states: • “A charging authority needs to identify the total cost of infrastructure that it desires to fund in whole or in part from the levy” (paragraph 12); • “Information on the charging authority area’s infrastructure needs should be directly related to the infrastructure assessment that underpins their relevant plan.” (paragraph. 13); • “In determining the size of its total or aggregate infrastructure funding gap, the charging authority should consider known and expected infrastructure costs and the other sources of possible funding available to meet those costs.” (paragraph 14).
    [Show full text]
  • The Leigh Parish Neighbourhood Development Plan 2020-2036
    Regulation 14 draft for consultation January 2021 The Leigh Parish Neighbourhood Development Plan 2020-2036 The Leigh Neighbourhood Development Plan Regulation 14 Draft, January 2021 2 The Leigh Neighbourhood Development Plan Regulation 14 Draft, January 2021 Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 5 The Leigh Parish Neighbourhood Development Plan ............................................................................. 5 Neighbourhood Plan Area and Period .................................................................................................... 7 Background to The Leigh and the NDP ................................................................................................... 9 Flooding................................................................................................................................................. 10 Demographic profile ............................................................................................................................. 16 Parish Aspirations ................................................................................................................................. 16 Community Action Point ....................................................................................................................... 17 The Development Plan .........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • ORTHODONTIC COMMISSIONING INTENTIONS (Final - Sept 2018)
    CUMBRIA & NORTH EAST - ORTHODONTIC COMMISSIONING INTENTIONS (Final - Sept 2018) Contract size Contract Size Units of Indicative Name of Contract Lot Required premise(s) locaton for contract Orthodontic Activity patient (UOAs) numbers Durham Central Accessible location(s) within Central Durham (ie Neville's Cross/Elvet/Gilesgate) 14,100 627 Durham North West Accessible location(s) within North West Durham (ie Stanley/Tanfield/Consett North) 8,000 356 Bishop Auckland Accessible location(s) within Bishop Auckland 10,000 444 Darlington Accessible location(s) within the Borough of Darlington 9,000 400 Hartlepool Accessible location(s) within the Borough of Hartlepool 8,500 378 Middlesbrough Accessible location(s) within the Borough of Middlesbrough 10,700 476 Redcar and Cleveland Accessible location(s) within the Borough of Redcar & Cleveland, (ie wards of Dormanstown, West Dyke, Longbeck or 9,600 427 St Germains) Stockton-on-Tees Accessible location(s) within the Borough of Stockton on Tees) 16,300 724 Gateshead Accessible location(s) within the Borough of Gateshead 10,700 476 South Tyneside Accessible location(s) within the Borough of South Tyneside 7,900 351 Sunderland North Minimum of two sites - 1 x accesible location in Washington, and 1 other, ie Castle, Redhill or Southwick wards 9,000 400 Sunderland South Accessible location(s) South of River Wear (City Centre location, ie Millfield, Hendon, St Michael's wards) 16,000 711 Northumberland Central Accessible location(s) within Central Northumberland, ie Ashington. 9,000 400 Northumberland
    [Show full text]
  • Various Roads, Churchdown, Tewkesbury Borough) (Variation) Order 2020
    GLOUCESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL ON STREET PARKING ORDER 2017 (VARIOUS ROADS, CHURCHDOWN, TEWKESBURY BOROUGH) (VARIATION) ORDER 2020 NOTICE is hereby given that Gloucestershire County Council has made a Variation Order under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, the effect of which would vary the Gloucestershire County Council On Street Parking Order 2017 (the 2017 Order) by introducing the proposed restrictions described in the Schedule below along all/part of the various roads described within Churchdown in the Borough of Tewkesbury, Gloucestershire. THE SCHEDULE No Waiting At Any Time Road Name, Extent Number Craven Drive Along sections on both sides of the carriageway at the junctions of Hazelcroft Road No 42611 (Road No 45719) and Martindale Road (Road No 42612). Martindale Along a section on both sides of the carriageway at its junction with Craven Road Drive (Road No 42611). Road No 42612 Hazelcroft Along a section on both sides of the carriageway at its junction with Craven Road No 45719 Drive (Road No 42611). Station Road Along a section on the western side of the carriageway between its junction Road No 3/80 with Church Road (Road No 3/80) and the Primary School entrance. Along a section on the eastern side of the carriageway close to its junction with Barnhay (Road No 72047) Station Road Road No 3/364 Along a section on both sides of the carriageway at its junction with Pirton Lane (Road No 3/364). Pirton Lane Along sections on the eastern side of the carriageway close to its junction with Road No 3/364 Station Road (Road No 3/364) and Vicarage Close (Road No 47843).
    [Show full text]
  • Local Authority & Airport List.Xlsx
    Airport Consultative SASIG Authority Airport(s) of Interest Airport Link Airport Owner(s) and Shareholders Airport Operator C.E.O or M.D. Committee - YES/NO Majority owner: Regional & City Airports, part of Broadland District Council Norwich International Airport https://www.norwichairport.co.uk/ Norwich Airport Ltd Richard Pace, M.D. Yes the Rigby Group (80.1%). Norwich City Cncl and Norfolk Cty Cncl each own a minority interest. London Luton Airport Buckinghamshire County Council London Luton Airport http://www.london-luton.co.uk/ Luton Borough Council (100%). Operations Ltd. (Abertis Nick Barton, C.E.O. Yes 90% Aena 10%) Heathrow Airport Holdings Ltd (formerly BAA):- Ferrovial-25%; Qatar Holding-20%; Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec-12.62%; Govt. of John Holland-Kaye, Heathrow Airport http://www.heathrow.com/ Singapore Investment Corporation-11.2%; Heathrow Airport Ltd Yes C.E.O. Alinda Capital Partners-11.18%; China Investment Corporation-10%; China Investment Corporation-10% Manchester Airports Group plc (M.A.G.):- Manchester City Council-35.5%; 9 Gtr Ken O'Toole, M.D. Cheshire East Council Manchester Airport http://www.manchesterairport.co.uk/ Manchester Airport plc Yes Manchester authorities-29%; IFM Investors- Manchester Airport 35.5% Cornwall Council Cornwall Airport Newquay http://www.newquaycornwallairport.com/ Cornwall Council (100%) Cornwall Airport Ltd Al Titterington, M.D. Yes Lands End Airport http://www.landsendairport.co.uk/ Isles of Scilly Steamship Company (100%) Lands End Airport Ltd Rob Goldsmith, CEO No http://www.scilly.gov.uk/environment- St Marys Airport, Isles of Scilly Duchy of Cornwall (100%) Theo Leisjer, C.E.
    [Show full text]
  • Borough of Bedford Local Access Forum
    Borough of Bedford Local Access Forum Minutes of meeting held on 17th January 2012 at Committee Room 2, Borough Hall commencing at 6.30pm Members Observers Bob Wallace - Chairman Phill Fox – Bedford Borough Council James Russell – Vice Chairman Simon Fisher – Bedford Borough Council David Mitchell Lizzie Barnicoat – Secretary Nigel Jacobs Apologies Barry Ingram Graham Watson Steve Bunstead David Binns Sarah Hollands Andy Gerrard Mark Egar 1. Welcome by Chairman Bob Wallace welcomed everyone to the meeting, thanking everyone for attending following the rearrangement. 2. Public Questions There were no public questions received, as no members of the public present. 3. Correspondence Received The Secretary detailed the correspondence received between meetings; a number of items had been received from the Eastern Region LAF Coordinator including an invite to the Natural England LAF Conference which the Chairman would be attending. There had also been information regarding Access for all training, Minerals and Waste consultation document, and Huddle training information which would be detailed further during the meeting. There was also correspondence regarding LAF representation on Local Nature Partnerships which also would be discussed during the meeting. Page 1 It was raised if the BoBLAF had received any information on funding for community paths, and discussions around promoting partnership work, it was noted that at present nothing had been received, however, the Secretary to circulate any information if received. The Forum Secretary had made an application to Project Involve which had been denied, those present then discussed how best to ensure information is shared and accessible to the public. It was agreed that in the interim period remaining with the Borough Council website as the access point to be continued with.
    [Show full text]
  • In the Borough of Ashford Prow
    ‘Honey Hill’ and the field boundary where the path no longer follows PROW - IN THE BOROUGH OF ASHFORD the stream, for a distance of 1km. Notice of the makiNg of aN order to temporarily close There is no alternative route. public footpath AU67 iN ashford For detailed enquiries please contact Andrew Hutchinson Contact In the borough of ashford Centre no. 03000 417171 keNt couNty couNcil Or for further details on temporary closures on the Rights of Way Network see: www.kent.gov.uk/prowclosures (public footpath AU67) (prohibitioN of traffic) temporary order 2017 PROW - IN THE BOROUGH OF SWALE Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, Section 14(1), As Amended By The Road Traffic (Temporary Restrictions) Act 1991 Notice of the makiNg of aN order to temporarily close kent county council has made an order the effect of which is to restricted byWays ZSX47, ZSX48 aNd ZSX90 iN the town of temporarily close public footpath AU67, between its junction with sheerNess public footpath AU66 and tQ 9939 4386 from the 13th November In the borough of Swale 2017. keNt couNty couNcil The path will be closed for a maximum of six months, although it is expected that it will reopen before the end of December 2017. (restricted byWays ZSX47, ZSX48 aNd ZSX90) (prohibitioN of traffic) temporary order 2017 The path is closed because works are planned on or near it. Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, Section 14(1), As Amended By The The alternative route is via the tarmac track through Lodge Wood and Road Traffic (Temporary Restrictions) Act 1991 will be signed for the duration of the closure.
    [Show full text]
  • Bedfordshire and Its Boundaries with Buckinghamshire and Cambridge- Shire
    CoPV ort No. 566 B evtew_oiJNpn-Metropol itan Counties COUNTY OF BEDFORDSHR AND ITS BOUNDARIES WITH : BUCKINGHAMSH R t AND CAMBRIDGESHIR LOCAL GOVERNlfEST BOUNDARY COMMISSION f'OIt ENGLAND REPORT NO. LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR ENGLAND CHAIRMAN Mr G J Ellerton CMC MBE DEPUTY CHAIRMAN Mr J G Powell CBE PRICS FSVA Members Professor G E Cherry BA FRTPI PRICE Mr K F J Ennals CB Mr G R Prentice Mrs H R V Sarkany Mr B Scholes OBE THE RT HON NICHOLAS RIDLEY MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE ENVIRONMENT REVIEW OF NON METROPOLITAN COUNTIES THE COUNTY OF BEDFORDSHIRE AND ITS BOUNDARIES WITH BUCKINGHAMSHIRE AND CAMBRIDGE- SHIRE COMMISSION'S FINAL REPORT AND PROPOSALS INTRODUCTION 1. On 26 July 1985 we wrote to Bedfordshire County Council announcing our intention to undertake a review of the County under section 48{1) of the Local Government Act 1972. Copies of the letter were sent to the principal local authorities, and parishes, in Bedfordshire and in the surrounding counties of Buckinghamshire, Cambridgeshire, Hertfordshire and Northamptonshire; to the National and County Associations of Local Councils; to the Members of Parliament with constituency interests and to the headquarters of the main political parties. In addition, copies were sent to those government departments, regional health authorities, water authorities, and electricity and gas boards which might have an interest, as well as to British Telecom, the English Tourist Board, the local government press and to local television and radio stations serving the area. 2. The County Councils were requested, in co-operation as necessary with the other local authorities, to assist us in publicising the start of the review by inserting a notice for two successive weeks in local newspapers so as to give a wide coverage in the areas concerned.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix B KENT YOUTH SERVICE
    Appendix B KENT YOUTH SERVICE: NEEDS ANALYSIS AND OUTCOMES FRAMEWORK FOR THE COMMISSIONING OF YOUTH WORK PROVISION IN KENT 1. Introduction 1.1 The publication ‘Bold Steps for Kent’ outlines the medium term plan for Kent County Council for the next four years; one of its three aims is to ‘put the citizen in control’: “power and influence must be in the hands of local people and local communities so they are more able to take responsibility for their own community and service needs, such as creating new social enterprise”. In line with this aim, Kent Youth Service is seeking to commission a range of providers to deliver youth work within local communities. This document lays out the intended outcomes for young people and the communities in which they live as a result of this commissioning process. 2. Service Context 2.1 The Education and Inspections Act 2006 (Section 6) places a duty on local authorities to provide for young people aged 13-19 (and up to 24 for those with learning difficulties and/or disabilities) sufficient recreational and educational leisure time activities and facilities for the improvement of young people’s well-being and their personal and social development. 2.2 The focus on the ages 13-19 reflects the fact that these ages are commonly understood to represent a transition period for young people during which the engagement in positive leisure time activities as described in the Education and Inspection Act 2006 can offer significant benefits to young people. The statutory guidance for this duty states that local authorities should be clear that they are able to secure access to positive activities in order to accommodate individuals with early or delayed transitions.
    [Show full text]
  • Information Pack Dean of International Canterbury Christ Church University - Dean of International
    INFORMATION PACK DEAN OF INTERNATIONAL CANTERBURY CHRIST CHURCH UNIVERSITY - DEAN OF INTERNATIONAL CONTENTS Welcome from the Vice Chancellor 3 About Canterbury Christ Church University 4 Strategic Framework 2015-2020 8 Internationalisation at Christ Church 9 Job Description 10 Person Specification 13 Application Process 15 About the City of Canterbury 16 2 CANTERBURY CHRIST CHURCH UNIVERSITY - DEAN OF INTERNATIONAL WELCOME LETTER Dear Applicant, A Message from the Vice-Chancellor The University has enjoyed substantial growth in student numbers over recent years, and we have developed into a broad-based University offering some 17,000 students a wide range of programmes. As Vice-Chancellor it is my intention to create an environment where the University is an inspiring place to work, where every individual feels able to contribute towards the wider educational and societal mission of the University so that higher education has the potential to transform the lives of individuals and communities. We are seeking to appoint to the role of Dean of Internationalisation an exceptional individual who will make a significant contribution to shaping and delivering the University’s strategic vision, and work closely with me and the senior team to achieve our future aspirations, as outlined in the Strategic Framework. This a key appointment, and the successful individual will need to subcribe to our values and culture of being a supportive, inclusive and student-focused institution striving for excellence in education, research and knowledge exchange. I would like to personally thank you for taking an interest in this role and in Canterbury Christ Church University. Yours faithfully Professor Rama Thirunamachandran Vice-Chancellor & Principal of the University 3 CANTERBURY CHRIST CHURCH UNIVERSITY - DEAN OF INTERNATIONAL ABOUT CANTERBURY CHRIST CHURCH UNIVERSITY Canterbury Christ Church University is a friendly Our network of campuses and centres stretch and vibrant community of over 17,000 students across Kent and Medway, offering undergraduate and some 1,700 staff.
    [Show full text]
  • 02/00866/Min Waste Management Facility
    02/00866/MIN WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITY INCLUDING MATERIALS RECOVERY, COMPOSTING , BIOLOGICAL WASTE TREATMENT, ENERGY RECOVERY, CONTINUED LANDFILL AND ASSOCIATED CLAY EXTRACTION, ACCESS ROAD, VISITOR CENTRE, CAR PARKING, RAIL ACCESS, RAIL SIDINGS, RAIL RECEPTION AREA, RAIL CONTAINER LOADING AND UNLOADING PLANT AND RAIL CONTAINER STORAGE AREA AT Bletchley Landfill Site, Bletchley Road, Newton Longville FOR Shanks Waste Services Limited The Proposal Planning permission is being sought for an Integrated Waste Management Facility to be sited at Bletchley Landfill Site. The proposal includes facilities for materials recovery from waste, buildings for composting and other biological treatment, plant for the recovery of energy from residential waste through thermal treatment, a research and development complex, a visitor centre, continued landfill and associated day working, a new road access connecting to the Stoke Hammond bypass when constructed, offices and car parking, a new rail access and rail reception area comprising a rail spur from the Bletchley to Oxford line, rail sidings and an associated area for container loading, unloading and storage. The Application Site The application site extends to 155 hectares as the development site includes the existing landfill site. The final landform of the landfill site would be altered from that recently given planning permission to enable the proposed waste management facility to be sited at the lowered ground level within the former brick clay pit. The application site straddles the boundary of this authority and Buckinghamshire County Council. The parts of the application comprising the composting facility, the rail reception area and the southern part of the new access road would, therefore, fall to Buckinghamshire County Council to determine.
    [Show full text]