DOCSLIB.ORG

The Determinants of Voter Turnout in English Local Government Elections

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Determinants of Voter Turnout in English Local Government Elections University of Plymouth PEARL https://pearl.plymouth.ac.uk 04 University of Plymouth Research Theses 01 Research Theses Main Collection 1998 THE DETERMINANTS OF VOTER TURNOUT IN ENGLISH LOCAL GOVERNMENT ELECTIONS DOWNE, JAMES DANIEL http://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/1647 University of Plymouth All content in PEARL is protected by copyright law. Author manuscripts are made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the details provided on the item record or document. In the absence of an open licence (e.g. Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher or author. THE DETERMINANTS OF VOTER TURNOUT IN ENGLISH LOCAL GOVERNMENT ELECTIONS by JAMES DANIEL DOWNE A thesis submitted to the University of Plymouth in partial fulfilment for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Politics Faculty of Human Sciences March 1998 LIBRARY STORE REFERENCE ONLY Item No, Soo 3605158 Date 'i JUN 1998 Class No. Conli. I'Jo 90 0360515 8 This copy of the thesis has been supplied on condition that anyone who consults it is understood to recognise thai its copyright rests with its author and that no quotation from the theins iand no information derived from it may be published without the author's prior consent. Signed: J. ho^^ Date: Izjhjn Table 5.28: Correlation coefficients produced between the socio-economic variables and turnout in the shire districts (1986-1992). Table 5.29: Explaining the variation in turnout using the political and structural variables in the London boroughs. Table 5.30: Explaining the variation in turnout using the socio-economic variables in the London boroughs. Table 5.31: Explaining the variation in turnout using all the independent variables in the London boroughs. Table 5.32: London boroughs with 'deviant* levels of turnout in elections between 1978 and 1994 (five elections). Table 5.33: Explaining the variation in turnout using the political and structural variables in the metropolitan boroughs. Table 5.34: Explaining the variation in turnout using the socio-economic variables in the metropolitan boroughs. Table 5.35: Explaining the variation in tumout using all the independent variables in the metropolitan boroughs. Table 5.36: Metropolitan boroughs with 'deviant' levels of tumout in elections between 1978 and 1994 (twelve elections). Table 5.37: Explaining the variation in tumout using the political and structural variables in the shire districts. Table 5.38: Explaining the variation in tumout using the socio-economic variables in the shire districts. Table 5.39: Explaining the variation in tumout using all the independent variables in the shire districts. Table 5.40: Shire districts with 'deviant' levels of tumout in elections between 1983 and 1991 (three all-out elections). Table 5.41: Shire districts with 'deviant' levels of turnout in elections between 1983 and 1991 (eight third elections). Table 5.42: Comparison of the determinants of tumout at the local authority level. Chapter 6: Explaining turnout variation in London wards. Table 6.1: The averages and range in the level of tumout in London wards by year of election (1978-1994). Table 6.2: List of London wards that appeared in the top ten ward tumout rates in each election between 1978 and 1994. Table 6.3: The socio-economic make-up of two high turnout wards in London compared to the average census figures for the data-set and the average census figures for the high tumout wards. Table 6.4: List of London wards that appeared in the bottom ten ward tumout rates in each election between 1978 and 1994. Table 6.5: The socio-economic make-up of two low tumoui wards in London compared to the average census figures for the data-set and the average census figures for the low tumout wards. Table 6.6: Deviation of turnout at the ward level within the London boroughs Table 6.7: The top ten cases of the highest range of tumout at the ward level in a London borough election. Table 6.8: The level of tumout according to single- and multi- member wards in London. Table 6.9: The level of tumout according to the size of the electorate in London wards. Table 6.10: The level of tumout according to the elector-councillor ratio in multi-member wards in London. Table 6.11: The level of turnout according to the number of major parties in London ward elections. Table 6.12: The level of turnout according to the Labour party share of the vote in London wards. Table 6.13: The level of turnout according to the Conservative party share of the vote in London wards. Table 6.14: The level of turnout according to the Liberal Democrat share of the vote in London wards. Table 6.15: The level of turnout according to the previous marginality of wards in London. Table 6.16: Cross-tabulation between turnout and previous marginality in London wards. Table 6.17: Correlation coefficients produced between political/structural variables and turnout in London wards. Table 6.18: Correlation coefficients produced between socio-economic variables and turnout in London wards. Table 6.19: Explaining the variation in turnout using the pohtical and structural variables in London wards. Table 6.20: Explaining the variation in turnout using the socio-economic variables in London wards. Table 6.21: Explaining the variation in turnout using all the independent variables in London wards. Table 6.22: The residual wards more than +/- two and a half two standard deviations away from the line of best fit. Table 6.23: The residual London wards with a rate of turnout furthest above the predicted level in every election. Table 6.24: The residual London wards with a rate of turnout furthest below the predicted level in every election. Table 6.25: The London wards that make more than one appearance as a residual between 1978 and 1994 (five elections). Table 6.26: Actual and predicted levels of turnout in the St. James' ward (Kingston-upon- Thames). Table 6.27: Actual and predicted levels of turnout in the Parkside ward (Wandsworth). Chapter 7: Explaining turnout variation in metropolitan wards. Table 7.1: The averages and range in the level of turnout in metropoUtan wards by year of election (1980-1994). Table 7.2: List of metropolitan wards that appeared in the top five ward turnout rates in each election between 1980 and 1994. Table 7.3: The socio-economic make-up of two high turnout wards in the metropoUtan boroughs compared to the average census figures for the data-set and the average census figures for the high turnout wards. Table 7.4: List of metropolitan wards that appeared in the bottom five ward turnout rates in each election between 1980 and 1994. Table 7.5: The socio-economic make-up of two low turnout wards in the metropolitan boroughs compared to the average census figures for the data-set and the average census figures for the low turnout wards. Table 7.6: Deviation of turnout at the ward level within the metropolitan boroughs Table 7.7: The top ten cases of the highest range of turnout at the ward level in a metropolitan borough election. Table 7.8: The level of turnout according to the size of the electorate in metropolitan wards. Table 7.9: The level of tumout according to the number of major parties in metropolitan ward elections. Table 7.10: The level of tumout according to the Labour party share of the vote in metropohtan wards. Table 7.11: The level of tumout according to the Conservative party share of the vote in metropoUtan wards. Table 7.12: The level of tumout according to the Liberal Democrat share of the vote in metropolitan wards. Table 7.13: TTie level of turnout according to the previous marginality of wards in the metropolitan boroughs. Table 7.14: Cross-tabulation between turnout and previous marginality in metropolitan wards. Table 7.15: Correlation coefficients produced between pohtical/structural variables and tumout in metropolitan wards. Table 7.16: Correlation coefficients produced between socio-economic variables and tumout in metropolitan wards. Table 7.17: Explaining the variation in turnout using the political and strucniral variables in metropohtan wards. Table 7.18: Explaining the variation in tumout using the socio-economic variables in metropoUtan wards. Table 7.19 Explaining the variation in turnout using all the independent variables in metropolitan wards. Table 7.20: The residual metropoUtan wards with a rate of turnout furthest above the predicted level in every election. Table 7.21: The residual metrojwUtan wards with a rate of tumout furthest below the predicted level in every election. Table 7.22: The metropoUtan wards that make more than two appearances as a residual between 1980 and 1994 (eleven elections). Table 7.23: Actual and predicted levels of turnout in the Kew ward (Sefton). Table 7.24: Actual and predicted levels of tumout in the Todmorden ward (Calderdale). Chapter 8: Explaining turnout variation in district wards. Table 8.1: The averages and range in the level of turnout in district wards by year of election (1983-1991). Table 8.2: List of district wards that appeared in the top 20 ward tumout rates in the elections of 1983, 1987 and 1991. Table 8.3: The socio-economic make-up of two high tumout wards in the district councils compared to the average census figures for the data-set and the average census figures for the high turnout wards. Table 8.4: List of district wards that appeared in the bottom 20 ward tumout rates in the elections of 1983, 1987 and 1991.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Derby Park Conservation Area Appraisal Adopted January 2007
    Derby Park Conservation Area Appraisal Adopted January 2007 This Conservation Area Appraisal was prepared by Donald Insall Associates and amended following public consultation in September 2006. It was adopted in January 2007 This Conservation Area Appraisal was prepared by Donald Insall Associates and amended following public consultation in September 2006. It was adopted in January 2007 including the suggested boundary changes shown below. For more information on boundary changes please see Section 9.0 DERBY PARK CONSERVATION AREA APPRAISAL DERBY PARK CONSERVATION AREA APPRAISAL CONTENTS SECTION PAGE PREFACE iii 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Background 1.2 Scope and Structure of the Study 1.3 Designation 1.4 General Identity 1.5 Survey 2.0 LOCATION AND CONTEXT 3 2.1 Location 2.2 Topography ● Geology 2.3 Uses 2.4 Local Economy 2.5 General Condition 2.6 Regeneration Proposals 2.7 Conservation Context 2.8 Study Area Boundary 3.0 HISTORIC DEVELOPMENT 7 3.1 Early History and Origins 3.2 Development 3.3 Historic Uses and their Influence 3.4 Archaeology 4.0 LANDSCAPE SETTING ● VISTAS 15 4.1 Setting and Relationship with Surrounding Area 4.2 Character and relationship of spaces 4.3 Views and vistas within the Conservation Area 4.4 Views out of the Conservation Area 4.5 Green Spaces and Planting 4.6 Derby Park 5.0 TOWNSCAPE ● FOCAL BUILDINGS 31 5.1 Townscape 5.2 Focal Buildings and Features 5.3 Boundaries and Surfaces 5.4 Streetscape Features 6.0 ARCHITECTURE ● MATERIALS ● DETAILS 45 6.1 Prominent Styles CONTENTS ii DERBY PARK CONSERVATION AREA APPRAISAL
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX ONE How the Council, Police and Social Landlords
    APPENDIX ONE How the Council, Police and Social Landlords promote the reporting of incidents of drug dealing, drug taking and related ASB in communal spaces and communicate the outcome of this reporting Scrutiny Report London Borough of Tower Hamlets April 2015 1 Chair’s Foreword Month after month, Tower Hamlets appears second in the list of London boroughs with the highest rate of reported anti-social behaviour (ASB). The casework belonging to councillors often reflects this. The police along with the council and social landlords have a duty to work in partnership to resolve this persistent problem. Feedback from the various agencies involved suggests that the local partnership model is working. However, residents and councillors often report that this multi-agency approach can sometimes lead to confusion. For example, some residents’ notice boards in the borough can have three different posters explaining the routes available to report anti-social behaviour. The reporting of ASB becomes more confusing when this behaviour is caused by drug abuse because of the crossover into criminal activity. Residents are also often unsure which agency is the first port of call. Even though the scope of this work was to look into the reporting of drug related ASB, the review focused on how ASB overall is reported, including how the outcome of this reporting is then communicated to residents. Since many cite that they have not been updated on the actions taken by agencies, nor have any knowledge of how problems have been resolved. The review makes six recommendations to improve partnership working in Tower Hamlets with the aim to reduce this confusion.
    [Show full text]
  • The GB Day Visitor Statistics 2015
    The GB Day Visitor Statistics 2015 GB Day Visits 2015 Contents This report provides details of the approaches Section 1: Introduction 3 followed in the 2015 Great Britain Day Visits Survey (GBDVS) and the work undertaken to Section 2: Survey method 4 develop these methods. Summary of approach 4 Design considerations 5 GBDVS measures participation in Tourism Day Scoping, planning and pilioting stages 6 Visits taken to destinations in the UK (including Northern Ireland) by the residents of England, Sample 9 Scotland and Wales. Survey administration and questionnaire 14 Data preparation and analysis 16 GBDVS is jointly sponsored by the statutory Weighting development 18 tourist boards of England and Scotland and Visit Offline survey 22 Wales (the Tourism Department of the Welsh Accuracy of results 24 Government). Boundary changes 2015 26 Published and copyright of the sponsors: GBDVS Methodological Changes 2016 27 VisitEngland Section 3: Appendices VisitScotland Appendix 1 - Questionnaire 28 Visit Wales Further information 50 © April 2015 The GB Day Visitor Page 2 Section 1: Introduction The Great Britain Day Visit Survey (GBDVS) was commissioned jointly by VisitEngland (VE), VisitScotland (VS) and Visit Wales (the Tourism Department of the Welsh Government). The survey aims to measure the volume, value and profile of Tourism Day Visits taken by GB residents to destinations in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Fieldwork is undertaken on a weekly basis, commenced in January 2011 and will continue until at least the end of December 2019. While previous surveys have been conducted with similar objectives (most recently the 2005 England Leisure Visits Survey and 2002/3 GB Day Visits Survey), the new survey represented a significant change in terms of the survey methods used and the approach followed to define a Tourism Day Visit.
    [Show full text]
  • How to Find Us Redgrave Court Merton Road, Bootle, Merseyside L20 7HS
    How to find us Redgrave Court Merton Road, Bootle, Merseyside L20 7HS 100 metres Redgrave Court A565 A567 A5090 A5038 Southport Marsh Lane Long Washington Parade term Derby Road Bootle New Fernhill Road Strand New Strand Strand Rd Southport Road Stuart Road Oxford Road Merton Road St Albans Rd Oriel Road Pembroke Rd M57 Bootle Trinity Road Breeze Hill Oriel A5058 Road M58 Hawthorne Road M6 Balliol Road Ireland Ferry Bedford Rd Stanley Road Selwyn StreetCarisbroke Rd Kirkdale Regent Road Hawthorne Road Derby Road A59 Bank Hall Melrose Road Bankhall Street Orwell Road A565 A567 A59 Liverpool Chester By Road From the North – M6(S) Jn 26, M58, the junction with A5054 (Boundary Street), head A5036, A567 left on to A567 (Stanley Road). Continue north until until you see Hugh Baird College on your Follow M58 to the end. At major junction take left. Continue through these lights and at the A5036 (signed Bootle and Docks – right hand first left turn proceed intoTrinity Road. Take the lane) and continue along dual carriageway second right into Pembroke Road (at the back (Dunning’s Bridge Road) until the traffic lights at of Redgrave Court) and the visitors car park is the entrance to Bootle golf course. Turn left onto located on the right opposite St Edmond’s Road. A5038 (Netherton Way), continue down this road (now called A5038 Bailey Drive). Go straight over From the South – M1(N), M6(N) Jn 21a, the roundabout to A5038 (Southport Road) and M62, A5036, A567 continue to junction with A5058 (traffic lights). Follow the M62 to the end.
    [Show full text]
  • BOUNDARY COMMISSION for ENGLAND PROCEEDINGS at The
    BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR ENGLAND PROCEEDINGS at the 2018 REVIEW OF PARLIAMENTARY CONSTITUENCIES IN ENGLAND HELD AT THE COTTON EXCHANGE BUILDING, OLD HALL STREET, LIVERPOOL, L3 9JR ON FRIDAY 21 OCTOBER 2016 DAY TWO Before: Mr Neil Ward, The Lead Assistant Commissioner ______________________________ Transcribed from audio by W B Gurney & Sons LLP 83 Victoria Street, London, SW1H 0HW Telephone Number: 0203 585 4721/22 ______________________________ At 9.00 am: THE LEAD ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for joining us today. My name is Neil Ward. I am the Lead Assistant Commissioner appointed by the Boundary Commission to conduct two things: To conduct the hearings across the whole of the North West into their Initial Proposals for the revised parliamentary boundaries for the North West region and, along with two fellow assistant Commissioners, Nicholas Elliott and Graeme Clarke, to take on board all the representations that are either made in the hearings or in written representations and to consider, in the light of them, whether we think it is appropriate to recommend changes, revised proposals to the Boundary Commission on their Initial Proposals. I should say that I am, in a sense, essentially independent of the Boundary Commission. Although I am appointed by them, I had no hand in the drafting of the proposals and I received them the same time as everyone else and I am, in a sense, an honest broker in this process, considering whether or not changes ought to be made. This is the second day of the Liverpool hearing. Just a couple of words on process.
    [Show full text]
  • To Bus Routes in Southport and Formby
    Southport and Formby Area Network Bus Map E M I V R A D R I N M E E A E N U I R N R E Harrogate Way A S V 40 M H A S Y O 40 A R D I W TRU S X2 to Preston D G R K H L I E I P E V A T M N R E O D 40 A R O C N 44 I R N L O O LSWI OAD O L A C R G K T Y E A V N A A E R . S D A E E RO ’ T K X2 G S N N R TA 40 E S 40 h RS t GA 44 A a W p O D B t A o P A R Fo I Y A 47.49 D V 40 l E ta C as 44 E Co n 44 fto 40 44 F Y L D E F e D S 15 40 R O A A I G R L Crossens W H E AT R O A D 40 A N ER V P X2 D M ROAD A D O THA E L NE H 15 Y R A O L N K A D E 347 W D O A S T R R 2 E ROA R O 347 K E D O . L A 47 E F Marshside R R D T LD 2 Y FIE 2 to Preston S H A ELL 49 A 15 SH o D D 347 to Chorley u W E N t V E I R 40 W R h R I N O M D A E p A L O o R F A r N F R t 15 R N E F N Golf O P I E S T O R A D X2 U A U H L ie 44 E N R M D N I F E R r Course E S LARK Golf V 347 T E D I C Southport Town Centre Marine D A E D N S H P U R A N E O E D A B Lake A Course I R R O A E 47 calls - N S V T R C 15.15 .40.44.46.46 .47.49.315(some)X2 R K V A E A E T N S HM E K R Ocean D I 2 E O M A L O O R A R L R R R IL O P Plaza P L H H B D A D O OO D E C AD A A R D 40 O A W 40 A S U 40 O N R T K 40 EE O 40 H R Y Y D L R E C LE F T L E S E E H U V W W L 15 O N I 49 KN Y R A R R G O D E R M O A L L S A R A A D M O E L M T E M I D B A Southport C R IDG E A E B Hesketh R S M I A N T C R S Hospital O E E E A Princes E 2 D E D R .1 P A A 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Meeting of the Council Working for a Healthy, Prosperous and Happy
    Town Hall, Castle Circus, Torquay, Devon TQ1 3DR Main Switchboard (01803) 201201 Fax (01803) 207006 DX 59006 Tuesday, 21 October 2014 Meeting of the Council Dear Member I am pleased to invite you to attend a meeting of Torbay Council which will be held in Rosetor Room, Riviera International Conference Centre, Chestnut Avenue, Torquay, TQ2 5LZ on Thursday, 30 October 2014 commencing at 3.00 pm The items to be discussed at this meeting are attached. Yours sincerely, Steve Parrock Executive Director of Finance and Operations (All members are summoned to attend the meeting of the Council in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Act 1972 and Standing Orders A5.) Working for a healthy, prosperous and happy Bay For information relating to this meeting or to request a copy in another format or language please contact: June Gurry, Town Hall, Castle Circus, Torquay, TQ1 3DR 01803 207012 Email: [email protected] www.torbay.gov.uk (i) Meeting of the Council Agenda 1. Opening of meeting 2. Apologies for absence 3. Minutes (Pages 1 - 18) To confirm as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting of the Council held on 25 September 2014. 4. Declarations of interests (a) To receive declarations of non pecuniary interests in respect of items on this agenda For reference: Having declared their non pecuniary interest members may remain in the meeting and speak and, vote on the matter in question. A completed disclosure of interests form should be returned to the Clerk before the conclusion of the meeting. (b) To receive declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests in respect of items on this agenda For reference: Where a Member has a disclosable pecuniary interest he/she must leave the meeting during consideration of the item.
    [Show full text]
  • North West River Basin District Flood Risk Management Plan 2015 to 2021 PART B – Sub Areas in the North West River Basin District
    North West river basin district Flood Risk Management Plan 2015 to 2021 PART B – Sub Areas in the North West river basin district March 2016 1 of 139 Published by: Environment Agency Further copies of this report are available Horizon house, Deanery Road, from our publications catalogue: Bristol BS1 5AH www.gov.uk/government/publications Email: [email protected] or our National Customer Contact Centre: www.gov.uk/environment-agency T: 03708 506506 Email: [email protected]. © Environment Agency 2016 All rights reserved. This document may be reproduced with prior permission of the Environment Agency. 2 of 139 Contents Glossary and abbreviations ......................................................................................................... 5 The layout of this document ........................................................................................................ 8 1 Sub-areas in the North West River Basin District ......................................................... 10 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 10 Management Catchments ...................................................................................................... 11 Flood Risk Areas ................................................................................................................... 11 2 Conclusions and measures to manage risk for the Flood Risk Areas in the North West River Basin District ...............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • PCG Fund Levelling up Categorisations
    Meeting PCG 11 March 2021 Report from the Strategic Directors of Customer and Digital Services, and Regeneration and Environment Levelling Up Fund Local Authority Categorisations Wards Affected: All Key or Non-Key Decision: n/a Open or Part/Fully Exempt: (If exempt, please highlight relevant paragraph n/a of Part 1, Schedule 12A of 1972 Local Government Act) 1 – Lichfields map of UK wide categorisations No. of Appendices: 2 – List of London Boroughs Levelling Up Fund: Prospectus Background Papers: Contact Officer(s): Alice Lester (Name, Title, Contact Details) Doug Palmer 1 Purpose of the Report This report briefly sets out the headlines from the Levelling Up Fund Prospectus, (published on 03 March 2021), and the priority categorisation list. An authority’s place on the categorisation list clearly impacts on the chances of receiving funding from the £4.8bn available. The government’s methodology for how the categorisations were arrived at has not been published. However officers have pulled together some indices which indicate that Brent should have been in priority 1, set out in the report. 2 Recommendations for PCG Use the information detailed to lobby government, either as Brent or with either West London authorities, or London Councils. Consider submitting an FOI request to government asking for details of the methodology for the categorisations. Meeting 3 Detail The Levelling Up Fund Prospectus provides guidance on how local authorities can submit competitive bids for infrastructure funding from a £4.8 billion pot up to 2024-25. The fund is focussed on capital investment in small scale projects, specifically local transport projects, town centre regeneration, and culture and heritage.
    [Show full text]
  • Ainsdale Ward Profile
    Last Updated: 25/05/2018 - Final Ward Profile Ainsdale Councillor Tony Brough Councillor Terry Jones Councillor Lynne Thompson Released: October 2017 Collated by Gemma Monaghan Commissioning Support & Business Intelligence Service Data, Insight, Business Intelligence, & Performance Last Updated: 25/05/2018 - Final Document Control Issue/Amendment Record Version Date of Issue Reason for Issue V1 21/09/2017 Initial Full Draft V2 04/10/2017 Final V3 25/05/2018 Change of councillor Document Ownership Role Name/Title Author Gemma Monaghan Release Wayne Leatherbarrow Authority Service Manager – Performance & intelligence. Distribution Cabinet Council Chief Executive SLB Public Data, Insight, Business Intelligence, & Performance 2/40 Last Updated: 25/05/2018 - Final Primary Settings .......................................................... 20 Contents Key Stage 1 (KS1) ......................................................... 20 Key Stage 2 (KS2) ......................................................... 21 Highlights ................................................................................ 4 Secondary School Settings ........................................... 21 Sefton Comparative Position .................................................. 5 Key Stage 4 (KS4) ......................................................... 21 National Comparative Position ............................................... 5 Not in Employment Education or Training (NEET) ....... 22 LCR Comparative Position ......................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Southport Township Profile April 2015 Sefton Business Intelligence & Performance Team
    Southport Township Profile April 2015 Sefton Business Intelligence & Performance Team Southport Township Profile Contents 1. Overview 2. Summary Chart 3. Population 4. Ethnicity & Country of Birth 5. Housing Tenure 6. Vacant & Void Properties 7. Occupancy & Number of People 8. Deprivation 9. Deprivation Older People 10. Children of Low-Income Families 11. Worklessness & Benefits 12. Occupation 13. Crime 14. Anti Social Behaviour 15. Environmental Issues 16. Deliberate Fires 17. Qualifications 18. Education 19. General Health 20. Life Expectancy 21. Obesity 22. Smoking & Alcohol 23. Mosaic Community Groups Overview Population Living in Privately 11% 43,356 (48 %) Males Residents (16 to 64) on 72% Owned Houses Key Out of work Benefits 47,378 (52%) Females 2,870 1,912 Children Living in Low-Income in Vacant & Void Properties Families (15%) 4 Aged 40 – 59 Five areas fall in top 10% Residents have 22% deprived areas Nationally 36% Violent Crime NO Qualifications 42% All ASB in 13,782 – Hospital Year 6 pupils 21 per 1,000 incidents Obese Environmental Issues stays for Alcohol related to harm residents in 18% All Fires 78% Good Health Life Expectancy (Years) in 4 Mosaic 82.9 Females Community Segmentation Smoking Prevalence Males 78.3 Senior Security Summary Chart Compared Maghull Sefton Category Indicator to Sefton Township Average Average Change in population (2003 - 2013) -1% -2% n Population Density (the number of persons per hectare) 11 18 n Rented Properties 26% 28% n Vacant and / or Void Properties per 1,000 properties 22 20
    [Show full text]
  • FOI 1161 Mitesh Popat by Email Request-113047-46F6379d
    Our Reference: FOI 1161 Mitesh Popat By email [email protected] 12 April 2012 Dear Mitesh Freedom of Information Act 2000 Thank you for your request for information which was received by us on 9 April 2012. You requested the following: “Would you please help me with getting full list of all registered restaurants and bars (food related establishments) in greater London (hopefully with their addresses and any other relevant details)”. Your request has been handled under the terms of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act). None of the information you have requested is held by the Food Standards Agency. Food establishments register with the relevant local authority. Although the Agency collects monitoring data annually from local authorities on the food law enforcement activities that have been carried out, this does not include the names and addresses of individual food establishments. You will need to contact the 33 London Boroughs individually to obtain this information. A full list of these authorities is attached. If you have any queries about this letter, please contact me. Please remember to quote the reference number at the top of this letter in any future communications. If you are not satisfied with the way the Agency has handled your request for information, you should write within two calendar months of the date of this letter to the Openness Team, and ask for an internal review. They will arrange for the Complaints Coordinator to conduct the review. Their address is Food Standards Agency, Room 2C Aviation House, 125 Kingsway, London, WC2B 6NH (email:[email protected]).
    [Show full text]