Local Government Boundary Commission for England Report No.348 LOCAL Coverumeilt BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOH S.'Glaild
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Local Government Boundary Commission For England Report No.348 LOCAL COVERuMEIlT BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOH S.'GLAilD CHAIRMA7I Sir Nicholas Morrison KGB • DEPUTY CHAIRMAN Mr J M Rankin QC MEMBERS Lady Bouden Mr J T Brockbank Mr R R Thornton CB DL Mr D P Harrison Professor G E Cherry To the Rt Hon- William Whitelaw CH MC :;!? Secretary of State for the Home Department PROPOSALS FOR FUTURE ELECTORAL ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE BOROUGH OF RSSTORKEL IN THE COtJNTY OF CORNWALL 1. \7ef the Local Government Boundary Commission for England, having carried out ourinitial review of the electoral arrangements for the borough of Restormel, in accordance with the requirements of section 63 of, and Schedule 9 to,- the Local Government Act 1972, present our proposals for the future electoral arrangements for that district. 2. In accordance with the procedure laid down in Section 60(l) and (2) of the 1972 Act, notice was given on 31 December 19?^ that we were to undertake this review. This was incorporated in a consultation letter addressed to Restormel Borough Council, copies of which were circulated to Cornwall County Council, a town council, parish councils and parish meetings in the district, the Members of Parliament for the constituencies concerned and the headquarters of the main political parties. Copies were also sent to the editors of the local newspapers circulating in the area and of the local government press. Notices inserted in the. local press announced the start of the review and invited comments from members of the public and from interested bodies. 3. Restormel Borough Council were invited to prepare a draft scheme of representation for our consideration. When doing so, they were asked to observe the rules laid down in Schedule 11 to the Local Government Act 1972, and the guidelines set out in our Report No. £. alxmt the proposed size of the Council and the proposed number of councillors for each ward. They were also asked to take into account views expressed to them following their consultation with local interests, ^e therefore asked that they should publish details of their provisional proposals about a;.month before they submitted their draft scheme to us, thus allowing opportunity for local comment. 4. The Council have passed a resolution under Section 7(4)(a) of the Local Government Act 1972, requesting the Secretary of State to provide for a system of whole council elections. 5. On 29 Kay 1975 Restormel Borough Council submitted their draft scheme of representation. The Council proposed to divide the area of the district into 14 wards each returning 3 members to form a council of 42 members'. 6. 7/e considered the draft scheme together with the comments which we had received and those which had been sent to us by the Borough Council. 7. We noted that the draft scheme showed some uneveriness in the standard of representation, ^e considered whether there were modifications which might "be made to secure a more even standard. 8. We thought that there would be some advantage, in terms of equality of ( representation, if the parishes of the Rock and Pydar wards in the Council's ' - draft scheme were to be regrouped: the Rock ward to..comprise the parishes of Roche, St Dennis and St Enoder, and the Pydar ward to comprise the parishes of Mawgan-in-Pydar, St Columb Major and St TCenn, each ward returning 3 councillors. For the same reason we also proposed'-to include the parish of Luxulyan in-the proposed Treverbyn ward. ' 9- TTe decided that the 3-meraber Fowey River ward proposed by the Council should be divided into two wards so that the Fowey River ward would comprise the parishes of Lanlivery and St Sampson plus the Fowey ward of the former borough of St Austell-with- Fowey, returning 2 councillors; and the parish of Lostwithiel should constitute a separate single member ward. 10. We thought that a change in part of the boundary between the proposed Edgcumbe and Gannel wards, and in part of the boundary between the proposed Trevarna and Polstreath wards, might improve the standard of representation in those areas. 11. Subject to the changes referred to in paragraphs 8, 9 and 10 above, we decided that the District Council's draft scheme provided a reasonable basis for the future electoral arrangements of the district in compliance with the rules in Schedule 11 to the 1972 Act and having regard to our guidelines. >7e formulated our draft proposals accordingly. 12. On 17 January 1977 we issued our draft proposals and these were sent to all who had received our consultation letter or had commented on the Borough Councilfs draft scheme. The Borough Council were asked to make these draft proposals and the * accompanying maps, showing the proposed ward boundaries, available for inspection at their main offices. Representation on- our draft proposals were invited from those to whom they were circulated and, by public notices, from other members of the public and interested bodies. We asked for comments to reach us by 17 March 1977. 13- Restormel Borough Council objected to all the modifications which we had introduced in formulating our draft proposals. They requested the reinstatement of their draft scheme arrangements, apart from their proposed 3-member Fowey River ward. This, they now agreed, should be divided into two wards, but retaining the existing arrangements under which Lostwithiel and Lanlivery parishes together return one councillor while Fowey and St Sampson parish together return two. 14. St Sampson Parish Council reaffirmed a previous request that the present arrangements for their parish, Fowey, Lostwithiel and Lanlivery should be retained, and indicated that the four authorities agreed on this. 15. As regards our draft proposals for the Crinnis and Tywardreath wards, where we had adopted the scheme submitted to us by the Borough Council, we received objections from a county councillor, 4 local political associations, a village council, a ratepayers association, a borough councillor and a Methodist minister. 16. In view of the objections to our proposals we decided that we needed further information to enable us to reach a conclusion. Therefore, in accordance with Section 65(2) of the 1972 Act Mr L P fallen was appointed an Assistant Commissioner at our request and asked to hold a local meeting and to report to us. 17. The Assistant Commissioner held a meeting at the Municipal Offices, St Austell on 20 October 1977- A copy of his report is attached at Schedule 1 to this report. 18. In the light of the discussion at the meeting and of his inspection of the Borough the Assistant Commissioner recommended that the boundary "between the proposed Edgcucibe and Qannel wards in our draft proposals should be confirmed, but that the following modifications should be made to those proposals:- (a) our proposed Castle and Polstreath wards should be replaced by the following wards: (i) a ward to be named St Mewan consisting of the parish of St Mewan and northern part of our proposed Polstreath ward, returning 3 councillors; (ii) a ward to be named St Ewe, consisting of the parishes of Creed, Srampound and St Ewe together with the central area of our proposed Polstreath ward, returning one councillor; (iii) a ward to be named Mevagissey consisting of the parishes of St Goran and St Michael Caerhay.fi , together with the southern part of our proposed Polstreath ward, returning 2 councillors; Cb) our proposed Pydar and Rock wards should be replaced by the following wards: (i) a ward to be named Pydar consisting of the parishes of Mawgan-in-Pydar and St V/enn together with the Middle, North and Town Wards of the parish of St Columb Major, returning 2 councillors; (ii) a ward to IE-named St Enoder consisting of the parish of St Enoder and the South ward of the parish of St Columb Major, returning 2 councillors: (iii) a ward to be named Rock consisting of the parishes of Roche and St Dennis, returning 2 councillors; (c) the parishes of Luxulyan from our proposed Treverbyn ward, and Lanlivery from our proposed Fowey ward, should be transferred to our proposed Lostwithiel ward and the representation of that ward be increased to 2 councillors; Cd) the boundaries of the proposed Crinnis and Tywardreath wards should be redrawn to produce three areas: (i) one forming a ward to be named Crinnis returning 2 councillors; (ii) another forming a ward to be named St Blaise returning 3 councillors; (iii) the area remaining, together with the Fowey ward of the former borough of St Austell-with-Fowey and the parish of St Sampson, forming a ward to be named Fowey, returning 3 councillors. 19. The effect of the Assistant Commissioner's*recommendations was to provide for 1? wards, two more than in our draft proposals, and a council of ^3 members, one uiore than we had proposed. 20. We have reviewed our draft proposals in the light of the comments which we had received and of the report of the Assistant Commissioner. We were disposed to accept his recommendations but in view of the radical revisions to the draft proposals that he recommended, and because we felt that his considered view had not been sufficiently tested against local feelings at the meeting, we thought that copies of his report should be circulated among interested parties for comment before we reached any final conclusions. 21. The response to the report was considerable. There was a good deal of support for a number of the revisions which the Assistant Commissioner had recommended, though some opposition was expressed to the proposals for the Castle and Polstreath wards and the boundary between the proposed Pydar and St Enoder wards.