Boundary Committee's Draft Recommendations

Draft Response to Boundary Committee February 2004 Draft Response to Boundary Committee Introduction 1. The Council’s response to the Boundary Committee made in September 2003 is attached at Appendix 1 for information. This makes it clear that City of York Council does not wish to alter its boundaries based on: · The views of the public · Concerns that an expansion could be counter-productive and distracting to the delivery of quality services · A belief that there is not a specific natural community that exists externally to its existing boundary and recognition that it has required extensive effort to create a sense of community within the existing boundary since the 1996 re-organisation · Recognition that the surrounding local authorities have higher costs than York and that any increase in York’s boundary can only add to the Council’s costs, which is likely to negate any economies of scale that might be realised. 2. At a meeting between the Boundary Committee and Cllr Stephen Galloway (Leader of City of York Council) and Cllr David Merrett (Leader of the opposition) in December 2003 it was made clear that the Council’s position remained unchanged and that it did not regard an option of merging York with Selby as viable. 3. The Council’s position remains unchanged since the submission of September 2003. It maintains that: · There is not a ‘natural community’ that covers the York/Selby area · There is no public support for the merger of York and Selby local authorities · The costs of reorganisation and disruption to services would be prohibitive · The management arrangements of a York/Selby structure would not be cost effective · The fact that residents of York would not be able to vote on an option that proposed a York/Selby merger is clearly iniquitous · Debate about a York/Selby merger in a Local Government Reorganisation that is about regional government is an unnecessary distraction from the real issue which is whether there is support for an elected Regional Assembly 4. We do not have a view on which of the current options proposed by the Boundary Committee is preferable as this is for the determination of local people and directly affected elected representatives. We do, however, understand that Selby favours a merger with East Riding as the areas sit comfortably alongside each other in terms of geography and demographic profile and there appears to be a strong case for combining the two authorities. We also understand that such a solution would be acceptable to the East Riding authority Additional evidence and comment 5. Since the submission of September 2003 the City of York Council has undertaken additional work and analysis and would add the following in respect of: · The views of the public · The views of the Boundary Committee · The views of partners City of York Council Page 1 of 8 Draft Response to Boundary Committee February 2004 6. This additional information further strengthens the Council’s view and position that its boundaries should not be changed in the event of any local government reorganisation. The views of the public 7. The findings from our consultation exercise of August 2003 using a telephone survey of a panel of local citizens that is statistically valid to +/- 4.4% were clear. · 60% of respondents are happy with the council boundary as it currently exists · The vast majority of respondents (93%) believe that if there were proposed changes to the Council’s boundary then they should be able to vote on this in the referendum · 51% of respondents are of the view that an increase to the Council’s boundary would result in services becoming worse · Nearly 40% of respondents would be less likely to support regional government if there were proposals to increase the Council’s boundary 8. Our discussions with the Boundary Committee in December 2003 revealed that they were dissatisfied with the use of a panel to conduct our consultation. We have therefore undertaken additional survey work using a random sample that is again statistically valid to within +/- 4.4%. This has found: · (Results will be summarised here, due w/c 9 February) The views of the Boundary Committee in respect of York/Selby 9. We understand and respect why the Boundary Committee has retained the right to consider the feasibility of a York/Selby merger. However the evidence presented in the Committee’s Draft Recommendations does not appear to be particularly robust or compelling. Communities of interest 10. The Council notes that the Boundary Committee believes there to be communities of interest between Selby and York. This claim appears to be founded on a finding from the MORI public opinion research that found that 16% of Selby residents most associated themselves with York. 11. While this is undoubtedly true it does not consider the full picture from the point of view of all Selby residents. For example the MORI research also identified that 45% of Selby residents most associate themselves with the district town of Selby, with the remainder feeling identity with towns and cities from the surrounding area including Tadcaster, Leeds, Pontefract and York. Leeds and York are also identified as local focal points for shopping and other services. It therefore appears illogical to suggest that a merger of York and Selby can be supported by evidence that overall indicates a disparate range of identities. 12. In reality Selby has a diverse range of communities of interest, none of which provide overwhelming evidence that there is a case for merging the York and Selby areas. For example there are a number of distinct travel to work communities within the district. City of York Council Page 2 of 8 Draft Response to Boundary Committee February 2004 Partnerships 13. The Boundary Committee has presented evidence of partnerships between Selby and York as a possible reason for a merger. Although there are partnerships in place (primarily at a county-wide level in respect of services such as Emergency Planning) it must be noted that the Local Strategic Partnerships for Selby and the City of York are completely separate entities. 14. Clearly the key to any successful partnership is the recognition that mutual interests can be achieved by a willingness to work together collaboratively. The Council believes that a willingness to form a partnership is far more powerful than boundaries and a successful partnership is not exclusively dependant upon shared boundaries. Therefore the conditions appear favourable for Selby and East Yorkshire to form productive partnerships based on their shared views and aspirations. 15. We refer to the views of Selby and York Primary Care Trust (PCT) and North Yorkshire Police below. While the views of these partner organisations are clearly important we do not believe that it makes sense to change the Council’s boundaries to create coterminous boundaries to meet the needs of individual stakeholders. Indeed to achieve this then the debate about York’s boundaries would need to be extended beyond that of Selby to include all stakeholders as the PCT also covers parts of Hambleton District Council and the Police Authority is based on York and North Yorkshire. 16. The Council is of the view that if Selby were to join East Riding or the rest of North Yorkshire in a new unitary structure then it would be appropriate to consider the creation of new and distinct York PCT and Police area. This would strengthen York’s unitary status from 1996 and the PCT and Police areas could be reconfigured to reflect the new North Yorkshire unitary structure if that is chosen by its citizens. 17. We note that if a York PCT were to be created that this would cover a population of 181,326 (2001 census figure) and that this would be an above average size for a PCT based on the average of English PCTs being a population of approximately 161,000. The views of partners 18. We understand that the Boundary Committee is keen to hear the views of other stakeholder organisations. We would draw attention to the views of two key stakeholders. 19. North Yorkshire Police Authority – the Chief Constable of North Yorkshire has submitted a report to the Police Authority that recognises that the Boundary Committee’s review is about local government reorganisation and not policing and that it is a matter for local politicians and local people to determine which local government structures would work best for them. In particular we note the Chief Constable’s comments that: · If Selby were to be moved out of the North Yorkshire Police Authority as a result of a merger with East Riding that while this would be a significant loss of resources it would not threaten the overall viability of the force. · There is not a particular desire for structural change on the part of North Yorkshire Police. City of York Council Page 3 of 8 Draft Response to Boundary Committee February 2004 20. We will review our understanding of the Police Authority’s position once it has discussed this matter at its 9th February meeting. 21. Selby and York Primary Care Trust – we understand that the Trust values its link between Selby and York and does not favour having a single North Yorkshire unitary authority. We believe that the reasons for this position do not take into account the views of local residents or the potential for disruption and reduced productivity to Councils services (including social care) that would result from a change to the their boundaries. 22. We have explained our position to the Primary Care Trust and are currently waiting for their response. Conclusion 23. The Council believes that it is in the best position to understand the overall views and needs of the people whom it is elected to represent.

Load more