DOCSLIB.ORG

The Determinants of Voter Turnout in English Local

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

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. Table 8.5: The socio-economic make-up of two low turnout wards in the district councils compared to the average census figures for the data-set and the average census figures for the low tumout wards. Table 8.6: Deviation of turnout at the ward level within the district councils. Table 8.7: The top ten cases of the highest range of tumout at the ward level in a district council election. Table 8.8: The level of tumout according to single- or multi- member wards in the district councils. Table 8.9: The level of turnout according to the size of the electorate in district wards.
Recommended publications
  • Derby Park Conservation Area Appraisal Adopted January 2007

    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
  • Former Lloyds Bank, 140 Cambridge Road, Churchtown, Southport PR9 9RZ

    Former Lloyds Bank, 140 Cambridge Road, Churchtown, Southport PR9 9RZ

    Former Bank Premises in Affluent Churchtown Area To Let: £15,000 Per Annum Former Lloyds Bank, 140 Cambridge Road, Churchtown, Southport PR9 9RZ • Prominent Former Lloyds Bank Premises • Ground Floor Sales Area With First Floor Ancillary Accommodation • Suitable For A Variety Of Uses Including Retail, Restaurant, Bar, Offices etc Subject To All The Necessary Consents • Nearby Occupiers Include Co-Op, Tesco Express, Boots Pharmacy, Subway, Waterfields & Dominoes Pizza Location: The property is situated within Churchtown Village to a prominent position, close to its junction with Marshside Road and Preston New Road. Nearby occupiers include Waterfield Bakers, Tesco Express, Co-op and Boots, in addition to various other local retailers. Churchtown is an attractive and affluent village approximately 2.5 miles north east of Southport town centre. Description: The property comprises of a self-contained former bank premises. The unit is self-contained and provides accommodation over ground floor with the former banking hall and private offices. Ancillary accommodation is provided to the first floor with kitchen area and WC facilities. Fitton Estates, Hoghton Place, 47 Hoghton St, Southport, Merseyside, PR9 0PG Telephone: 01704 500345 Email: [email protected] Accommodation: Please refer to the enclosed floor plans, not to scale and provided for indicative purposes only. We understand the premises provides the following approximate Net Internal Area: Ground Floor 609 Sq Ft First Floor 519 Sq Ft Total 1,128 Sq Ft Terms: The unit is available by way of a new lease, on terms to be agreed. Rent: £15,000 per annum exclusive. Money Laundering Regulations: Please note we are now required to carry out customer due diligence on all tenants once an offer is accepted, whereby we are required to obtain proof of identity and proof of address of the prospective tenant.
  • APPENDIX ONE How the Council, Police and Social Landlords

    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.
  • Robert Hodgins

    Robert Hodgins

    St Peter’s Church, Formby Review of the Ten Commonwealth War Graves in the Graveyard Prepared to mark the VE Day Celebrations 08-10 May 2020 Introduction This review has been prepared to commemorate the ten graves in the graveyard that meet the published criteria of the Commonwealth War Graves Commission (CWGC) which honours the 1.7 million men and women who died in the armed forces of the British Empire during the First and Second World Wars, and ensures they will never be forgotten. The CWGC work began with building, and now maintaining, cemeteries and memorials at 23,000 locations in more than 150 countries and territories and managing the official casualty database archives for their member nations. The CWGC core principles, articulated in their Royal Charter in 1917, are as relevant now as they were over a hundred years ago: • Each of the Commonwealth dead should be commemorated by name on a headstone or memorial • Headstones and memorials should be permanent • Headstones should be uniform • There should be equality of treatment for the war dead irrespective of rank or religion. CWGC are responsible for the commemoration of: • Personnel who died between 04 August 1914 and 31 August 1921; and between 03 September 1939 and 31 December 1947 whilst serving in a Commonwealth military force or specified auxiliary organisation. • Personnel who died between 04 August 1914 and 31 August 1921; and between 03 September 1939 and 31 December 1947 after they were discharged from a Commonwealth military force, if their death was caused by their wartime service. • Commonwealth civilians who died between 03 September 1939 and 31 December 1947 as a consequence of enemy action, Allied weapons of war or whilst in an enemy prison camp.
  • The GB Day Visitor Statistics 2015

    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.
  • ELECTION of a COUNCILLOR Bebington Ward

    ELECTION of a COUNCILLOR Bebington Ward

    ELECTION OF A COUNCILLOR Thursday 2 May 2019 The following is a statement of the persons nominated for election as a Councillor for the Bebington Ward STATEMENT OF PERSONS NOMINATED The following persons have been nominated: Reason why Name of Candidate Home Address Description (if any) Name of Proposer no longer nominated* CROWFOOT 25 Garth Boulevard, Liberal Democrat Forshaw Mark J Amanda Jane Higher Bebington, CH63 5LS HEYDON 2 Arno Road, Prenton, Green Party Gately Alan M Rachel Wirral, CH43 5SL JONES 25 The Beeches, Local Conservatives Clarke Sheila L Geoff Moreton, Wirral, CH46 3SN WILLIAMS (Address in Wirral) Labour Party Thelwell Peter Jerry * Decision of the Returning Officer that the nomination is invalid or other reason why a person nominated no longer stands nominated. The persons above against whose name no entry is made in the last column have been and stand validly nominated. Dated: Wednesday, 3rd April 2019 Eric Robinson Returning Officer Printed and published by the Returning Officer, Town Hall, Brighton Street, Wallasey, Wirral, CH44 8ED ELECTION OF A COUNCILLOR Thursday 2 May 2019 The following is a statement of the persons nominated for election as a Councillor for the Bidston & St James Ward STATEMENT OF PERSONS NOMINATED The following persons have been nominated: Reason why Name of Candidate Home Address Description (if any) Name of Proposer no longer nominated* KENNY (Address in Wirral) Labour Party Evans Emma L Brian Martin PARKHOUSE 9 Alderley Road, Wirral, Green Party Green Alan James Frederick CH47 2AT PARSONS 17 Plumer Drive, Liberal Democrat Brooks Simon W Mike Birkenhead, CH41 8HN WILSON (Address in Wirral) Local Conservatives Rogers Philip A Vida * Decision of the Returning Officer that the nomination is invalid or other reason why a person nominated no longer stands nominated.
  • South Gloucestershire Council Conservative Group

    South Gloucestershire Council Conservative Group

    COUNCIL SIZE SUBMISSION South Gloucestershire South Gloucestershire Council Conservative Group. February 2017 Overview of South Gloucestershire 1. South Gloucestershire is an affluent unitary authority on the North and East fringe of Bristol. South Gloucestershire Council (SGC) was formed in 1996 following the dissolution of Avon County Council and the merger of Northavon District and Kingswood Borough Councils. 2. South Gloucestershire has around 274,700 residents, 62% of which live in the immediate urban fringes of Bristol in areas including Kingswood, Filton, Staple Hill, Downend, Warmley and Bradley Stoke. 18% live in the market towns of Thornbury, Yate, and Chipping Sodbury. The remaining 20% live in rural Gloucestershire villages such as Marshfield, Pucklechurch, Hawkesbury Upton, Oldbury‐ on‐Severn, Alveston, and Charfield. 3. South Gloucestershire has lower than average unemployment (3.3% against an England average of 4.8% as of 2016), earns above average wages (average weekly full time wage of £574.20 against England average of £544.70), and has above average house prices (£235,000 against England average of £218,000)1. Deprivation 4. Despite high employment and economic outputs, there are pockets of deprivation in South Gloucestershire. Some communities suffer from low income, unemployment, social isolation, poor housing, low educational achievement, degraded environment, access to health services, or higher levels of crime than other neighbourhoods. These forms of deprivation are often linked and the relationship between them is so strong that we have identified 5 Priority Neighbourhoods which are categorised by the national Indices of Deprivation as amongst the 20% most deprived neighbourhoods in England and Wales. These are Cadbury Heath, Kingswood, Patchway, Staple Hill, and west and south Yate/Dodington.
  • Paying for the Party

    Paying for the Party

    PX_PARTY_HDS:PX_PARTY_HDS 16/4/08 11:48 Page 1 Paying for the Party Myths and realities in British political finance Michael Pinto-Duschinsky edited by Roger Gough Policy Exchange is an independent think tank whose mission is to develop and promote new policy ideas which will foster a free society based on strong communities, personal freedom, limited government, national self-confidence and an enterprise culture. Registered charity no: 1096300. Policy Exchange is committed to an evidence-based approach to policy development. We work in partnership with aca- demics and other experts and commission major studies involving thorough empirical research of alternative policy out- comes. We believe that the policy experience of other countries offers important lessons for government in the UK. We also believe that government has much to learn from business and the voluntary sector. Tru, stees Charles Moore (Chairman of the Board), Theodore Agnew, Richard Briance, Camilla Cavendish, Robin Edwards, Richard Ehrman, Virginia Fraser, Lizzie Noel, George Robinson, Andrew Sells, Tim Steel, Alice Thomson, Rachel Whetstone PX_PARTY_HDS:PX_PARTY_HDS 16/4/08 11:48 Page 2 About the author Dr Michael Pinto-Duschinsky is senior Nations, the European Union, Council of research fellow at Brunel University and a Europe, Commonwealth Secretariat, the recognised worldwide authority on politi- British Foreign and Commonwealth cal finance. A former fellow of Merton Office and the Home Office. He was a College, Oxford, and Pembroke College, founder governor of the Westminster Oxford, he is president of the International Foundation for Democracy. In 2006-07 he Political Science Association’s research was the lead witness before the Committee committee on political finance and politi- on Standards in Public Life in its review of cal corruption and a board member of the the Electoral Commission.
  • Bootle New Strand Station Interchange Information Buses That Operate from Bootle Bus Station Buses from Stand 1 Buses from Stand 4 Buses from Stand 5

    Bootle New Strand Station Interchange Information Buses That Operate from Bootle Bus Station Buses from Stand 1 Buses from Stand 4 Buses from Stand 5

    Bootle New Strand Station Interchange Information Buses that operate from Bootle Bus Station Buses from stand 1 Buses from stand 4 Buses from stand 5 From 20/01/2019 From 01/09/2019 From 19/01/2020 To Netherton (Pendle Drive) To Huyton Bus Station To Aintree University Hospital 144 Via Washington Parade, Bootle Strand, Marsh Lane, Rimrose Road, 217 Via Linacre Lane, Southport Road, Rice Lane, Longmoor Lane, 159 Via Linacre Road, Church Road, Dunnings Bridge Road, Park Lane West, Crosby Road South, Church Road, Hawthorne Road, Field Lane, Aintree University Hospital, Valley Road, Kirkby Bus Station, Glovers Lane, Buckley Hill Lane, Switch Island Retail and Leisure Park, Hatton Hill Road, Ford Lane, Pendle Drive 217A Kirkby Admin, Knowsley Lane, Page Moss, Kingsway Aintree Lane, Wango Lane, Longmoor Lane Mondays to Fridays Saturdays Sundays Mondays to Fridays Saturdays Sundays Mondays to Fridays Saturdays Sundays 7am 0742 7am 0742 8am 0839 6pm 1850 6pm 1850 7am 0750 6am 0613 0653 6am 0613 6am 0606l 7pm 1950 7pm 1950 7am 0723 Then every hour at 42 Then every hour at 42 Then every hour at 39 8pm 2050 8pm 2050 Then every hour at 50 minutes Operated by Stagecoach minutes past each hour until minutes past each hour until 9pm 2150 9pm 2150 past each hour until minutes past each hour until l service 217A continues to Halewood Shopping Centre via Belle Vale 10pm 2250 10pm 2250 5pm 1742 5pm 1742 10pm 2239 10pm 2250 Operated on behalf of Merseytravel 6pm 1839 6pm 1839 From 19/01/2020 To 7pm 1939 7pm 1939 Huyton Bus Station 8pm 2039 8pm 2039 227 Via
  • Local Government Boundary Commission for England

    Local Government Boundary Commission for England

    If LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR ENGLAND REVIEW OF NON-METROPOLITAN COUNTIES FURTHER REVIEW OF THE COUNTY OF HUMBERSIDE NORTH YORKSHIRE EAST YORKSHIRE HUMBERSIDE EAST YORKSHIRE _J \\HOLDERNESS BOROUGH OF BEVERLEY ^KINGSTON UPON HU SOUTH YORKSHIRE LINCOLNSHIRE REPORT NO. 604 I I I I I I I • LOCAL GOVERNMENT I BOUNDARY COMMISSION I FOR ENGLAND iI REPORT NO. 604 i i i i i i i i i I I I • LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR ENGLAND I I CHAIRMAN MR G J ELLERTON I MEMBERS MR K F J ENNALS MR G R PRENTICE I MRS H R V SARKANY I MR C W SMITH I PROFESSOR K YOUNG I I I I I I I I I I I CONTENTS The Making of Numberside The Progress of the Humberside Reviews 2.1 The Commission's Initial Review i 2.2 The Secretary of State's Direction 2.3 The Commission's Further Review 2.4 The Commission's Interim Decision 2.5 The Commission's Draft Proposal i 2.6 The Response to the Commission's Draft Proposal i The Commission's Approach to the Further Review and its Consideration of the Case For and Against Change i 3.1 The Criteria for Boundary Changes 3.2 The Wishes of the People 3.3 The Pattern of Community Life 3.4 The Effective Operation of Local Government and i Associated Services i The Commission's Conclusions and Final Proposal 4.1 The Commission's Conclusions 4.2 The Commission's Final Proposal i 4.3 Electoral Consequences 4.4 Second Order Boundary Issues 4.5 Unitary Authorities i 4.6 Publication i i Annexes 1.
  • Cambridge Arcade and Princess Diana Gardens Report Of

    Cambridge Arcade and Princess Diana Gardens Report Of

    Report to: Southport Area Committee Date of Meeting: Subject: Cambridge Arcade and Princess Diana Gardens Report of: Alan Lunt, Director of Built Environment Wards Affected: Ainsdale , Birkdale, Kew, Dukes, Norwood and Cambridge Is this a Key Decision? No Is it included in the Forward Plan? No Exempt/Confidential No Purpose/Summary This report is intended to update members on maintenance issues at Cambridge Arcade, and the adjacent Princess Diana Gardens, and provide details of options available to address these. Recommendation(s) It is recommended that the Committee: 1. Notes the contents of this report and confirms support for the proposals to address the most serious issues, particularly those having potential Health and Safety implications. 2. Provides guidance on the preferred course of action for wider improvements to Cambridge Arcade and Princess Diana Gardens. How does the decision contribute to the Council’s Corporate Objectives? Corporate Objective Positive Neutral Negative Impact Impact Impact 1 Creating a Learning Community X 2 Jobs and Prosperity X 3 Environmental Sustainability X 4 Health and Well-Being X 5 Children and Young People X 6 Creating Safe Communities X 7 Creating Inclusive Communities X 8 Improving the Quality of Council X Services and Strengthening Local Democracy Reasons for the Recommendation: The recommendation is made in accordance with the Authorities constitution. What will it cost and how will it be financed? (A) Revenue Costs All costs associated with the proposals within this report can be met from existing revenue budget provisions. (B) Capital Costs There are no direct Capital costs associated with the proposals within this report.
  • To Bus Routes in Southport and Formby

    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.