Democracy in Crawley

How decisions are made and who represents you

Agenda and minutes

Venue: Committee Room B - Town Hall

Contact: Democratic Services  Email: democratic.services@crawley.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

1.

Councillor John Stanley

Minutes:

The Chair acknowledged the absence of Councillor John Stanley who had sadly and unexpectedly passed away since the date of the last Committee meeting, and who had been Chair of the Governance Committee up until that time.  A minutes silence had taken place at the last Full Council meeting in memory of Councillor Stanley.

2.

Disclosures of Interest

In accordance with the Council's Code of Conduct, Councillors of the Council are reminded that it is a requirement to declare interests where appropriate.

 

Minutes:

No disclosures of interests were made.

3.

Minutes pdf icon PDF 59 KB

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the Governance Committee held on 15 March 2017.

Minutes:

The minutes of the meeting of the Governance Committee held on 15 March 2017 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

 

4.

Electoral Review 2017/2018 pdf icon PDF 85 KB

To consider report LDS/132 of the Head of Legal and Democratic Services.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Committee considered report LDS/132 of the Head of Legal and Democratic Services in detail which sought the Committee’s endorsement of the Council’s draft Submission on a Council size of 39 to the Local Government Boundary Commission for England (LGBCE).

 

The Committee noted that, should the Committee agree to endorse the draft Submission, some minor clerical corrections would need to be made before the document was put before Full Council for its consideration.

 

A minority of Committee members were of the opinion that a Council size of 36 would present the best option of retaining the neighbourhood principle, based upon the advice they felt the LGBCE had given.  The view was also expressed that individual Councillor workload could be decreased with a reduction in the number of Councillors serving on some Committees, and it was also argued that there was a national trend in the reduction of Council size.

 

However, other Committee members were of the view that Councillor’s had a significant workload and that a reduction in Council size was not feasible, especially given the significant current and future expansion in the Borough’s population.  In addition, those members argued that a Council size of 39 provided minimal neighbourhood divisions and that the proposed size was founded on the evidence provided, including the information provided in Section 5 of the report which detailed Councillor workloads.

 

It was moved and seconded that the recommendation be amended to support a Council size of 36.  However, having put it to the Committee, the motion was LOST.

 

Following further discussion and a vote, the Committee agreed that Paragraphs 8.6 and 8.7 of the draft Submission be deleted as the LGBCE had advised that it would not take election results into consideration, and the information was therefore deemed unnecessary.

 

At the request of Councillor Crow, and in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 25.5, the names of the Councillors voting for and against the proposal to endorse the draft Submission (subject to the minor clerical corrections and the removal of Paragraphs 8.6 and 8.7) were recorded as set out below:

 

For the Proposal:

 

Councillors M G Jones, S J Joyce, P K Lamb, T Lunnon, T Rana and A C Skudder (6).

 

Against the Proposal:

 

Councillors R D Burrett, D G Crow, C R Eade, R A Lanzer and K McCarthy (5).

 

Abstentions:

 

None.

 

With the vote being 6 for the proposal and 5 against the proposal, the proposal was therefore CARRIED, and it was

 

RESOLVED

 

1.     That, subject to minor clerical corrections and the removal of Sections 8.6 and 8.7, the draft Submission on Council size be endorsed and that a copy of the updated draft Submission be provided to Full Council.

 

2.     That Full Council be recommended to approve the document at Appendix A of report LDS/132 (subject to minor clerical corrections and the removal of Sections 8.6 and 8.7) for final submission to the Local Government Boundary Commission for England, and in doing so agree that the Council size be proposed at 39  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

5.

2018 Review of Parliamentary Constituencies pdf icon PDF 1 MB

To consider report LDS/133 of the Head of Legal and Democratic Services.

Minutes:

The Committee considered report LDS/133 of the Head of Legal and Democratic Services which recommended that further representations be made to the Boundary Commission for England suggesting that Rusper and Colgate ward be included in the Crawley parliamentary constituency.

 

Some Committee members were of the opinion that Rusper and Colgate ward had clear associations with Horsham District and that moving the ward in to the Crawley constituency would blur the area’s rural identity.  Those Committee members were in not favour of including Rusper and Colgate ward, and were of the view that Copthorne and Worth ward should be added as previously proposed by the Boundary Commission.

 

Other Committee members stated that Kilnwood Vale would receive a significant number of services from Crawley and as such it would be logical for it to be represented by the Member of Parliament for Crawley.  Disappointment was expressed that Crawley fell only slightly short of the new electorate threshold which would have enabled Crawley to remain co-terminus with the Borough boundary, especially given that the predicted future expansion of the population for Crawley.

 

At the request of Councillor Crow, and in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 25.5, the names of the Councillors voting for and against the proposal to make representations to the Boundary Commission for England that the Rusper and Colgate ward be included in the Crawley parliamentary constituency, were recorded as set out below:

 

For the Proposal:

 

Councillors M G Jones, S J Joyce, P K Lamb, T Lunnon, T Rana and A C Skudder (6).

 

Against the Proposal:

 

Councillors R D Burrett, D G Crow, C R Eade, R A Lanzer and K McCarthy (5).

 

Abstentions:

 

None.

 

With the vote being 6 for the proposal and 5 against the proposal, the proposal was therefore CARRIED, and it was

 

RESOLVED

 

That representations be made to the Boundary Commission for England that the Rusper and Colgate ward should be included in the Crawley parliamentary constituency.