To consider the following Motion submitted by Councillor Dawson:
“This Council:
(a) notes that the Local Government Boundary Commission, in its final report of November 1997, concerning the governance of Sefton Metropolitan Borough, recognised the serious difficulties arising from having a borough within which the communities have relatively little in common and concluded:
· “There are a range of democratic and management arrangements that could be used to address the problem. If these changes are to succeed, they must provide a shared agenda for the Council and those who have been campaigning for Southport to leave Sefton.
· The encouragement of a culture within Sefton Council which recognises the distinctiveness and importance of Southport and other parts of the borough is needed. We have seen little evidence that Seton Council as a whole has this kind of decentralised approach and thinking. This is reflected in the way in which residents across the borough feel that other areas receive more favourable treatment - which will only change if the Council behaves in a different way.
· If the government places a duty upon local authorities to promote the overall social, economic and environmental wellbeing of the communities they serve then Sefton Council will have to decide how it will implement this new obligation. Best value will require local authorities to discuss and agree these plans with their communities and review them on a regular basis. At the very least, these developments will call upon Sefton Council to develop new styles of working with residents throughout its territory.
· We believe that Sefton Council could achieve more efficient and convenient local government throughout the various communities it serves. But how to accomplish this must be a matter for the Council, no doubt following consultation with its residents and after examining the experience of other local authorities. We recognise that this may not be an easy process but we have concluded it is an essential one if the demands for splitting the borough are not to resurface at regular intervals.”
(b) believes that, over the past 16 years, Sefton MBC has failed to adequately-address the issues clearly-identified by the Local Government Boundary Commission and the Council's performance in the areas identified as needing change has, arguably, deteriorated rather than improved particularly during the past two years. In particular, we note:
1. double-rating of parished areas such as Maghull and Lydiate, meaning that residents in those areas have unfairly been pay twice for the same services;
2. a programme of library closures which clearly discriminated againstresidents of individual communities within the Borough; and
3. the creation of a Sefton Central Area Committee which flies in the face of the purpose of Area Committees in that it has councillors from different communities determining matters which should best be decided upon only by councillors of the communities concerned.
(c) notes the introduction by the Member of Parliament for Southport of the "Local Government Boundary Commission (Public Representations) Bill 2013-14", due to have its Second Reading on 16th May 2014.
(d) resolves to write to the Local Government Boundary Committee asking them to return to the Borough of Sefton to conduct a formal Review as to whether the Commission's recommendations in 1997 have been adequately complied with and, if not, to recommend to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how these issues should now be addressed.”
Minutes:
It was moved by Councillor Dawson, seconded by Councillor Robertson:
“This Council:
(a) notes that the Local Government Boundary Commission, in its final report of November 1997, concerning the governance of Sefton Metropolitan Borough, recognised the serious difficulties arising from having a borough within which the communities have relatively little in common and concluded:
· “There are a range of democratic and management arrangements that could be used to address the problem. If these changes are to succeed, they must provide a shared agenda for the Council and those who have been campaigning for Southport to leave Sefton.
· The encouragement of a culture within Sefton Council which recognises the distinctiveness and importance of Southport and other parts of the borough is needed. We have seen little evidence that Sefton Council as a whole has this kind of decentralised approach and thinking. This is reflected in the way in which residents across the borough feel that other areas receive more favourable treatment - which will only change if the Council behaves in a different way.
· If the Government places a duty upon local authorities to promote the overall social, economic and environmental wellbeing of the communities they serve then Sefton Council will have to decide how it will implement this new obligation. Best value will require local authorities to discuss and agree these plans with their communities and review them on a regular basis. At the very least, these developments will call upon Sefton Council to develop new styles of working with residents throughout its territory.
· We believe that Sefton Council could achieve more efficient and convenient local government throughout the various communities it serves. But how to accomplish this must be a matter for the Council, no doubt following consultation with its residents and after examining the experience of other local authorities. We recognise that this may not be an easy process but we have concluded it is an essential one if the demands for splitting the borough are not to resurface at regular intervals.”
(b) believes that, over the past 16 years, Sefton MBC has failed to adequately-address the issues clearly-identified by the Local Government Boundary Commission and the Council's performance in the areas identified as needing change has, arguably, deteriorated rather than improved particularly during the past two years. In particular, we note:
1. double-rating of parished areas such as Maghull and Lydiate, meaning that residents in those areas have unfairly been paying twice for the same services;
2. a programme of library closures which clearly discriminated againstresidents of individual communities within the Borough; and
3. the creation of a Sefton Central Area Committee which flies in the face of the purpose of Area Committees in that it has councillors from different communities determining matters which should best be decided upon only by councillors of the communities concerned.
(c) notes the introduction by the Member of Parliament for Southport of the "Local Government Boundary Commission (Public Representations) Bill 2013-14", due to have its Second Reading on 16th May 2014.
(d) resolves to write to the Local Government Boundary Committee asking them to return to the Borough of Sefton to conduct a formal Review as to whether the Commission's recommendations in 1997 have been adequately complied with and, if not, to recommend to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how these issues should now be addressed.”
Following debate thereon, on a show of hands, the Mayor declared that the Motion was lost by 44 votes to 15 with 1 abstention and it was
RESOLVED:
That no action be taken on the Motion.