Agenda and minutes

None.

To confirm the minutes of the previous meeting.

RESOLVED – that the minutes of the meeting held on 24 March 2022 be confirmed and signed by the Chair. 

The Elections Team Leader summarised the report of the Associate Director: Policy & Governance.

Following the previous meetings, amendments had been made to the draft submission and the recommendations presented within the report. This was in line with the Committee's comments and detailed proposals for Madeley and Sutton Hill, Lawley and Oakengates.

A discussion followed with Members making a number of comments on the updated draft proposals.

The Committee noted the importance of wards reflecting local identities; an example given was that of Lawley. This ward was discussed as being a difficult one to produce alternative proposals to that of the LGBCE's because of the numbers of electors. However, Members stated that having parts of Horsehay in Dawley and Aqueduct ward did not match community identities.

Members discussed and said that the final submission should recognise the difficulty for an alternative proposal for this ward and that if changes should occur to Lawley then the LGBCE should look at other neighbouring wards instead of Dawley.

Following this, Members heard from the Service Delivery Manager: Legal & Democracy and Team Leader: Elections that this was reflected in the report and that if the Committee noted the recommendations contained within, the final submission would be reflect this.

Members were pleased to see proposals for wards like Apley Castle and Oakengates recognise community identity and that this was supported by community consultation and residents feedback.

Members asked about the consultation data and commented on the sample size being smaller than expected. The Team Leader: Elections explained that despite a low response rate the data was useful for the draft proposals and the data they provided was of high quality, gathering responses from across the Borough. During the consultation, maps and proposals for all wards were available for residents to discuss. The data from the consultations were used for the report presented as well as the final submission.

It was noted that Members of the public and of the Committee could put in their own submission to the LGBCE.

After this members voted on the recommendations of the report:

5 voted for and 2 voted against the report recommendations.

The majority of the committee voted that:

RESOLVED - that the Boundary Review Committee:-

·         Delegates authority to the Director: Policy & Governance, in consultation with the Chair of the Boundary Review Committee, to finalise the contents of the Council’s response to the LGBCE’s draft warding arrangements on the basis of this report and the maps circulated at the meeting.