Minutes:
The
Mayor welcome Ceri Stradling, the Lead Commissioner,
Steve Halsall, the Chief Executive, Matt Redmond, the
Deputy Chief Executive and Cher Cooke the Review Officer from the Local Democracy and Boundary Commission for
Wales to Council.
Council then received a presentation on the
upcoming electoral review of Neath Port Talbot and noted that the Commission
was independent of the Welsh Government and political parties and reported
directly to the Cabinet Secretary for Local Government and Public Services
Members noted details of the review process and the
12 week consultation period which would commence on 3 July and finish on 24
September, 2018.
Council noted the Legislation around the
requirement to carry out the review which was the Local Government (Democracy)
(Wales) Act 2013 and that any subsequent changes as a result of the review
would be in place for the Local Government Elections scheduled to be held in
May 2022. Members noted that the ten
year review programme had been suspended in 2013 due to Welsh Government’s
proposed changes to local government and had been reinstated in 2016. Members received, circulated at the meeting,
a Policy and Practice Document which had been updated since its original
publication in 2013. The Commission also
outlined the Statutory Criteria involved in the Review.
From the data considered by the Commission, the
Authority would be a Category 3, with the elected member to population ratio of
1:2,500. This would equate to a reduction from the current 64 Members to 56.
However, in line with the Commission’s 10% cap on changes to Council size, this
would result in 58 Members (1:1,828), although this may vary +/- 1 dependant on
electoral parity.
In arriving at the configuration of electoral wards,
such things as natural and manmade boundaries would be taken into
consideration.
Members received, circulated at the meeting, a map
and statistics of the Authority area where each electoral ward had a Red, Amber
Green status indicating how far it deviated from the desired ration of 1:1,828
In addition Members noted some issues which the
Commission would not take into account which included such things as
Parliamentary and Assembly Constituency Boundaries, Local political
implications, postcodes or addresses and changes to school catchment areas,
etc. Details of the review process were also noted.
Members of Council then raised the following:-
·
Members sought assurances that the review
would not affect
the Town and Community
Councils and the links with the current electoral wards. The Commission was
unable to provide such assurances as they were able to make consequential
changes to Community Council boundaries and electoral arrangements as a result
of the electoral review process.
·
Errors in the paperwork circulated at the
meeting were pointed out by Members to the Commission together with
discrepancies between the tables presented.
The Commission apologised and advised that the figures, etc would be rectified, together with the information on
its website.
·
Members referred to the reduction in the
number of Councillors as a result of the Local Government Reorganisation in
1996 and felt that the proposed further reduction to 58 would result in the
risk of Councillors workload becoming unmanageable. The proposed reduction would result in a
democratic deficit. Councillors did not
have the benefit of support staff to assist their work. Local government had lost staff (through the
austerity measures imposed on it), whilst having increased responsibilities
with no additional funding. It was felt that the scrutiny process in local
government would suffer.
·
The changes in the review criteria were
welcomed, in particular considering both natural and manmade boundaries.
·
Members asked about the population statistics
and the County Borough’s average? How significant would the population
projections be? The Commission advised that the figure 1:1,828 would result in
an over representation rather than and under representation and that the LDP
had also been considered in relation to any significant planning or outline
planning applications which might result in an increase in population.
·
Members referred to Welsh Government’s Green
Paper and the proposed additional responsibilities/changes for local
government. The Commission’s proposals
would result in fewer elected Members resulting in a reduction in democratic
representation and a consequential reduction in scrutiny including on joint
working arrangements. Valley areas in
particular would suffer.
·
Members asked whether the process across Wales
would be completed and submitted to Welsh Government piecemeal or as a whole
and were advised that as each review was completed it would be submitted to the
Cabinet Secretary for determination.
Whether Welsh Government then chose to create Orders for each local
authority area on an individual basis or all 22 at the same time was then up to
Welsh Government.
·
Concern was expressed that the proposals were
based almost entirely on figures. The Commission
responded that all reviews would be based on the Council size model as agreed
by Welsh Government. It was therefore
unlikely that there would be any inconsistencies. The Commission stressed that the review may,
in some authorities result in an increase in the number of Councillors.
·
Members questioned whether the index of
social deprivation would be considered as part of the review and were advised
that this was not one of the factors.
Members then expressed concern, particularly as the electoral wards that
deviated the most from the desired ratio (according to the Plan circulated),
were those with the highest social deprivation.
The Commission advised that a fair democracy was its aim and that if
certain factors were borough wide, these would not be considered. If the factors were in some electoral wards
and not all, representations could be made to the Commission on behalf of those
particular electoral wards. It was felt
that this would result in Member competing against Member in order to prove a
special case for their electoral ward. This was not how Neath Port Talbot
wanted to go forward.
·
The differing amounts of workload as a result
of, for instance, the number of local business, the work commitments of fellow
Ward Members or as a result of social deprivation were raised and the Commission was asked
whether these could also be considered.
The Commission confirmed that these would not be considered but if
changes to the criteria were required these could be taken on board at the next
review.
·
Members asked for the cost of the exercise for
all 22 Local Authorities and were informed that it would cost £3m over the 5
year period.
The Leader of Council then summed up expressing
concerns over the timeliness of the review in light of the other reviews on the
table, such as the Parliamentary Boundary Review, etc. Members were advised that an all Member
Seminar would be held on 17 July to start the collective response process and
that Officers would then come back to Council in the Autumn with a proposed
response. After being thanked for their
attendance at today’s meeting, the Commission’s Officers withdrew from the
room.