Agenda and minutes

To record apologies for absence and the attendance of substitute members. 

Apologies were  submitted on behalf of Councillor Sarah James with Councillor Viral Patel attending as substitute, and Councillor Max Thompson with Councillor de la Harpe attending as substitute.

To adopt and sign as a correct record the Community Governance and Electoral Issues Committee minutes of the meeting held on 18 March 2024.

RESOLVED: to approve the minutes of the meeting held on the 18 March 2024 as a correct record and agree that the chair sign them as such.

To receive any declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests and any conflicts of interest in respect of items on the agenda for this meeting. 

None.

To receive notification of any matters which the chair determines should be considered as urgent business and the special circumstances which have made the matters urgent, and to receive any announcements from the chair. 

None.

To receive any questions or statements from members of the public that have registered to speak. 

Councillor Barrow addressed the committee. He spoke in support of the draft LGBCE proposals for Grove, which reflected that submitted by the council, and against any alteration to the proposal which could result in East Challow parish becoming part of a larger Grove ward or a larger Grove and Wantage ward. He spoke in support of the retention of Baulking and Uffington parishes within the same ward due to their shared community identity and working relationship between the two parishes.

To consider the report of the head of legal and democratic on the Local Government Boundary Commission for England’s draft recommendations for new wards in Vale of White Horse.

The committee considered the report of the head of legal and democratic on the council’s response to the Local Government Boundary Commission for England (the Commission) proposed warding pattern for the district.

The committee welcomed the high correlation between the Commission’s draft recommendations and those proposals put forward by the council.

The committee raised no objection to the following draft recommendations which reflected the proposals put forward by the council:

·       Abingdon South

·       Kingston Bagpuize

·       Botley & Sunningwell

·       Kennington & Radley

·       Cumnor

·       Marcham & Wootton

·       Drayton

·       Steventon & East Hanney

·       Sutton Courtenay

The committee considered the following draft recommendations on which councillor representations had been submitted.

Abingdon-on-Thames (Abingdon East, Abingdon North wards)

The committee noted that there was a slight the difference between the arrangements for Abingdon set out in the final recommendations for Oxfordshire County Council and those proposed for Abingdon East and Abingdon North district wards around Mattlock Way and Hendred Way. The committee also noted that this was a consequence of the two reviews overlapping - the county review had to take account of the existing district ward boundaries. Whilst accepting the logic of the argument for the recommendations in terms of road access, the committee agreed that greater weight should be given to achieving coterminosity with the Oxfordshire divisions in Abingdon allowing for effective and convenient local government.

The committee agreed to raise an objection to the proposal based on the above.

Blewbury, Harwell & Western Valley and Hendreds 

The committee considered the representations received from councillors which argued that Harwell parish should be included in a district ward with other rural villages rather than within a ward with Western Valley parish which had a different identity and demographic. Whilst acknowledging the points raised, the committee noted that a single member Western Valley ward would have an electoral variance of -16%. In addition, the committee noted that, as set out in the Commission’s draft recommendations document, the alternative arrangements would not provide for an effective balance of the three statutory criteria.

The committee also considered the representations received in respect of Harwell Campus. These argued that the Campus was geographically closer to Chilton and should be included within the same ward as Chilton parish. The committee noted that the draft recommendation, which reflected the council’s proposal, included the Harwell Oxford Campus ward of Harwell Parish Council, currently in the Hendreds ward, within the Harwell & Western Valley ward thus providing for the parish to be included in a single ward.  The committee also noted that any proposal to include the whole of Harwell campus within one parish would need to be considered as part of a community governance review (a review of parish arrangements) and could result in related alterations at the district ward level.

The committee agreed to make no objection to the proposal.

In response to the Commission’s invitation to comment on the ward name for the proposed Blewbury ward, the committee agreed that Blewbury & Chilton was suitable reflecting the two largest settlements.

Grove

The committee considered the representations regarding the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 27.