To approve as a correct record the minutes of the meeting of the General Purposes Committee held on 27 May 2011 (copy attached).

RESOLVED

that the minutes of the meeting of the General Purposes Committee held on 27 May 2011 be confirmed and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

To receive from Members any declarations and the nature thereof in relation to:-

(a)    Personal interests in any agenda item;

(b)    Personal and prejudicial interests in any agenda item.

To receive any announcements from the Chairman and any matters of communication.

None.

To receive petitions from members of the public in accordance with the Public Participation Procedure as set out in Annex 2 of Part A4 of the Constitution.

No petitions were received from members of the public in accordance with the Public Participation Procedure as set out in Annex 2 of Part A4 of the Constitution.

To receive any questions, statements or deputations from members of the public in accordance with the Public Participation Procedure as set out in Annex 1 of Part A4 of the Constitution.

No questions, statements or deputations were received at this point from members of the public in accordance with the Public Participation Procedure as set out in Annex 1 of Part A4 of the Constitution.  However, the Chairman advised the meeting that a member of the public wished to make a statement on item 8 (Community Governance Review – Stotfold Parish Council (Area of Fairfield)) when this item was considered.

To consider the outcome of a review of the arrangements for administering the combined referendum and local authority elections held on 5 May 2011.

The Committee received a report by the Head of Legal and Democratic Services which set out the findings of a review of the arrangements for administering the combined referendum and local elections held on 5 May 2011.  The review had been undertaken by the Chief Executive in his capacity as Returning Officer.   The Chief Executive advised that the report had arisen as a result of both a request made at the meeting of the Customer and Central Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee held on 14 June 2011 and of his own practice of conducting a post election review.

The meeting was aware of the views of a Central Bedfordshire Member who, being unable to attend the meeting, had already emailed his comments to members of the Committee.  The Chairman referred to these comments at relevant times during the debate.

The meeting noted that the Overview and Scrutiny Committee had specifically highlighted the following issues for consideration:

a)                 Informing Agents about meetings;

b)                 Ensuring nomination papers were properly completed;

c)                  The count at Dunstable;

d)                 The time taken for the results to be announced;

e)                 Information about the results;

f)                    Notification of results to towns and parishes.

Although the Chief Executive had responded to each of the above in his report he highlighted certain points for Members’ consideration.  First, with regard to the arrangements for accepting nomination papers and the difficulties which had arising from the late submission of some papers, he emphasised that the ultimate responsibility for submitting nomination papers in good time rested with the candidates and their Agents.

The Chief Executive then turned to the counting procedure at Dunstable.  He reminded the meeting of the special arrangements introduced by the government for the management of the national referendum through the Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Act which had included the appointment of a Chief Counting Officer (CCO) to oversee the referendum.  The CCO had issued some 207 directives on a range of issues related to it including, most importantly, the timing of the referendum count.   The Chief Executive referred Members to his report which set out the reasons why he had taken the decision to hold the count for the local election results on the following day and why it would have been impractical to have done so earlier.  He also emphasised that his first priority was to ensure that the results of the count were accurate and reflected the views of the electorate.

Members then raised matters for consideration.

A Member commented on the delay which had arisen at the count because of the use of one ballot box, rather than separate boxes, at each polling station to receive the ballot papers cast for both the Central Bedfordshire Council and parish council elections and the resulting need to separate the two.  In response, the Democratic Services Manager explained that the use of only one box for both sets of voting papers was a requirement of the Act.

A Member reminded the meeting that the next combined poll  ...  view the full minutes text for item 15.

To consider whether a public petition seeking a community governance review for the area of Fairfield within Stotfold Parish is a valid petition and, if agreed as such, approve the Terms of Reference for the review.

The Committee considered a report by the Head of Legal and Democratic Services which informed Members of the receipt of a petition from Fairfield Community Action.  The meeting was aware that a copy of the petition was attached in full at Appendix A to the officer’s report.

The petition, which had been made and submitted under the provisions of The Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007, called upon the Council to undertake a Community Governance Review for the area of Fairfield within the Parish of Stotfold and, subsequent to this, make a recommendation to the Electoral Commission that a new parish council, known as Fairfield Community Council, be created for the representation of local residents.  The Head of Legal and Democratic Services, having examined the petition, confirmed that it met the conditions specified in the Act and the Council was therefore required by the same Act to undertake the Review.  However, before doing so, the Council had to first establish the Review’s Terms of Reference.  To this end he had included proposed Terms of Reference at Appendix B to his report for the Committee’s approval.

At this point the representative for Fairfield Community Action, who had requested that he be able to make a statement on behalf of the group, was invited by the Chairman to address the Committee.

The representative explained that he did not wish to repeat what was already included in the petition.  Instead he commented on the quality of its content and presentation and how it was the result of a substantial amount of work by local residents.   He also explained the efforts made to canvass the views of Fairfield residents and how the resulting information had emphasised how much they differed from others within Stotfold Parish.

The representative then stressed that it had not originally been the intention to breakaway from Stotfold Parish but it had become apparent that the formation of a new council was the only means by which the financial inequities faced by Fairfield residents could be overcome.  He added that the Section 106 agreement for the Fairfield development was the first drawn up by the former Mid Beds District Council and that Council had acknowledged that it had contained a number of errors which had worked to the disadvantage of local residents. The representative stated the creation of a single body to represent Fairfield, in the form of the proposed community council, would enable the precept raised from Fairfield residents to be used for their benefit.  The representative concluded by commending the petition to the Committee.

The Vice-Chairman commented on the financial implications for Central Bedfordshire Council in carrying out the Review and other related tasks.

In response to a query by a Member the Head of Legal and Democratic Services explained the process to be followed by Central Bedfordshire Council with regard to the outcome of the Review.

Examples of earlier, similar divisions of parish councils were given by Members and comment passed on how they  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16.