Local Government Commission (Hansard, 23 May 1995)

§ Mr. Curry

The Local Government Commission made a number of recommendations on boundary and electoral matters in its final reports on the future of local government in the shire countries of England. My right hon. Friend has now reached decisions on these recommendations.

Among other factors, he has had regard to the possible interaction between these recommendations and the programme of fresh structure reviews of individual districts which he announced on 2 March. Where the commission has recommended further reviews of boundaries or electoral arrangements he has considered the implications for the commission's programme of periodic electoral reviews and other work. In each case he has considered the commission's reports and the representations he has received, and is satisfied that these decisions will best reflect the identities and interests of local communities and will best secure effective and convenient local government.

My right hon. Friend accepts the recommendations made for a boundary change in Gloucestershire between the parishes of West Dean and Coleford in the district of the Forest of Dean, and the consequential changes to parish, district and county electoral arrangements. He also accepts the recommended change in boundary between Colchester borough and Tendering district in the Wivenhoe area of Essex, the recommended re-warding of East Hertfordshire district and the recommended re-warding of Newbury district in Berkshire.

Basildon, Thurrock and Peterborough will be subject to fresh district reviews. My right hon. Friend has already announced that the recommended boundary changes around Basildon which would transfer Wickford to Rochford and Billericay to Brentwood will not be acted upon pending the fresh reviews. It follows that he should 532W defer a decision on the recommended changes in electoral representation in Wickford, Billericay, Basildon and the county, which are based on this boundary change. He considers that a decision on the electoral change recommended for Thurrock—an extra two councillors— should also await the fresh review. Similarly, in Peterborough, a decision on the recommended boundary change which would transfer the southern township area from Huntingdonshire to Peterborough will be made in the light of the outcome of the fresh review of Peterborough. He also expects the commission to look again at the re-warding of Peterborough as part of that review.

In a number of cases the commission suggested it be directed to undertake further reviews. My right hon. Friend will be considering the case for undertaking a review of Cambridge City's boundaries in due course. As he has already announced, he will consider asking the commission to look again at the proposed boundary change around Southend airport. On electoral matters, the commission recommended an early review of electoral arrangements at district and county level in those areas of Essex affected by structural change, the six districts in Berkshire which will gain unitary status and the Suffolk Coastal district. He accepts the case for each of these, and will be discussing with the commission how they may be given priority in its programme of work.

Decisions in principle on all the commission's structural recommendations have now been announced. Decisions on the remaining planning recommendations were announced on 11 April, and an announcement on the parishing recommendations will be made very shortly. Other matters, such as recommendations for police and fire service arrangements, flow directly from the structural decisions, and will be set out in draft orders for structural change which are the subject of consultation. Similarly, ceremonial matters will be covered in general regulations and in structural change orders which are subject to public consultation.