Spooner Row Message Board

Can someone please provide the names of these councillors. I wish to contact each one to demand why they voted against the 'will' of the majority and ask why they wasted public funds in holding a charade of a public consultation when the outcome was totally ignored.

Don't forget to also contact George Freeman MP, email:  george.freeman.mp@parliament.uk

Maybe even contact Theresa May, email:  mayt@parliament.uk   and let her know what is going on locally in her Party.  All we are asking for is to be treated democratically and fairly!!!!

We do not currently have a Parish Council that operates as a parish council because Wymondham Town Council is controlled and influenced by the District Council - we all realise now that it's all about their politics and agendas.  And now the new proposed Community Council, which a large number of local people legitimately sought for under the rules of the Local Government Boundary Commission, has also been quashed by the District Council. This totally goes against what the Commission stands for.  

For transparency, which is required, what were the reasons why this was quashed after they initially supported us?

Please see the text of an email  sent this day to Electoral services basically asking for the reasons and for them to be published in accord with the utterly dreadful wishy washy guidance. The bit about publishing is fortunately in the Act so not so bad but it forces South Norfolk  into a corner. I am not convinced we will get anywhere because the guidance is so bad but I am at least trying and given last night's excellent result will be hanging around for a bit longer.

Dear Madam 1st December 2017

Governance review

At the Electoral arrangements review committee ( EARC ) held at South Norfolk on the 29th November , the committee after minimal consideration and from listening to evidence which confirmed that 90% of the residents who responded wanted to form a separate parish council , decided in their ‘wisdom’ to not allow this.

This is utterly bizarre

SNC are required by law to ask the residents every 10-15 years ( although this is now 16 years) about their governance arrangements and whether they want a change i.e. set up their own council. At the first meeting this was recommended. However at the second meeting after a second consultation which re affirmed the same result as the first ! , with a much lower response rate ,they decided to completely overturn this recommendation.

May I ask formally where it states in the Governance review guidance , having asked the residents their views that they can then just simply ignore them despite a massive majority in favour ? It undermines the whole point of the review and clearly runs contrary to the principles laid down in the guidance Governance review although I accept the guidance itself is full of very unhelpful caveats .

Some key paragraph and paragraph sections from the Governance guidance appear below

An important aspect to approaching sustainable communities is allowing local people a say in the way their neighbourhoods are managed.

By taking this decision they have removed the voice of the people and have not allowed this

61.

Building a sense of local identity may make an important contribution to cohesion where a local area is facing challenges arising from rapid demographic change. In considering the criteria, community governance reviews need to home in on communities as offering a sense of place and of local identity for all residents

Once again this has been completely compromised

127.

In rural areas, the Government wants to encourage the involvement of local people in developing their community and having a part to play in shaping the decisions that affect them. A parish can be a useful and democratic means of achieving this.

Just exactly how has the decision encouraged this process

I am aghast and cannot for the life of me understand this decision and believe it to be completely unjustifiable and undemocratic ?

This decision simply re enforces the widely held view, as evidenced by the 90% wanting to form their own council that the governance arrangements, communication etc etc are poor and need change and that the current council governance arrangements fail miserably ,in this regard , as they do not reflect the views and wishes of the electorate , something which the district councillor clearly has also forgotten given his clearly biased ‘presentation’ for want of a better word to committee!

Finally may I point out that SDC has to publish the reasons for this decision and tell everyone who had an interest why? See the paragraph below again from the guidance

98.

Under the 2007 Act the principal council must both publish its

recommendations and ensure that those who may have an interest are informed of them. In taking a decision as to whether or not to give effect to a recommendation, the principal council must have regard to the statutory criteria (see paragraph 51). After taking a decision on the extent to which the council will give effect to the recommendations made in a community governance review, the council must publish its decision and its reasons for taking that decision.

I look forward to the reasons being spelt out and all the affected residents, as all were consulted, being informed.

Yours faithfully

Julian Halls Cromwells ward town councillor

Julian, definitely let our MP know what is going on, after all, I am sure he will want to know if his own district council is working fairly and promoting his Government's localism agenda or not.

I raised the setting up of a Task and finish group to begin the process of improved communication as an issue at the Town Council meeting tonight so we can begin to improve matters of communication to the villages ( the term sub parish is not to be used  please). However until the full South Norfolk council sit and approve the minutes of the EARC we cannot move forward, so post February.

I will be writing to the Sec of State shortly at the DCLG ( Communities and Local Govt) but suspect he will not get involved even though it is his guidance which in my view is being ignored.

happy days

I agree but the logic is that until the full council (SDC) approve the minutes of the EARC and accept them, there remains the slim possibility that we could still go it alone. I do not think this likely given the very clear politically biased vote  we experienced but it is the excuse being used.

There was a suggestion from Councillor Hornby that I am in a wonderful position to improve commuincation lines now. I pointed out that I am one of ( now) three councillors for Cromwells and whilst we , that is suzanne nuri and myself want to hold surgeries there will be a cost to this and the council Governance report , much overdue has suggested we hold them. Whether the other councillors engage , and the public incidentally is another question and the poor circulation of About Wymondham they tell me is being addressed. 

I , as you do want to keep the pressure up, so want the council to pay for the venues we hope to hire locally. The suggestion is that we use the Town council offices but I think the argument against that is obvious for Cromwells at least.

There is a great deal more I could say, but not here as opinion as opposed to evidence is not a good argument base. I think before long we might need an informal gathering in the pub to see where we want to go and when best to try to get something out from this episode which is positive.  Highjacking  is also a distinct possibility which means we need  tread carefully 

Is the transcript available from the SNC meeting yet? I would like to understand the full reasons why.

A reply from the DCLG

In short we can go for judicial review or express our disatisfaction at the ballot box in May 2019 !!!

Our even shorter reply = Not interested

At least I had a reply I suppose........ MP did not even do that

Julian Halls

2 Chapel loke

Spooner Row

Wymondham

By email: julian.halls@talktalk.net

Tel: 0303 444 1165

Fax: 020 7035 0018

Email:aamir.malik@communities.gsi.gov.uk

www.gov.uk/dclg

Our Ref:3594455

Your Ref:

Date:19 December 2017

Dear Mr Halls

Thank you for your email of 7 December to the Rt Hon Sajid Javid MP, expressing

concerns about South Norfolk Councils on-going Community Governance Review.

As you will appreciate the Secretary of State receives a significant amount of

correspondence on a daily basis and it is not possible for him to reply to each letter

individually. I am replying in his stead as I work in the team responsible for issues

relating to local councils.

The Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007 devolved the

power to create, modify and abolish parish councils to principal authorities through

the Community Governance Review (CGR) process, and allowed the public to

trigger a CGR by collecting a certain number of signatures for a petition.

I appreciate that you are unsatisfied with the results of the Electoral arrangements

review committee ( EARC), however the final decision to create a new parish council

rests with the local authority. The decision can be subject to a judicial review if

campaigners are unhappy with it.

The Government believes that these should remain local decisions and for this

reason it is not possible to intervene in this matter. Indeed, while the Government

hopes and expects local authorities to consider and take seriously the concerns of

their residents, they act and take decisions within their statutory powers

independently of central government. Ultimately, elected representatives are

accountable for their actions through the ballot box.

With thanks again for your time,

Aamir Mehmood Malik

How much would it cost to run a Spooner Row Parish Council?

I believe, and correct me if I am wrong, but this was collected over a couple of days in a rush to meet a deadline for SNC to put this important local issue back on the full council Agenda. This is an amazing number to collect in such a short time with most people out at work. This really does need to go back on the Agenda and not swept under the carpet in order for SNC to operate in a fair and open manner. How can a vote be taken if it is not on the Agenda to be discussed?  It is the Government's policy under this current electoral review to promote new community councils.

Would the position of parish clerk need to be advertised first?

Very pleased with this outcome.

It is included in an online EDP article reporting on yesterdays meeting.

http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/politics/south-norfolk-district-councils-announces-electric-car-charging-points-new-community-council-1-5401216?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=dlvr.it

Proposed boundary maps are on SNC's Agenda pages 34-37:

https://www.south-norfolk.gov.uk/sites/default/files/downloads/council-agenda-19-february-2018_0.pdf