The Chair to advise the Committee of any items on which members of the public have requested to speak and advise those members of the public present of the details of the Council’s public participation scheme.
For those members of the public who have submitted any questions or statements, please note, a three minute time limit applies to each speaker and you will be asked to speak before Councillors debate the issue.
Temporary measures during the Coronavirus Pandemic
Due to the Government guidance on measures to reduce the transmission of coronavirus (COVID-19), we will holding meetings in a virtual manner which will be live webcast on our website. Members of the public will still be able to register to speak and ask questions, which will then be read out by the Governance and Democracy Case Manager during Public Question Time and will either be answered by the Chair of the Committee, or the relevant Portfolio Holder, or be followed up with a written response.
Minutes:
Peter Berman submitted the following:-
I write this both as an individual resident and as the representative of Wiveliscombe Town Council at a meeting where Town and Parish Councils met Leaders from Stronger Somerset and One Somerset.
In our Town Council’s response to the consultation document, a copy of which was sent to your Council, we advocated a poll/referendum on the two proposals. On a previous occasion when SCC tried to impose a unitary authority on the County, nearly 80% of those who took part in a poll organised by the Districts voted to reject that proposal. If such a fundamental change is to happen to the organisation of Local Government in Somerset, the public should have the maximum opportunity to express their views. The consultation document from Government is too lengthy and narrowly worded and does not give this facility. The Leader of the County Council totally failed to give a convincing reason as to why the poll should not be carried out.
It was interesting to note how much better the District Leaders performed at the meeting, especially in pointing out some of the “mis-statements” by the County Council.
Just one point for consideration at the meeting. Should the options include “no change”? At a time when Local Authorities will be occupied for many months with what we can only hope is the aftermath of the pandemic, it seems illogical to force this extra burden upon the staff and to divert them from the main task in hand. I have had personal experience as a Non-Executive Director of an NHS Trust of both the additional work and the disruption and anxiety caused to our staff by reorganisation.
The Leader responded:-
Thank you for your letter in consideration of holding a poll on the future of local government.
Thank you for your support of the poll ensuring that all residents have a democratic voice in this very important choice for the future of our local democracy and how our services are delivered.
As you will be aware the Council overwhelmingly endorsed the running of the Poll and residents will be receiving their packs very shortly. You have asked the question about whether the poll should include an option for “no change” This was considered however the Secretary of State has been very clear that no change is not an option and is minded to implement change.
Once again thank you for taking the time to provide your support and views on this very important issue.
Denise Wyatt submitted the following:-
My name is Denise Wyatt. I am a member of Somerset Independents, a pressure group and political party formed a year ago during Lockdown to stand up for Somerset residents.
Somerset Independents was formed because residents suspected that you councillors were not standing up for them. And that was indeed the case with this Council reorganisation that no residents asked for. In fact, 2007 82% of them voted against any unitary authority. Yes, 82% AGAINST.
Somerset Independents wrote to all Councillors in Somerset asking them to support a referendum -over 200 councillors. We also asked the local media to cover our campaign. The local media did.
Why did you try to ignore the views of residents, who were against what you were doing? Instead of listening properly, you spent public money on shameless PR lies for Stronger Somerset.
District councils had a shameless competition between Stronger Somerset and the County’s One Somerset.
Your PR even quoted our supporter and colleague Professor Colin Copus’ work. The Professor said you should have a Referendum. You did not want to listen to him or to us. He told us directly that you never asked him or spoke to him!
Suddenly you appear to have listened to our campaign for a Referendum for Somerset people. The people of Somerset deserve to know why you want to hear from them when you have previously ignored them.
Why the about turn from you? Is it because you discovered, even in your rigged consultation, EVEN WHEN you fixed the questions to suit your agenda, THAT RESIDENTS DON’T WANT YOUR ROTTEN CHANGES. NOT NOW and certainly NOT DURING THE PANDEMIC.
But I’m sorry to say that you aren’t even asking the right question in the Referendum. You are only asking the question that suits you, even now! Choosing between two rotten options. This is not the way!
So you are proposing a Referendum, but only between two terrible options. There is not a "no change" option. There is not a "not now" option during the Coronavirus Pandemic. Just two rotten buckets. Two rotten choices, between which bucket of manure residents want to tipped over their heads. Whether they want the Districts bucket of manure, Stronger Somerset or the County’s bucket of manure One Somerset.
We are pleased that you now want a vote, but residents deserve to know why – and to have a proper choice of “no change” and more importantly “not now choice” during a national emergency.
Any new council must reject the strong leader model in favour of the modern committee system, which the people Sheffield are currently voting on in a referendum. Do it but only when safe.
Thank you for listening.
The Leader responded:-
Thank you for your statement in consideration of holding a poll on the future of local government.
The business case for stronger Somerset was approved by Full Council and submitted to the Secretary of State. The Council fully supports this as we believe this is the best solution for all the residents of Somerset.
As you will be aware the Council overwhelmingly endorsed the running of the Poll and residents will be receiving their packs very shortly. You have asked the question about whether the poll should include an option for “no change” This was considered however the Secretary of State has been very clear that no change is not an option and is minded to implement change.
Once again thank you for taking the time to provide views on this very important issue.
Chris Mann submitted the following:-
I think that Stronger Somerset does not satisfy Best Value and has a £250m risk with its Southwest Two and therefore a new poll is a waste of money. The Secretary of States single tier consultation has three criteria. A - likely to improve local government and service delivery, giving greater value for money, generating savings, providing stronger strategic and local leadership and more sustainable structures. Stronger Somerset does not satisfy this because it requires the replacement of 5 existing councils with 5 new organisations including another Southwest One which was created immediately after councillors voted against unitary in 2007, promising savings of £180m, but lost £70m. It locked Somerset into two tier management for 10 years while adjacent counties became unitary. The councils are also all Best Value authorities requiring economy, efficiency and effectiveness. How can replacing 5 councils with two unitary councils, a Children’s Trust, a Joint Enabling Service and a Southwest Two Integrated Delivery Service possibly satisfy this compared with One Somerset’s single senior management team? Strategic leadership for Somerset would lack one voice. Stronger Somerset is not a sustainable structure because as PWC point out there would be unbalanced financial sustainability, suggestion of an unprecedented future combined authority and risk of disaggregating existing county council services. Taunton badly needs a town council under either proposal. B – a good deal of local support as assessed in the round overall across the whole area of the proposal Stronger Somerset has had no visible support in the Somerset County Gazette which has reported all announcements with basic explanations of this complicated matter, and also the more detailed PWC report. Between February 25th when the government’s consultation was announced and April 22nd when it ended, there have been two letters
in favour of One Somerset, one against, one calling for a Taunton Town Council and one complaining about a £200 increase in Council Tax since 2018C - 300,000 to 600,000 population Stronger Somerset does not satisfy this because East and West Somerset unitary councils would both be less than 300,000 citizens and there are no local identity or geography issues. The Secretary of State says a new poll would detract from the consultation to which thousands in Somerset have already responded, be confusing to the public and in consistent with the published timetable. It would be hard to see value for money. His decision will not be made on the basis of most popular support. I therefore ask councillors to vote against having this poll.
The Leader responded:-
Thank you for your statement in consideration of holding a poll on the future of local government.
The business case for stronger Somerset was approved by Full Council and submitted to the Secretary of State. The Council fully supports this as we believe this is the best solution for all the residents of Somerset.
Once again thank you for taking the time to provide views on this very important issue.
Peter Finch submitted the following:-
As a local council taxpayer I have significant concerns with this report.
Every resident, business, town and parish council, charity and other organisation throughout Somerset has been able to participate in the Government’s consultation process, either by completing an online form or by writing directly to the Secretary of State.
The fact the Secretary of State confirms in his letter to the Districts, that ‘thousands of people have already responded ‘is testament to this.
Is there anything to suggest that the Secretary of State’s consultation process disproportionately disadvantaged supporters of the Stronger Somerset proposal over those of One Somerset, which would warrant an additional consultation exercise being necessary?
If advocates of each side had an equal opportunity to participate, what insight would a public poll provide the Secretary of State above that which he will be able to conclude from the responses to his consultation?
If you are not able to answer this question then how can it possibly be value for money to commit so much public money on a speculative exercise with little or no obvious added value?
My next area of concern relates to the wording of the proposed ballot itself.
I believe it wrongly and misleadingly describes the Stronger Somerset option.
This is NOT a straightforward choice between creating one or creating two councils.
The Stronger Somerset proposal is to create two councils, a confusing and mysterious combined authority (possibly with an elected mayor) and an additional quango for children’s services.
That’s four organisations not two. Each with expensive management structures and separate lines of accountability.
One of the principal reasons many oppose the Stronger Somerset case is the fact that it is management and bureaucracy heavy and preserves the confusion around accountability which exists in the present fragmented model of local government in Somerset.
By simply referring to the district’s proposal as creating two councils it significantly misrepresents the true bureaucratic and bloated nature of their proposal and I believe would be open to challenge by way of judicial review.
Secondly, nowhere within the ballot paper that accompanies your report does it make clear that the ballot is advisory only. People are NOT being asked to vote for the model of local government that WILL be introduced in Somerset but simply to state a preference which MAY or may not be considered.
I would respectfully ask members to vote against, or abstain today and not waste further public money on an exercise which clearly does not have the decision maker’s support.
I thank you for your time and hope that these points will be considered.
The Leader responded:-
Thank you for your submission.
We have considered your points and in response we would like to make a number of our own:
First, we are not proposing a poll of all electors in our council areas because we feel “the Secretary of State’s consultation process disproportionately disadvantaged?supporters of the Stronger Somerset proposal over those of One Somerset”. We are proposing a poll that is different to the consultation but complementary to it.
Second, the government consultation invited detailed answers to a detailed online questionnaire. Anyone, anywhere, was able to respond to the consultation. The local poll will be independently run and verified and offer every elector in Somerset one vote – everyone’s voice will be heard equally. It will follow guidance produced by the Electoral Commission and will ask a question that presents the options clearly, simply and neutrally, will be easy to understand and to the point. It will be unambiguous, will avoid encouraging voters to consider one response more favourably than another and will avoid misleading voters. The consultation encouraged comment and views and appealed to some people; the poll, on the other hand, will encourage people to express a preference in a way that is familiar and will be easy to engage with for all voters. We would contend that this would be of great help in making the decision and avoid any ambiguity about where local support lay.
Third, the choice we are offering on the ballot paper is the choice before the Secretary of State – between One Somerset, which favours one unitary council for the whole of the county council area and Stronger Somerset, which favour two unitary councils – one for Western Somerset and one for Eastern Somerset. Of course, there is much more to the proposals than the number of councils and the details of the respective cases are in the business cases published on the respective websites. The business cases of both proposals discuss combined authorities as a way to engage with Government on devolution deals and to attract investment for major regional infrastructure projects. The only thing confusing and mysterious about this is the county council’s continuing insistence that our discussion of a potential combined authority should somehow be added to the number of councils we want to see created. Similarly with the alternative delivery model – this is a tool of government, not a tier of government. It would be jointly owned by, and accountable to, the two new unitary authorities and will give the strong and singular focus on children and young people we believe is needed to deliver improvements at greater pace and with better momentum. This new arrangement we propose will be designed to give a clear focus on the crucial area of Children’s Services and to add real value, not to increase management costs.
Fourth, the report before councillors accompanying the proposal makes clear that the councils have the power under Section 116 of the Local Government Act 2003 “to hold a local advisory poll (referendum).” We do not pretend that this is a binding vote and will make the advisory nature of the poll clear to electors.
Finally, on value for money, we will take full account of the need to show value for money in the use of public funds. We have arrived at the proposed method for conducting the poll by balancing inclusivity and ease of participation with cost. Every elector in Somerset will be given the chance to have their vote for little more than the price of a second-class stamp.
We hope that addresses the points you make and assures you that our proposal takes every account of them.