Agenda item

(Voting: 35 in favour, 11 against, 0 abstentions)

The Leader of Council said that the residents of Somerset should be allowed a vote on the future of local government and how services were delivered in Somerset, as it involved their future.  The Government’s consultation was not correct for Somerset and should have included further consultees.  She said the she had responded to a number of questions submitted by the Conservative Group. She noted the District Executive had commended the recommendations to Full Council.

The Chairman noted that the report had been discussed at an informal meeting of the Scrutiny Committee earlier that week and by the District Executive that morning.  It was now for Full Council to decide.

In response to questions from Members, the Leader of Council and the Chief Executive replied:-

·         The cost of the referendum to SSDC would be in the region of £92,000 depending upon the number of people voting.

·         The referendum questions had been checked by an independent expert on electoral, who had suggested amendments to the original draft and officers were satisfied it complied with Electoral Commission guidance.

·         Legal opinion on the referendum had been taken from Bevan Brittan Solicitors and James Goudie QC.  The legal opinion was sought to clarify the legal advice.  The QC advice cost £3,300.

·         In September 2020, the Government did not intend to hold a referendum but once their consultation document was published, the Somerset District Councils decided the people of Somerset should be asked their opinion. 

·         An equality impact assessment had been carried out.

·         The cost of conducting the poll included the cost of return postage.

·         All opinions would be taken into account and the Secretary of State had a duty to take account of all available information.  It would be disappointing if he made his decision prior to the conclusion of the poll.

During discussion, the following points were made:-

·         Comments on social media should not be relied upon to provide responses to the consultation.

·         The Secretary of State should have as much information as possible from the residents of Somerset before taking his decision. 

·         There was value in the expenditure on the poll in Wednesbury principles.

·         Parish Councils were not specifically consulted by the Government but were able to submit a view in the general Government consultation.

·         The Government’s on-line consultation was difficult to complete and could have been completed on-line multiple times by any person.

·         The decision should not be political and would cost SSDC £92,000.  The cost of consulting solicitors and a QC were not available.

·         The Council should spend their money on providing services to the public.

·         It was not known if Town or Parish Councils would have a greater workload if a unitary authority were formed and they had the opportunity to respond to the Government consultation, either as a council or an individual.

·         There would be less Councillors under either Unitary Authority option.

·         The poll would not be political and residents should be allowed their opinion on the proposals.

·         SSDC had fully engaged in the process and had fully informed its residents so why have a poll now.  It was not a proper use of taxpayers money.

·         Councillors had worked together on the various regeneration projects across the district and the cost of the poll was small compared to that investment.  The opinion of the public was vital on this proposal.

·         Town & Parish Councils would be given the opportunity to take on additional work if they wished but they were under no obligation to do so.

·         Councillors should work together to represent the people of Somerset and allow them a vote on the future government for the county.

Councillor Tony Lock proposed that the question be put and this was seconded by Councillor Peter Seib.  The Chairman then agreed that the question be put and a named vote was taken.  This was agreed by 35 votes in favour and 11 against.

The Leader of Council concluded that the Stronger Somerset proposal was a cross-party proposal and 85% of District Councillors in Somerset, including Conservative, Independent, Labour and Green councillors had voted in favour of it.  She proposed the recommendations and they were seconded by Councillor Peter Gubbins.  A named vote was taken and the recommendations were confirmed by 35 votes in favour, 11 against and no abstentions.

(Voting: 35 in favour, 11 against, 0 abstentions)