Contact: David Hinxman, Head of Committee Division - ext. 7339

1. Summary

1.1. The following decisions are sought:

That the following representations be made following the publication of proposed Parliamentary Constituencies by the Boundary Commission for England.

(i) Winchester/Fareham - Whiteley

In order to avoid dividing the Whiteley community, the County Council considers that Whiteley should be located wholly in either the Winchester Constituency or the Fareham Constituency.


(ii) Meon Valley

The County Council considers that, whilst the Commission's recommendations are based on electoral data at a fixed point in time, regard should be had to significant anticipated changes. In the Meon Valley the major development area west of Waterlooville is, in the County Council's view, such an issue. It will have a major impact in many ways, particularly in terms of the size of the electorate. The situation at Whiteley is an example of the anomalies which derive from failure to take major developments into account before building actually commences.

The County Council is also concerned that the Meon Valley Constituency as proposed has no focal point, no centre of population to give it a clear identity.


(iii) The villages to the south east of Alresford

Local knowledge persuades the County Council that the villages to the south east of Alresford look towards Winchester rather than to the east of Hampshire. Accordingly, the County Council is opposed to their inclusion in the proposed East Hampshire Constituency.


(iv) Basingstoke

The County Council considers that the parishes of Oakley, Dummer and North Waltham have a stronger affinity with the town of Basingstoke than with north west Hampshire and accordingly should be included in the proposed Basingstoke Constituency.


(v) New Forest East/West Constituencies

The County Council considers that Boldre should remain in New Forest East and be joined by Sway rather than taking Boldre from New Forest East to join Sway in New Forest West. Both Boldre and Sway have greater affiliation with Brockenhurst in New Forest East than they have with New Forest West.


(vi) Romsey

The need to reflect local community interest effectively persuades the County Council that Bassett and Swaythling should not be included in the Romsey constituency. They look strongly to the City of Southampton and comprise defined entities within the area of that unitary authority. The County Council does not consider that the affinity between Romsey and its surrounding area with Bassett and Swaythling is such that they should be co-located in the same parliamentary constituency.


(vii) Yateley

The County Council is disappointed that the Commission's proposal divides Yateley between the Aldershot Constituency and North East Hampshire. The County Council considers that, with the interests of the local community in mind, the status quo should prevail albeit that retaining Yateley in the Aldershot Constituency will increase marginally the electorate above the usual tolerance.

2. Reason

2.1. The Boundary Commission for England has published its proposals and the County Council has the opportunity to make representations by 14 March, 2002.

3. Other Options considered and rejected

3.1. Not applicable.

4. Conflicts of Interest declared by the decision maker or a member or officer consulted

4.1. Not applicable.

5. Dispensation granted by the Standards Committee

5.1. Not applicable.

6. Reasons for the matter being dealt with if urgent

6.1. Not applicable

Approved by: (signature) Date: (date of decision)

Councillor T.K. Thornber, C.B.E.

5bR230302