On 23rd September, Babergh's full Council considered a paper on the proposals of the Boundary Committee for England and the available comments from various town and parish councils in the district.
As a result of the debate, Councillors agree the following response to the Boundary Committee:
1. support for the concept of a “North Haven” unitary (see sections 2.1 and 2.2 of the paper)
2. a view that this concept could be further strengthened by a change to the proposed North Haven boundary to include Hadleigh and a number of its neighbouring parishes in the Babergh district, acknowledging the fact that so far local stakeholders have shown only limited support (see section 2.3 of the paper)
3. support for the concept of a Rural Suffolk unitary, although it is noted with concern that there may not be sufficient commitment to this concept in other parts of the county served by that proposed unitary council (see section 2.4 of the paper)
4. a recommendation that if commitment to the Rural Suffolk unitary does not exist in sufficient measure elsewhere in the county, urgent discussions take place to refine and/or better articulate this element of the Draft Proposal or to develop alternative proposals that have a broader measure of support (see section 2.4 of the paper) whilst also retaining a North Haven unitary
5. a recommendation that the alternative pattern of unitary government (the One Suffolk unitary) identified in the Boundary Committee report has having merit be not pursued (see section 3.1 of the paper)
6. a recommendation that, in the event of it being proposed to include Lowestoft in unitary arrangements for Suffolk, it be not included in the proposed Rural Suffolk unitary and that an alternative two or three unitary solution be evaluated in place of the Boundary Committee’s current Draft Proposal for Suffolk (see sections 4.1 and 4.2 of the paper)
|