Wirral Council councillors agree to change of polling station and to consultation on medical requirements for taxi drivers

Wirral Council councillors agree to change of polling station and to consultation on medical requirements for taxi drivers

Wirral Council councillors agree to change of polling station and to consultation on medical requirements for taxi drivers

                                                     

Please accept YouTube cookies to play this video. By accepting you will be accessing content from YouTube, a service provided by an external third party.

YouTube privacy policy

If you accept this notice, your choice will be saved and the page will refresh.

Licensing, Health and Safety and General Purposes Committee Wirral Council 19th November 2014  L to R Cllr Steve Williams, Cllr Geoffrey Watt, Cllr Andrew Hodson and Anne Beauchamp
Licensing, Health and Safety and General Purposes Committee Wirral Council 19th November 2014 L to R Cllr Steve Williams, Cllr Geoffrey Watt, Cllr Andrew Hodson and Anne Beauchamp

Wirral Council’s Licensing, Health and Safety and General Purposes Committee met on the 19th November 2014. The agenda and reports for this meeting can be read on Wirral Council’s website.

Please accept YouTube cookies to play this video. By accepting you will be accessing content from YouTube, a service provided by an external third party.

YouTube privacy policy

If you accept this notice, your choice will be saved and the page will refresh.

1. MEMBERS’ CODE OF CONDUCT – DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST 0:22
There were no declarations of interest made.

Please accept YouTube cookies to play this video. By accepting you will be accessing content from YouTube, a service provided by an external third party.

YouTube privacy policy

If you accept this notice, your choice will be saved and the page will refresh.

2. MINUTES 0:30
The minutes of the meeting held on the 19th June 2014 were agreed.

Please accept YouTube cookies to play this video. By accepting you will be accessing content from YouTube, a service provided by an external third party.

YouTube privacy policy

If you accept this notice, your choice will be saved and the page will refresh.

3. POLLING STATIONS: FURTHER UPDATE 0:43
Cllr Geoffrey Watt then declared a non pecuniary interest in item 3 (Polling Station – Further Update) as it refers to polling district QC which is in West Kirby & Thurstaston ward (which he represents on Wirral Council). Get Propecia free trial on http://www.trendingdownward.com/propecia-finasteride/ and try for hair loss treatment.

Kate Robinson explained that this report was about polling stations for polling district YC (Moreton West and Saughall Massie) and QC (West Kirby & Thurstaston).

The (Acting) Returning Officer’s report recommended the following polling stations:

YC (Moreton West and Saughall Massie): Foxfield School (Douglas Drive)
QC (West Kirby & Thurstaston): St Bridget’s Church of England Primary School (St Bridget’s Lane)

Councillors discussed the (Acting) Returning Officer’s recommendations.

The decisions as to where polling stations would be for the May 2015 elections were made by councillors on the Licensing, Health and Safety and General Purposes Committee as follows:

YC (Moreton West and Saughall Massie): Foxfield School (Douglas Drive)

There was a petition of “more than twenty-five names” about the decision for polling district QC. However Cllr Geoffrey Watt said that the petition had unfortunately been lost. There was also a letter from the headteacher of St Bridget’s Church of England Primary School which he had circulated to those on the committee which was about the polling station for district QC.

Councillors discussed whether the polling station for district QC should be St Bridget’s Church of England Primary School (St Bridget’s Lane) or St Bridget’s Centre (St Bridget’s Lane).

QC (West Kirby & Thurstaston): St Bridget’s Centre (St Bridget’s Lane) proposed by Cllr Geoffrey Watt, seconded by Cllr Andrew Hodson. This proposal was agreed.

Please accept YouTube cookies to play this video. By accepting you will be accessing content from YouTube, a service provided by an external third party.

YouTube privacy policy

If you accept this notice, your choice will be saved and the page will refresh.

4. UPDATE ON ELECTORAL ACTIVITIES 9:59

Kate Robinson advised the Committee that Wirral Council would be writing to 2,930 postal voters and 6 proxy voters during December to ask for refreshed signatures. If no response was received, a reminder would be sent. If no response was received to the reminder then the postal vote would be cancelled. She said that councillors may get inquiries about this and that they should encourage electors to respond.

Councillors discussed many interrelated issues to do with postal votes, the electoral roll, application forms, One Stop Shops, surgeries, internet access and local free newspapers.

Kate Robinson updated councillors on the results of the changes to individual registration. 91% of those on the voting lists had been matched with Department for Work and Pension data. People who had been automatically matched didn’t need to re-register. The plan was to send polling cards out in March [2015], but before that to do an audit of the electoral register in January with a mini canvass. Every household that was now registered would be sent a letter asking if the information held was right or wrong. This would save Wirral Council staff being “inundated with changes”.

Councillors Hodson and Sullivan asked her questions or commented on that item, the purpose of which was to keep councillors on the Committee updated on Electoral Services activities).

Please accept YouTube cookies to play this video. By accepting you will be accessing content from YouTube, a service provided by an external third party.

YouTube privacy policy

If you accept this notice, your choice will be saved and the page will refresh.

5. HACKNEY CARRIAGE VEHICLE PROPRIETOR LICENCE ALLOCATION POLICY 21:35

Margaret O’Donnell introduced this item and the reasons for the proposed change.

Councillors agreed the new policy.

Please accept YouTube cookies to play this video. By accepting you will be accessing content from YouTube, a service provided by an external third party.

YouTube privacy policy

If you accept this notice, your choice will be saved and the page will refresh.

6. MEDICAL REQUIREMENTS FOR HACKNEY CARRIAGE AND PRIVATE HIRE DRIVERS

Margaret O’Donnell introduced this item and the reasons for the proposed consultation.

Councillors suggested changes to what was consulted on. One councillor asked for legal advice on whether the current requirements should be a consultation option.

With the changes made to what was being consulted on councillors agreed the changes.

Please accept YouTube cookies to play this video. By accepting you will be accessing content from YouTube, a service provided by an external third party.

YouTube privacy policy

If you accept this notice, your choice will be saved and the page will refresh.

7. ANY OTHER URGENT BUSINESS ACCEPTED BY THE CHAIR

A councillor raised the issue of taxi drivers not adhering to the dress code. Margaret O’Donnell suggested that the dress code requirements could be sent out with the consultation on medical requirements for hackney carriage and private hire drivers.

The Chair raised the issue of deregulation. Margaret O’Donnell said she could provide an update, however the Bill had not yet received Royal Assent. She explained that one of the proposed changes after lobbying by the Local Government Association had been removed from the Bill.

A councillor said that he didn’t understand.

The Chair referred to emails. Margaret O’Donnell referred to a piece of work by the Law Commission which was unlikely to have effect this side of the May 2015 election.

If you click on any of these buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people. Thanks:

Standards Committee agreed to changes to Wirral Council’s constitution in narrow 5:4 vote

Standards Committee agreed to changes to Wirral Council’s constitution in narrow 5:4 vote

Standards Committee agreed to changes to Wirral Council’s constitution in narrow 5:4 vote

                         

The transcript below is from part of Wirral Council’s Standards and Constitutional Oversight Committee which met on Tuesday 26th November (item 4 Revisions to the Council’s Constitution). The vote on this item was five votes (Cllr Bill Davies, Cllr Ron Abbey, Cllr Denise Roberts and Cllr John Salter) in favour of approving the recommendations at 13.1 and 13.2 in the report and there were four votes against (Cllr Chris Blakeley, Cllr Leah Fraser, Cllr Peter Kearney). You can watch the meeting using this playlist (this item starts at 3m 38s into the meeting).

Cllr Leah Fraser said, “Excuse me Chair, before we proceed any further, I actually have spoken to Graham Burgess and apparently if there are any issues that are contentious that we’re not agreeing with to do with the changes to the constitution, then they’ll be referred for consultation. So what I’d like to move is that because there’s so much and the consultation is starting in January, which is only a month away, that we put all this into the consultation.”

Cllr Chris Blakeley replied, “Seconded Chair.”

Cllr Bill Davies (Chair) said, “OK”.

Cllr Ron Abbey said, “Chair, just on that point, as far as I am aware, these refer to arrangements by the Council to carry out its duties between now and January, which is now… you can shake your head Cllr Blakeley, I didn’t shake my head at”

Cllr Bill Davies (Chair) said, “Listen! Listen! I’m going to tell you now, this Standards Committee, I am not, I’m telling you now, right from the start, any cross chitchat out of the way. Continue Cllr Abbey now.”

Cllr Ron Abbey said, “I set out to say what I wanted to say, if it’s right or wrong I’m asking for this particular point to address this.. but I am led to believe whether it’s true or not, I’m not sure whether the Head of Law will be able to advise me whether I’m correct or not. These are interim measures which allow us to operate the Council in its proper format till January when full consultation will be taken on the constitution going forward. If I’m uncorrect then I’ll stand corrected, that’s why …response.. if I’m not then fine I’ll take … my place.”

Cllr Bill Davies (Chair) said, “OK. Surjit, do you want to give some advice for other people?”

Surjit Tour replied, “Chair, if it assist… just to provide that clarity it may help. The report essentially sets out two schedules. Schedule one which refers to amendments that this committee I believe can deal with and indeed it can move as part of its powers delegated to it through the power to make minor amendments to the Council’s constitution. Schedule two however outlines in more detail changes which the report it’s to be recommended that this committee recommends that Council approves because of the nature of those changes.

So in terms of the little point that’s been raised by the councillor. Councillor, the position is that they’re not interim changes that would be made at this committee. If approved the changes in schedule one, they would be changes that would be permanent to the Council’s constitution until changed by Council or this committee in the future whereas schedule two changes as proposed would require Council’s approval before those changes would take effect. Then again, they could be subsequently changed there also if Council so chose to do so.”

Cllr Bill Davies (Chair) said, “OK. Thank you, Councillor Blakeley.”

Cllr Chris Blakeley said, “Thank you Chairman, I had a conversation with the Chief Executive .. this evening and had a conversation with the Head of Law earlier this afternoon. The Chief Executive made it very clear to me that if there were any contentious issues and any disagreement then they should be referred to the full consultation. I suggested last night that the Chief Executive spoke to the Head of Law and remove the items that were contentious and allow the other ones that weren’t in contention to go through. That clearly hasn’t happened and that’s why we are moving the whole report be deferred to consultation. A very strange thing happened last night, the Chief Executive agreed with me. That’s the first time since he’s been in post.”

Cllr Bill Davies (Chair) said, “OK, now I’ve got Cllr McLaughlin, you want to comment briefly, Cllr McLaughlin?”

Cllr Moira McLaughlin said, “Very briefly, it’s just a comment. A significant number of amendments doesn’t actually mean that they are either anything more than minor or that they are contentious and I agree that there are a significant number, but that doesn’t in itself make them contentious. The other thing is that as far as I understood, these have been approved by the party leaders as the well, … that was my understanding that this has been approved by the party leaders and certainly I was only suggesting that we move ahead to facilitate the smooth running of the Council and to continue …..”

Cllr Bill Davies (Chair) said, “OK, …”

Surjit Tour said, “Chair, if I can also clarify, I’ve also spoken to the Chief Executive this afternoon about these matters. The Chief Executive’s view is that if, it’s a matter obviously for this committee, if they are matters which the committee is minded to unanimously agree on these proposals then I think the committee would want to refer those the wider review and have those debated obviously. If Members feel that it is, if whether certainly if Members require further debate or discussion, my view is that there would be no particular issue with regards to that being an appropriate course of action either for this committee. Clearly where there’s unanimous changes or the changes are relatively minor in detail then I almost think that they could be dealt with a recommendation to Council to approval, but where there are matters which require further debate and discussion, then the Chief Executive’s view was that subjecting those particular proposals to the wider review that’s going to be taken in due course.”

Cllr Bill Davies (Chair) said, “Councillor Harney.”

Cllr Tom Harney said, “Right, thank you Chair. I have one or two things to say, first of all I’m declaring my interest, I haven’t spoken to Mr. Burgess today, this week or even this month and I’m sure how he comes into all this. He seems to be able to read minds of Members and what the Members are going to be minded to do, maybe that’s a reflection of the whole of this constitution we have, I don’t know.

I would like to say some papers and some comments and I’m sorry if I offend anybody but there we are. That is life. I’ve got these papers here, I’ve got this paper here which was put on the table today. There is no coherence as far as I can see, I am not happy to be given this. This is a Standards Committee, I’m totally unhappy with it. I can’t even find schedule one, maybe it’s my eyesight, maybe it’s my age, I don’t know but I can’t find it, it must be somewhere and we’re being asked to agree amendments, some of them it seems may be minor and so on but there has been no steer as to what on earth it’s all about, apart from the fact it seems to have been discussed by the party leaders, who presumably have some new role in this Council which is not really defined by the constitution although I think it’s referred to. Well when we’re …. is it of importance? I do think that since this is a Standards Committee, we should have things done meticulously and sensibly.

The reality is and I will accept this having been a councillor for a number of years and that is that our record on adhering to or having a sensible set of standing orders which are actually adhered to is dismal in this Council over many, many years. …. keep on suspending standing orders and I’m afraid that I remember our previous Head of Legal Services who came along trying to get us to change and was shouted down basically almost. He was certainly outvoted.

He said ‘This is all wrong.’ and we said, ‘No, we do it this way, this is Wirral.’ So I do accept and I do think it’s important that we get our constitution right and our standing orders and so on right and we adhere to that, but we can only do that if we as a Council start to put ourselves thoroughly understand what the issues are and I’m not happy that.

I mean I know some things may be urgent and I will accept that and I’d like to be told what and why briefly preferably, I don’t think spending half an hour on it and then I would like the suggestion that we vote and then I suggest we go home and I do not think that from my point of view, and I’m quite willing to accept that everybody else is thoroughly dissatisfied and I’m not and I don’t know how I can vote without any of that and I just root through these and we have a rather what’s the word bad tempered discussion at the end of the day because we lose patience with each other, after all it’s not our job to write paperwork for the committee.”

If you click on any of these buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people. Thanks:

Council (Wirral Council) 14th October 2013 Questions to the Cabinet Member for the Governance and Improvement (Cllr Ann McLachlan)

Council (Wirral Council) 14th October 2013 Questions to the Cabinet Member for the Governance and Improvement (Cllr Ann McLachlan) on freedom of information requests, the Improvement Board, information governance and assistant Cabinet Members

Please accept YouTube cookies to play this video. By accepting you will be accessing content from YouTube, a service provided by an external third party.

YouTube privacy policy

If you accept this notice, your choice will be saved and the page will refresh.

These questions start at 10:24 in the video above.

Council (Wirral Council) 14th October 2013 Questions to the Cabinet Member for the Governance and Improvement (Cllr Ann McLachlan)

                               

Continues from Council (Wirral Council) 14th October 2013 Answers to Questions to the Cabinet Member for the Environment and Sustainability (Cllr Brian Kenny).

Cllr Lesley Rennie asked, “I’ll put a question really regarding the freedom of information item on your report because it’s rather unfortunate really that the Administration does appear to try to deflect the Council’s well documented inability to deal with the number of Freedom of Information requests that we’ve actually received from a number of people by in some way trying to imply that in some way that it’s members of the public’s own fault that they ask far too many questions really. Would the Cabinet Member agree with me that if in fact local people were able to trust the Council and that in fact the Council was more honest, more open, more trustworthy and transparent then members of the public would not need quite clearly to avail themselves of going down the route of Freedom of Information requests and also I hope that she would also agree with me that some of the information that indeed Members have to ask for should be freely available to Members of the Council to the elected Members to carry out their elected Member duties?”

Cllr Chris Blakeley asked, “The Cabinet Member will be aware that on the 16th July the Chief Executive sent an email out to the councillors. ‘It has come to my attention that a number of freedom of information requests have been made by elected Members for information relating to Council FOI and corporate FOI procedures. Members of course have a right to make FOI requests but I felt it was … in my view that… that I’d be very happy to… I’ve always more than happy to provide a written response personally to any information request.’

In the end Cllr McLachlan, on the 22nd August when I made a request of the Chief Executive for information, I was told that request was unreasonable and therefore had to submit a freedom of information request to which I received an answer in the prescribed time. Perhaps the Cabinet Member could persuade her officers to be more open and transparent and then maybe there won’t be as many freedom of information requests?”

Cllr Bill Davies asked, “My question for the Cabinet Member for Improvement and Governance would be regarding section one of your report on the Improvement Plan, is it too soon for the Improvement Board to consider leaving?”

Cllr Jean Stapleton asked, “Ann, regarding section three of your report on information governance, can you advise if elected Members will be affected by this please?”

Cllr Ian Lewis asked, “Cllr McLachlan, under item two under performance management you make reference to Member development training. On a previous question to a previous Council meeting, I asked you if Members had been appointed as assistant Cabinet Members and you replied in the minutes of the last meeting you said that the Labour Group had appointed assistant Cabinet portfolio holders, they were not within the constitution but the appointments had been made by the Labour Group to assist their Members in training. You say they’re not within the constitution, but on page 239 of the constitution, item F it states that assistant portfolio holders are within the constitution. Can I therefore ask you again to publish the names either in written form after the meeting or now of those assistant Cabinet Members please?”

If you click on any of these buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people. Thanks:

Licensing Act 2003 Committee (Wirral Council) 7th November 2012

A report of the Licensing Act 2003 Committee of Wirral Council of the 7th November 2012, Interest Declarations, Minutes (25th July 2012), Result of consultation on draft statememt of principles (Gambling Act 2005), classification of Small Creatures (Light Cinema, New Brighton)

Please accept YouTube cookies to play this video. By accepting you will be accessing content from YouTube, a service provided by an external third party.

YouTube privacy policy

If you accept this notice, your choice will be saved and the page will refresh.

Licensing Act 2003 Committee (Wirral Council) 7th November 2012

Present
Cllr Bill Davies (Chair), Labour
Cllr Rob Gregson (Labour)
Cllr John Salter (Labour)
Cllr Harry Smith (Labour)
Cllr Steve Niblock (Labour)
Cllr Denise Roberts (Labour)
Cllr Mike Hornby (Conservative)
Cllr Adam Sykes (Conservative)
Cllr Dave Mitchell (Liberal Democrat)

Council officers
Anne Beauchamp (Committee Officer)
Margaret O’Donnell (Licensing Manager)
Ken Abraham (Legal adviser)
Unknown officer (male)

In attendance
Cllr Geoffrey Watt

Press/public
John & Leonora Brace

The meeting started with Cllr Dave Mitchell (Lib Dem) giving apologies for Cllr Pat Williams (Lib Dem). The meeting was interrupted by the tune of an ice cream van, which the Chair, Cllr Bill Davies made a joke about, he went on to say that there were a number of meetings going on of different committees and that a number of councillors had sent their apologies. Apologies had been received from Cllrs McCubbin, Davies (George), Leech and Williams (Pat). He said he had a quick Any Other Business and asked if he could sign the minutes?

Agenda Item 1 Declarations of Interest 1:09 to 1:30
Cllr Niblock asked if he could declare a personal interest as a member of Merseyside Fire and Rescue Authority in item 3.
Cllr Denise Roberts also declared a personal interest as a member of Merseyside Fire and Rescue Authority in item 3.

Agenda Item 2 (Minutes) 1:30 to 1:50
The minutes of the meeting held on the 25th July 2012 were agreed.

Agenda Item 3. DRAFT STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES UNDER THE GAMBLING ACT 2005 1:50 to 8:20

The Chair asked Margaret O’Donnell (Licensing Manager) to talk about this item. She said the Committee had agreed a draft statement in July which had gone out to consultation, which had closed on the 31st October [2012].

At this point a Council Officer arrived.

Margaret O’Donnell continued that they had received one response which was attached at appendix 3, there were no specific direct comments so no amendments had been made to the draft since July, she said the purpose of the evening was to seek approval, then it would go to full Council on 17th December [2012] and was to be revised no later than January 2013.

Cllr Niblock referred to page 15 3.3 in the reference to “Merseyside Fire and Rescue Service Authority” which should read Merseyside Fire and Rescue Authority. He pointed out a minor error where a full stop should be a comma and asked a question about page 31 about bingo being played in a member’s club.

Margaret was about to answer his points but Cllr Niblock went on to point out page 36, 21.2 apologising and saying he meant 27.3 and the phrase “will be decided on a case by case individual basis”, which he thought should either be case by case or individual.

Cllr Harry Smith agreed with him.

Cllr Niblock went on to point out that certain proper nouns such as Licensing Authority needed to be capitalised but were all in lower case.

Margaret O’Donnell said she would ask it to be looked at.

Cllr Harry Smith said, “Who are we going to shoot?”

Cllr Hornby asked a question about CRB checks and qualifications for door supervisors?

The Chair said that they used to interview door supervisors.

Margaret O’Donnell said that [door supervisors] were covered by the Security Industry Agency and they had to go through a process to be licensed.

Cllr John Salter asked if they had consulted the Chief of Police and if the Police had made comments?

Margaret O’Donnell confirmed the police had made no comments.

The Chair commented about training, the three meetings on tonight and that they were looking for alternative dates. As there were no further questions, the recommendation to the Council meeting of the 17th December of the Draft Statement of Gambling Principles was agreed.

4. ANY OTHER URGENT BUSINESS ACCEPTED BY THE CHAIR 8:20 to 24:04
Classification of unclassified film “Small Creatures” (Light Cinema, New Brighton)

The Chair said there was one item of Any Other Business which Margaret would explain.

Margaret thanked the Chair for allowing this item of Any Other Business. She said it was in respect of the classification of a film in accordance with guidance issued by the British Board of Film Classification, as they had a cinema in New Brighton called the Light Cinema which wanted to show an unclassified film. She said they were obliged to protect children from harm. She said she received an email on the 6th November from a gentleman who wanted to show it during anti-bullying week (the week starting the 19th November), she said it had been classified by Liverpool Licensing Authority, she said the film related to anti bullying, an individual called Martin Wallace wanted to show the film Small Creatures and had submitted a synopsis and was classified as a 15 by Liverpool City Council screening at FACT. She read out a synopsis about the film. She said there was discrimination of a homophobic nature, on-screen cannabis smoking, no horror in the film, reference to two instances of self-harm, but brief, it had strong occasional language, no nudity but occasional references to sex, crime and occasional violence (a school fight on a field) and a stabbing on camera.

Cllr Harry Smith asked if there was a moral ending?

Margaret O’Donnell said the film was about 89 minutes long.

Cllr Harry Smith referred to possible abuse.

Margaret O’Donnell suggested it could be delegated to a subcommittee, who would then have the chance to view the film.

Cllr Harry Smith asked again if there was a moral ending?

Margaret said that the 14-year-old boy ignored the advice of his teachers and gets involved in knife crime, there’s then a stabbing.

Cllr Harry Smith said he was “disappointed with the ending of the film”.

Margaret said the key thing was the classification and if people should be permitted to go see it.

Cllr Niblock asked if Liverpool City Council had just classified it based on a synopsis, as what it looked like might not be like what’s written on paper. Margaret O’Donnell responded. She said they hadn’t been able to establish how Liverpool City Council had come to its decision.

Cllr Sykes referred to the guidance, Margaret O’Donnell responded by reading out what the British Board of Film Classification see as a 15 classification, during this Cllr Andrew Hodson arrived at 5:47pm for the 6pm meeting. Another councillor arrived at 5:48pm for the 6pm meeting.

Cllr Sykes asked if it would be shown as part of anti-bullying week? Margaret nodded.

Cllr Gregson made some comments.
Cllr Salter wanted something written down.
Cllr Gregson asked about the Liverpool decision.
Margaret O’Donnell said she was seeking the “general view of the Committee” and that she was more than satisfied to report back. She said the email had put them in a difficult position, if it hadn’t been for the meeting she’d have suggested setting up a subcommittee, which would depend on the availability of councillors, she said she would report back the comments made this evening and it was a matter for the applicant if they wanted to pursue it further.

Cllr Hornby said it depended on how the film was directed, which can be misunderstood. He said, “I don’t like the idea of we giving carte blanche to something because someone else across the river said, “It’s OK.”” Cllr Hornby said it was his view it had to be done through a subcommittee.

Cllr Harry Smith said he was really worried there was no moralising end to it and referred to what happened to the baddies at the end of Grange Hill.

Cllr Hornby referred to direction.

Cllr Mitchell agreed that it should be delegated to a subcommittee, who would get the information prior to the meeting, she said it’s to coincide with anti bullying week.

Cllr Roberts asked if the Liverpool councillors seen the film? She said it was no worse than books for teenagers.

The Chair said at his discretion a member of the public has indicated they wish to say something and that he will allow it.

Declaration of interest: The member of the public is my wife and writes and edits for this blog.

Mrs. Brace thanked the Chair for letting her speak. She said that similar types of films had been banned, but if it did go ahead she thought that only people aged over 18 should go and watch it.

The Chair thanked Mrs. Brace for her comments.

Shirley Hudspeth arrived.

The Chair said he thought a decision had been made and it would go to a subcommittee. It was agreed to delegate the decision to a subcommittee.

Shirley Hudspeth arrived.

The Chair closed the meeting and said that the Licensing, Health & Safety and General Purposes Committee would start in five minutes.

Licensing, Health and Safety and General Purposes Committee (Wirral Council) 23/1/2012 Part 3

sign reading Polling Station
sign reading Polling Station

Licensing, Health and Safety and General Purposes Committee (Wirral Council) 23/1/2012 Part 3

Continues from Licensing, Health and Safety and General Purposes Committee (Wirral Council) 23/1/2012 Part 2.

Kate said they had visited the Masonic Hall this afternoon and it was a suitable venue. It cost £350 for hire. Surjit Tour talked about Between2Worlds. He said there were statutory purposes for polling stations and the front entrance at the Masonic Hall was unsuitable for disabled access. However there was no certainty for hire costs with Between2Worlds as it would have to be negotiated.

Cllr Ian Lewis commented. He understood the point made by Cllr Darren Dodd, his concern was that they were looking at maps whereas in practice it was the effect on votes. Wherever it moved, people wouldn’t vote as they’d go to the wrong polling station as it had previously been the YMCA. He said elderly people who had used the YMCA might not find out as not everyone was sent a polling card. He said his personal preference was to accept the Masonic Hall as opposed to the YMCA car park.

Cllr Patricia Glasman said he agreed with Cllr Ian Lewis on the whole, she also wanted the Masonic Lodge, however there was no provision for tellers.

Kate said that other polling stations that were entered directly had no provision and tellers could remain outside.

Cllr Bill Davies asked about the disabled access.

Kate said yes in answer to his question. There was a side exit at the Masonic Lodge used as a fire exit, unfortunately a ramp over the front steps was not practical.

Cllr Chris Jones asked about the past history of problems about using a Masonic Lodge as a polling station.

Cllr Bill Davies said he didn’t have the details in front of his, but to his recollection each time Masonic Lodges had been proposed as polling stations it had been turned down.

Cllr Ian Lewis said it would be nice if polling stations were suitable for tellers and wouldn’t inconvenience political activists. He still saw the Masonic Lodge as the least inconvenient.

Cllr Steve Niblock proposed, seconded by Cllr Chris Jones that the polling station for WE.

Cllr Sue Taylor proposed and Cllr Kate Wood seconded that the Masonic Lodge be used as the polling station for polling district WE.

There was a vote first on the amendment.

For: Cllrs Taylor, Wood, Lewis, Anderson and Glasman (5)
Against: Cllrs Davies, Williams, Niblock and Jones (4)

Abstention: None (0)

The amendment was carried by one vote (5:4:0).

The Chair said if possible because of the time scale, could they make a decision quickly on alternative polling stations?

Cllr Steve Niblock said there was a fall back of Between2Worlds, but he was happy if it was agreed by the party spokespersons.

Cllr Bill Davies said he wanted to advise the committee that with the timing of the local elections, if possible could it wait till March? Cllr Bill Davies proposed and Cllr Sue Taylor seconded that if alternative polling stations needed to be found that it would be agreed by the spokespersons.

This was agreed by the Committee.