Agenda item

Macclesfield Community Governance Review

To consider the approach towards, and initial stages of, the Macclesfield Community Governance Review.


The Sub-Committee considered a briefing paper outlining the process to be followed in conducting the Macclesfield Community Governance Review. The Constitution Committee had ordered the Review in response to representations by the Macclesfield Civic Society in May 2011.


The process proposed, and matters to be taken into consideration by the Review, were broadly the same as for Crewe.


The Sub-Committee had noted previously that as the community governance review moved around the Borough it would need to review its membership so that Members with appropriate knowledge and experience could participate. Any review of the Sub-Committee’s membership would need to balance the need for local knowledge with the experience already gained by existing Members and the continuity this provided. It was also acknowledged that there were alternative approaches to involving local members in the Review process.


Since the report had been circulated it had been necessary to reconsider the timetable for the Review and a number of optional indicative timetables were circulated at the meeting. It was agreed that option (a) for the Stage 1 process, which included public meetings, should be adopted for now and that the options for Stage 2 could be considered as the Review progressed. In approving option (a), Members noted a potential issue with the timing of any ballot which would occur around the time of the Police Commissioner elections; this would be considered further in due course.


The Officers had prepared a draft list of consultees and stakeholders for the Macclesfield Review which had been circulated with the report. Local Members had been asked to suggest any additions to the list and the names of a number of additional organisations had been submitted by Councillors L Brown and D Neilson. The list would be updated accordingly and any additional suggestions received from local Members would be added.


Reference had been made at the previous meeting to a potential mechanism under the Localism Act 2011 which would allow the introduction of a form of community governance known as a ‘community trust’. This had not been included in the list of governance options in the report but was the subject of ongoing investigation by Officers. It was anticipated that further information would be available at the next meeting.


The Officers circulated maps showing the boundary of the unparished area of Macclesfield, the constituent and adjoining Borough wards, and adjoining parishes. It was noted that part of the Macclesfield South Borough Ward was already parished and included in Gawsworth Parish. This part of the Borough Ward would therefore not be included in the Community Governance Review.






(1)   the report be noted and the proposed arrangements for conducting the Macclesfield Community Governance Review, including the matters to be taken into account in conducting the Review, the alternative forms of local governance identified and the proposed consultation arrangements be approved;


(2)   the indicative timetable option (a) for Stage 1of the Review be approved and the project plan be amended accordingly; options for Stage 2 be considered further in due course;


(3)   the list of consultees and stakeholders appended to the report be approved, subject to the inclusion of the additional organisations submitted by local Members, and any further submissions received, and the list form the basis of the initial consultation on the Review;


(4)   the leaflets and other publicity and consultation materials used for the Crewe Community Governance Review be adapted for use in the Macclesfield Review and public meetings be arranged at suitable venues in Macclesfield;


(5)   the Officers report to the next meeting on any provisions within the Localism Act relating to community trusts; and


(6)   the Constitution Committee be asked to review the membership of the Community Governance Review Sub-Committee.


Supporting documents: