A Tale of Two Villages Revisited
Introduction
In May 2004 I published an article arguing for the formation of a Group Parish Council for the two parishes of Maiden Newton and Frome Vauchurch. This present article revises its predecessor and expands on it by adding a critique of the �parish meeting� model of local government.
The original article was well received by many in Maiden Newton and Frome Vauchurch alike, however some (in Frome Vauchurch) viewed it with rather hair-raising outrage. Those offended by my arguments erroneously viewed them as attacks on Frome Vauchurch Parish. The object of my criticism, however, was the administrative status quo of the two parishes. As stated above I now go further in offering a critique of the �parish meeting� as an institution but, again, no particular criticism of Frome Vauchurch is made. There is one small exception to this � the matter of the number of meetings held.
One Community Two Villages
Any newcomer to the area could be forgiven for not noticing one very important thing about our community - that it is, in fact, divided. Maiden Newton and Frome Vauchurch are two completely separate parishes which happen to be very close together. A glance at the map or a casual walk around gives few clues to our split personality.
Maiden Newton is the larger part to the north-east of the Frome and Frome Vauchurch is spread out rather unevenly to the south-west. Maiden Newton is six times the size of its neighbour and has about 1100 residents to Frome Vauchurch�s 150. And, crucially for this discussion, Maiden Newton has a parish council and Frome Vauchurch has a parish meeting.
For most matters the administrative distinction between the two villages is ignored but we live with many anomalies. For example I may tell people that my children go to Maiden Newton School though in truth I walk them to the next village - Frome Vauchurch which is where �Greenford School� is situated. To underline this oddity Greenford School�s official address is Maiden Newton and �Maiden Newton Greenford School� is the name under which you will find it in the phone book. The playing field � owned by Maiden Newton Parish Council and paid for by the electors of that parish � is, you guessed it, in Frome Vauchurch. And following the recent Boundary Committee report Frome Vauchurch and Maiden Newton now, absurdly, belong to separate County Council wards and electors from Frome Vauchurch have to travel (albeit not very far) to Maiden Newton Village Hall, which is situated in the neighbouring ward, in order to vote.
However the most extraordinary anomaly is this: Anyone residing in Frome Vauchurch can, because they live within 3 miles of Maiden Newton, be elected as a member of Maiden Newton Parish Council. In this capacity they can set a precept which the people of Maiden Newton have to pay and they do not (see below) and, of course, they can influence many other decisions which affect residents of Maiden Newton but not them. However anyone who lives in Maiden Newton is disqualified from becoming the Chairman of Frome Vauchurch Parish Meeting, becoming one of the helpers or even speaking at the parish meeting unless invited to do so. This anomaly is not at all hypothetical as until fairly recently two members of Maiden Newton Parish Council were residents of Frome Vauchurch including the chairman. I must add that none of this is in any way improper and the Frome Vauchurch members to whom I refer worked hard for Maiden Newton. It is all simply a matter of principle. The notorious West Lothian question, which has plagued English/Scottish relations since devolution, is the same problem writ large.
Parish Meetings
Before proceeding any further I think it is worth examining the idea of a parish meeting in some detail. It is often said that Maiden Newton has a parish council and Frome Vauchurch has a parish meeting. It is more accurate to say that they both have a parish meeting but Maiden Newton has a parish council as well. In fact all parishes have a parish meeting.
Most people have some idea of what a parish council is but will be at a loss to describe a parish meeting. Parish meetings were constituted under the 1894 and 1972 Local Government Acts and are made up of the local government electors of a parish. When the 1894 Act was drafted it sought to transfer all secular powers held by the vestry into the hands of parish councils. It was intended that all parishes should have a parish council but there was some political resistance and the act in its final form permitted smaller parishes to retain a slightly modernised version of the older system � this was to be the parish meeting. In this respect the confusion that reigned before the act has continued to the present day. It is small parishes of around 150 electors or less that often do not have parish councils and so the parish meeting is left to deal with administrative matters.
It must not be thought that a parish meeting is a miniature parish council � it is a different animal altogether. Parish councils are the �lowest� level of representational government; parish meetings are not representational at all. Parish meetings are, effectively, huge committees; there is an elected chairman and there may be �helpers� (sub-committee members) who may be elected or appointed, but neither of these actually represent the parish � they are parts of the body of the parish and perform various functions. The chairman and helpers are semiautonomous but ultimately must receive their instructions from the meeting as a whole. This is quite different from parish councillors who can happily, if unwisely, ignore the electorate should they wish - at least, that is, until the next election.
This DIY form of government can work reasonably well but, since everyone in the parish is his or her own representative, information on affairs affecting the parish must be very readily available and important issues must be brought before the whole electorate.
It is a requirement in law that parish meetings without a parish council meet at least twice a year and beyond this as often as seems needed. As an aside, for some reason Frome Vauchurch only meets once a year.
Parish meetings have a most peculiar standing, or rather lack of standing, in law. They have no legal personality and cannot own property, cannot be sued and cannot sue. They are not an authority though they can exercise some functions and can have some of the functions of a parish council conferred on them by the district council.
They are subject to the Freedom of Information Act and compliance with this act is one of their few duties.
Unlike parish councillors the chairman and �helpers� of a parish meeting are not subject to any code of conduct. This is a serious gap in the law providing no protection against bias and prejudice.
The Problem
So here it is: Maiden Newton has a parish council and Frome Vauchurch has a parish meeting. A parish council has a budget and this is collected as part of the council tax and is called the �precept�. In general a parish meeting has no precept and parishioners pay nothing. So, for example, a person in Maiden Newton with a band D property pays about �27 (pa) precept and a person in Frome Vauchurch with a band D property pays nothing.
Now this would not matter if it could be shown that Frome Vauchurch does not enjoy any benefits provided by Maiden Newton Parish Council. However there are such benefits. For example: maintenance and insurance of the War Memorial (three of the fallen commemorated come from Frome Vauchurch and it is inscribed with the names of both parishes), the provision, maintenance and insurance of the play area (which is nearer some of Frome Vauchurch than some of Maiden Newton) and the playing field. Maiden Newton Parish Council also supports services like the Youth & Community Centre (situated, incidentally, in Frome Vauchurch). One may say that these are small things forming only a minor part of the work of the Council but one would be wrong. These are the very things on which much of the Council�s budget is spent. I have been challenged on this issue but I do believe that there can be no argument over whether or not Frome Vauchurch benefits as suggested - only to what extent. Although the sums involved are relatively small this issue causes a degree of irritation to many in Maiden Newton and some embarrassment to many of the fair minded residents of Frome Vauchurch who are in this mildly invidious position through no fault of their own.
There is one further small inequity. Parish meetings receive no precept, though they may have some money left or donated to them, and any expense incurred which cannot be met from the money in hand may be sought as a grant from various public bodies and would thus be paid for by all Council tax payers and general tax payers. This situation occurred recently with Frome Vauchurch�s new notice board which was paid for out of the Frome Valley Project funded by the County Council. The situation is made slightly worse in this instance because Maiden Newton Parish Council provides the Frome Valley Project with a small donation every year. I certainly do not begrudge Frome Vauchurch their notice board and say good luck to them but I think the point is made.
Such considerations of fairness are, nevertheless, minor matters in comparison with what is lost in the present situation. Our two villages would be so much stronger if they could work as one. The dividing of the two parishes into separate County Council wards simply could not have happened had there been a group parish council and there have been occasions, particularly regarding highway issues, where a united front could have produced better results quicker for both parishes.
In addition to the problems of the relationship between the two parishes I suggest that the parish meeting model of local government is very difficult and time consuming to apply properly and serves Frome Vauchurch poorly. With the best will in the world it is almost impossible to avoid what in grander situations would be described as an oligarchy. Again, this is no criticism of FV, it is an inherent weakness of the system.
The Solution
The solution is, as I have made clear, to amalgamate and form a group parish council. This would consist of, probably, six or seven councillors elected from Maiden Newton and two from Frome Vauchurch. Both parishes would retain their identity as parishes and their respective parish meetings would continue to meet once a year. This is what has been done in Cattistock where a group council was formed with Chilfrome and Frome St. Quintin. It is possible that Frome Vauchurch would pay a smaller precept per household than Maiden Newton just as Chilfrome and Frome St. Quintin pay a smaller charge than Cattistock. If there was support for such a move an extraordinary meeting could take place and the proposal discussed and voted on or, much more likely, a poll called for. Maiden Newton Parish Meeting would also have to agree.
In total there are 18 parish meetings, 39 parish councils, 24 grouped councils and 6 town councils in West Dorset, so grouped parish councils are very common. They are created when nearby parishes feel they share common interests and wish to provide a united front. They do not even have to be physically very close (or even adjoining) - Abbotsbury, Fleet, Langton Herring and Portesham, for example, form the Chesil Bank group. When a �grouping order�, as it is called, is in force the rights of each parish to appoint trustees and hold documents is preserved and the separate meetings continue to meet once a year. There also seems to be the right of veto given to each parish over certain acts of the joint council. So, for example, a proposal to demolish Frome Vauchurch to provide space for the much needed Maiden Newton by-pass could be stopped by Frome Vauchurch Parish Meeting. (Just kidding).
A Solution Too Far
There is one further possibility, which I mention only for completeness, and that is a boundary change. Either parish (or anybody else in principle) could apply to WDDC to have the boundary changed and Frome Vauchurch could become part of Maiden Newton just as Notton, Cruxton and Crockway are part of Maiden Newton. WDDC in conjunction with the Boundary Commission would carry out extensive investigations and consultations to see if such a change would be acceptable and sensible and make their decision in due course. I believe the process takes a year or two. This would effectively be the end of Frome Vauchurch and is not really an option.
Conclusion
I believe that the status quo is letting down the people of both parishes. I believe that fears of Frome Vauchurch losing its identity are unfounded. It is quite absurd to have what is clearly a single community administratively split in this way. As I stated above, group parish councils are formed whenever nearby parishes feel they share common interests; I can think of no two parishes for which this is more true than Maiden Newton and Frome Vauchurch.
John Wright
May 2006
|