SOUTHPORT OUT OF SEFTON.

The future of Southport matters more to every member of The Southport Party than participating in the pointless and often destructive party politics constantly practiced by other parties which you see every week in the papers.
The common interest of every single member is to get the best for this town. It is now widely accepted that this cannot be achieved in any meaningful form simply by making cosmetic changes to the existing structure of Sefton Council. The only logical alternative is to recreate in some form the independence of this town, so wantonly destroyed in 1974 by Central Government with the co-operation of Southport Councillors, some of whom are still in power. The old "County Borough of Southport", which ran everything from the town's Police force and buses to the West Lancashire Water Board can never be recreated completely but most, probably all of the services now provided by Sefton could be managed by a unitary Southport authority from Southport Town Hall with minimal interference by politicians from other major towns. Southport managed quite adequately for nearly 100 years on its own - who has any right to claim that this situation could not now be recreated when you witness the incompetence of the existing organisation, Sefton Council? Reality would now dictate that it is most unlikely that Southport could actually go-it-alone. But a new Unitary consisting of Southport and its close neighbours, such as Ormskirk, Formby and as far as Hesketh Bank would be viable.

The several campaigns conducted since 1974 all had this same objective, but were thwarted by the fact that few, if any, of the elected councillors and Council officers actually wanted it to take place. That is, perhaps, easy to understand when you consider that Councillors and officials in a small authority generally earn less in expenses, allowances and salaries and certainly have less "power" and "prestige" than those in a larger authority. It needs also to be taken into account that the political make-up of any reconstituted authorities would be totally different to what we now have. Some parties would suffer, other would benefit. But why should this nonsense be allowed to influence the decision of splitting Sefton into 2 halves?

We would appreciate the true support of those councillors who still really believe in the idea of Southport out of Sefton; it is irrelevant and impertinent for any of them to prattle on about the work they may have done years ago when NOT A SINGLE ONE OF THEM VOTED IN FAVOUR of the inclusion in the 2003 Southport Referendum of the well-worded and appropriate additional question, requested by the 3 Councillors of The Southport Party concerning the creation of a unitary authority for Southport.

The Boundary Committee in their booklet "Recommendations for unitary Local Government in Cumbria and Lancashire", May 2004 (download available here), states that "whether or not structural change takes place in accordance with our recommendations, the boundaries between or within Sefton and West Lancashire could be reviewed at a later stage to address these long-standing boundary concerns." The "structural change" referred to is the abolition, as a prerequisite of a referendum for a North West Assembly, of Lancashire County Council and the creation of unitary local authorities out of the various Lancashire District Councils. The "boundary concerns" are, of course, the wishes of the people of Southport for the end of Sefton Council, which Councillors and officers alike do their utmost to stifle. The creation of a "Greater Liverpool" region as proposed in early 2007 goes exactly the wrong direction. if it includes Southport.

What a glorious opportunity for Sefton to be split into 2 and the northern half, including Southport, be adjoined to part, or all, of the West Lancashire District Council.

But what does Sefton Council propose to do about it - NOTHING!
They are waiting for the Boundary Committee to approach them!

The Southport Party will never cease in its efforts to return some form of real democracy and independence to this town. Our attempts to contact the Boundary Committee for England to establish the true current position on the above promise of a review resulted in 6 months of delays, referrals to other Government Departments and at last a sensible reply from the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. However, this amounts simply to an apology for the delay and the bland statement that there are no current plans to request the Boundary Committee to conduct a review. This is completely unacceptable and all readers are encouraged to write and complain about this undemocratic and uncaring decision:

Anne Dart,
Democracy and Local Governance Division
Zone 5/G9
Eland House
Brassenden Place
LONDONSW1E 5DU