Community Governance Review for Whitstable – response to Stage 1

Canterbury City Council has considered the consultation responses from Stage 1 of the Community Governance Review for Whitstable and has published its draft recommendations.

Views were sought on these and the period for comments has now closed. Thank you to everyone who participated. The information is remaining on this page due to the level of public interest, but you can no longer comment.

———————————————————————————-

The majority of those who responded in Stage 1 did not support the creation of a town council in Whitstable.

Therefore, the council has not recommended that one be established.

The findings were considered at a meeting of the General Purposes Committee on 16 April 2024 and resolved at Full Council on 25 April 2024. You can read the report on the council’s website.

There was a narrow majority in favour of a town council in both Gorrell and Tankerton wards. However, it was also noted there was a substantive variance in Gorrell, with a notable difference between the area labelled Harbour and that labelled Lower Gorrell.

The areas where support was highest are labelled Harbour (within Gorrell ward) and Tankerton ward on the map.

However, based on the findings of the consultation, the council has not recommended a town council covering the ‘petitioned’ boundary, nor has it recommended an alternative boundary for a smaller town council covering the areas in support, for the reasons outlined in the report.

The recommendations are therefore as follows:

“Based on the findings of the consultation, the advisory group has not recommended an alternative boundary for a smaller town council.

“Instead, it recommends a qualitative approach inviting comments, opinion and evidence which supports or disproves the following four propositions:

“i) That a parishing of the whole CT5 area does not represent the interest of the community given the lack of public support.

“ii) That the splitting of wards in Gorrell will damage community cohesion by forcing only some in an area to pay for largely shared services and resources.

“iii) That a smaller parished area covering Harbour & Tankerton lacks community cohesion given the lack of public support and distinct unique identity of both settlements, therefore is not recommended.

“iv) That a smaller parished area covering Harbour & Tankerton will neither be effective or convenient in achieving the original aims of the petition to create a single ‘voice for Whitstable’ and incapable of delivering the range of projects presented by the petitioning organisation.”

A map illustrating the areas referred to in the recommendations is set out below:

The full committee report detailing the draft recommendations as well as the final consultation report and other supporting documents can be viewed on our website.

You can view the Privacy Notice here.

Published: 29 April 2024