<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Unitary Local Gov or Not!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://tonytomkinson.wordpress.com/2008/10/20/unitary-local-gov-or-not/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://tonytomkinson.wordpress.com/2008/10/20/unitary-local-gov-or-not/</link>
	<description>Looking after Clavering</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 Sep 2009 11:29:55 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: tonytomkinson</title>
		<link>http://tonytomkinson.wordpress.com/2008/10/20/unitary-local-gov-or-not/#comment-118</link>
		<dc:creator>tonytomkinson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Mar 2009 13:13:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tonytomkinson.wordpress.com/?p=63#comment-118</guid>
		<description>Just a bit more movement to report. The BC have issued their latest recommendation for consultation. They wish to consult on the two following options,
1     A whole county unitary, without Lowestfoft, and
2     Two unitarys, the enlarged City of Norwich and the Remainder of Norfolk, which they are calling Rural Norfolk. (I doubt that Kings Lynn, and Great Yarmouth like that name)

The consultation period is until the middle of May then the BC will work up proposals top submit to the Minister. She should make up her mind sometime after the Common&#039;s recess and then there will be a short period for us to comment further, before an &quot;Order&quot; is laid before Parliament in the autumn. That is, if the ongoing Judicial Review started by South Norfolk, Breckland and West Norfolk does not scupper the whole process. If you will excuse me saying so, What a waste of money all round. We could have done without all of this!      TT</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just a bit more movement to report. The BC have issued their latest recommendation for consultation. They wish to consult on the two following options,<br />
1     A whole county unitary, without Lowestfoft, and<br />
2     Two unitarys, the enlarged City of Norwich and the Remainder of Norfolk, which they are calling Rural Norfolk. (I doubt that Kings Lynn, and Great Yarmouth like that name)</p>
<p>The consultation period is until the middle of May then the BC will work up proposals top submit to the Minister. She should make up her mind sometime after the Common&#8217;s recess and then there will be a short period for us to comment further, before an &#8220;Order&#8221; is laid before Parliament in the autumn. That is, if the ongoing Judicial Review started by South Norfolk, Breckland and West Norfolk does not scupper the whole process. If you will excuse me saying so, What a waste of money all round. We could have done without all of this!      TT</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tonytomkinson</title>
		<link>http://tonytomkinson.wordpress.com/2008/10/20/unitary-local-gov-or-not/#comment-108</link>
		<dc:creator>tonytomkinson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Jan 2009 04:52:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tonytomkinson.wordpress.com/?p=63#comment-108</guid>
		<description>There have been further developments from the Boundary Committee. They have decided that they will publish their recommendations on 13/14 February. Readers will remember that they should have been publised at the end of last year, but that delay was the result of a Judicial Revue sporsored by three District Councils.
This will not make any difference to the date that the Minister is due to make her decision, which will be by March 26, it could be earlier, but I doubt that it will be.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There have been further developments from the Boundary Committee. They have decided that they will publish their recommendations on 13/14 February. Readers will remember that they should have been publised at the end of last year, but that delay was the result of a Judicial Revue sporsored by three District Councils.<br />
This will not make any difference to the date that the Minister is due to make her decision, which will be by March 26, it could be earlier, but I doubt that it will be.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
