Milton Keynes) Local Government Boundary Commission for England Layden House 76-78 Turnmill Street LONDON EC1M 5LG
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Review Officer (Milton Keynes) Local Government Boundary Commission for England Layden House 76-78 Turnmill Street LONDON EC1M 5LG 8 October 2012 Dear Mr Skerten, ELECTORAL REVIEW OF MILTON KEYNES Please find enclosed the submission to your review from Milton Keynes Liberal Democrats and the Milton Keynes Council Liberal Democrat group. You will see that we are proposing a 57 member Council made up of 19 three member wards with elections by thirds. Such a scheme will be an improvement on the present situation because all electors will be entitled to vote at each election in the cycle irrespective of the ward they live in. The submission explains that Milton Keynes is a difficult area to produce a scheme with exact numerical equality because of the gird square system. However we believe that our proposed scheme is the best compromise as we have three other principles: a) Keeping parishes together as far as possible and where it is not possible creating wards around communities that have some coherence. b) Recognise the importance of keeping the historic towns of Bletchley, Newport Pagnell, Wolverton, Stony Stratford and Olney distinct in the warding arrangements and hence representation on the authority. c) Keeping ward continuity where this is possible and consistent with the other priorities. I would be very pleased to elaborate on any of the points, including the detail, set out in the submission. I can be contacted on as well as my Council e-mail address. My postal address is I trust that you will give this submission due consideration on its merits in your deliberations. Yours sincerely Cec Tallack Deputy Leader Liberal Democrat Group ELECTORAL REVIEW MILTON KEYNES COUNCIL WARD BOUNDARIES LIBERAL DEMOCRAT SUBMISSION Introduction. 1. The Liberal Democrat submission for the boundaries of Milton Keynes Council meets all of the statutory criteria. It sets out ward boundaries that are readily identifiable, maintain local ties to a high degree and provide for 57 Councillors in 19 three members wards along with the review guidance. This keeps parishes together to the maximum amount given the limitation of the overriding need for electoral equality will allow. This is based on the projections for the 2018 electorate. 2. The three key criteria that have informed these recommendations are firstly the value of keeping parishes together so far as possible having regard to the huge amount of community and boundary analysis that went into the recent parish review, secondly the important of keeping historic settlements intact viz Bletchley, Newport Pagnell, Wolverton and Stony Stratford and Olney and thirdly keeping ward continuity where possible within the other two considerations and of course the need for arithmetical parity. 3. We make one proposal where the maximum guideline variance of 10% is exceeded in order to keep the very clear defined and unique community of Newport Pagnell together in one ward. However mindful of the importance of the need for electoral equality, we offer an alternative solution in that geographic area if the Commission does not feel able to support our preferred solution. Character of the Borough 4. Milton Keynes has a unique character compared with any comparably sized Unitary Authority. It is a new town built around self contained grid squares. Most of the housing in the new city area has been built since the designation of the new town in 1967 with townscape designs that are not typical of urban cities. On the perimeter of the new town are some older towns, all of which are different in character. There is a rural hinterland that includes the medium sized old town of Newport Pagnell, the smaller towns of Olney and Woburn Sands and many villages. 5. In designing a new electoral map there are challenges that are greater than most urban centres. The new city consists of self contain units which form relative small communities which should be kept together for electoral purposes because they form the social cohesion of the city. The grid road system places physical barriers between these communities which make them more akin to small towns and villages than would normally be found in a urban borough of a quarter of a million people. This proposal aims to keep these communities together. The task of ensuring that wards have electoral equality and the same number of members is therefore a significant challenge. The importance of the Parishes 6. Unusually for a major urban area, Milton Keynes is fully parished. The Council and others have put a lot of effort into building up the urban parishes with their own identities as the lowest tier of government. Many of these thrive at the heart of their communities. In areas where it is possible to make borough wards coterminous with parishes, it enhances the ability of parishes, Parish Councillors and Borough Councillors ability to work together. This proposal aims to do this as far as possible. 7. On the other hand, Milton Keynes Liberal Democrats recognise that this review will not be able to maintain this relationship to such a high degree because of the rightful primacy of the requirement to achieve broad arithmetical equality. We would however urge the Commission to maintain this link between parishes and borough wards as far as it can in order to enhance the effectiveness of representation and joint working. 8. We also recognize that this objective of keeping ward boundaries aligned with parishes will be harder to achieve because our proposal is for a universal three member ward system unlike the previous hybrid system. However we support this change as elections in thirds have resulted in about a quarter of the electoral being disenfranchised at each local election. It will be much easier to get the electorate to buy into the process if all of the borough’s residents, rather than just some, get a vote every time there is a local election. The present wards and size of the Council. 9. The last electoral review took place in 2000-1 with the first election on those boundaries in 2002. Milton Keynes has been the fastest growing city in Europe in those times and the electorate has increased greatly. The workload of Councillors has grown a lot in the last decade especially with the active vibrant parish communities that we have. The Liberal Democrats welcome the decision of the Commission to increase the size of Milton Keynes Council to 57 Councillors. 10. The fact that we have not needed an interim review in the meantime is a testament to the tremendous foresight of the Local Government Boundary Commission in 2001. We are pleased to say that in the main it took the advice of the authors of this submission at that time. The detail in this submission tracks our proposed changes from the current ward boundaries. Principles Underlying the Proposed Ward Boundaries 11. There are a few major identifiable geographical divisions that provide blocks that the borough is divided. The two clearest are east of the M1 and Bletchley. Within the remaining part of the city, there is an east / west division created by the A5 and west coast main line. In the south this creates a barrier that becomes less so at the northern end of the borough where the two diverge. 12. The area to the north east of the M1 motorway is thought to be different to the rest of the borough. Not only is outside the new city designated area with the motorway a barrier but it contains two old market towns and a collection of villages. Fortunately it justifies six Councillors. We would strongly urge the Commission to create two three members wards in the area east of the M1. 13. Bletchley has its own unique features that should be recognised. It is a sizable old railway town with a tradition townscape for its period. It has a distinct culture and heritage within Milton Keynes. Fortunately again it justifies nine Councillors so we would strongly urge the Commission to create three wards of three members for Bletchley. 14. Outside of these two areas (5 of 19 wards), the Liberal Democrat proposal has been built upon the building blocks of the gird squares, older towns and identifiable rural communities. Above that is a presumption that wherever the numbers will allow parishes should be kept together. Where this is not possible the wards are proposed by the identification of community interest and demographic pattern of where people access local facilities. 15. The Liberal Democrats support election by thirds and accept that three member wards are required in this review. Whilst the need to maintain three member wards inevitably means there are some compromises, we believe our detailed proposal minimizes these to bring the best scheme for the representation of all part of the borough to a 57 member Unitary Authority. Detailed commentary on proposed wards Ward 1: Olney Description: This is a three member ward created from the area of the borough to the north east of the M1 motorway including the town of Olney but excluding Newport Pagnell. The centre of the ward is the market town of Olney but it also includes the many villages of North Buckinghamshire that look towards either Olney or Newport Pagnell. It is bounded by the motorway, the borough boundary and the River Ouse for most of the North West. It forms a clear coherent community. Its electorate is virtually the correct number for a 3 member ward (0.04% over in 2018). Proposals for change: This ward consists of the entirety of the current 2 member ward of Olney and the 1 member ward of Sherington. It should be noted that the proposal for ward 2 (Newport Pagnell) below is over the size limit.