“Making Every Vote Count”

Canterbury and District Labour Party’s Submission to the Local Government Boundary Commission for ’s Electoral Review of City Council – Part 2 Ward Patterns

Summary

In this submission Canterbury and District Labour Party demonstrates that a ward pattern of single member wards throughout the Canterbury City Council area is feasible, viable, and democratically desirable.

It recommends to the Local Government Boundary Commission for England that:

1. It should ensure that each ward within Canterbury District serves broadly the same numbers of electors and provides the same number of Councillors 2. It should ensure there is an equitable design of single member wards throughout the Canterbury City Council area, and 3. The 38 ward designs proposed by the Canterbury and District Labour Party are recommended as a starting point for the design of single member wards in the district.

Introduction

The Local Government Boundary Commission for England (LGBCE) announced at the end of the first phase of consultation that they are “minded” to recommend a reduction of 12 to 38 councillors for the Canterbury City Council. Taking this number as the likely final proposal, with the possibility of perhaps 1 additional councillor, the Canterbury and District Labour Party undertook an exercise to propose a pattern of ward boundaries which met each of the fundamental statutory criteria outlined by the LGBCE as follows:

 The new pattern of wards should mean that each councillor represents roughly the same number of voters as elected members elsewhere in the authority  Ward patterns should – as far as possible – reflect local community interests and identities and boundaries should be identifiable  The electoral arrangements should promote effective and convenient local government and reflect the electoral cycle of the council. The Labour Party recognise there are certain balances to be maintained between each of these criteria, and is mindful of LGBCE advice, for example, that where an overly large ward, which does not respect local community interests and identities is replaced by a smaller ward which may have a higher variance factor, but which clearly respects local community identities this may be preferable. Similarly, the Party was also very mindful of the ‘representational’ aspect implicit in the third

1

criterion. That is, arrangements should promote a strong relationship between the electors of a local community and their elected representative, and that the elected representative has the capacity to effectively represent an identifiable local community.

The Canterbury and District Labour Party first commissioned a working group to look at options for a ward pattern which best met the requirements of these three criteria and which it was considered would achieve wide public acceptance. This group considered the current multi-member ward pattern to have problems which would only be exacerbated with a reduction in the number of councillors and consequent inevitable enlargement of wards. It therefore undertook a study of the feasibility and viability of a district wide single member ward option. Those problems included simple geographical distance in the rural areas, the risk of further estrangement between voters and their elected Councillors, and the problems inherent in Councillors trying to effectively represent over six thousand people.

The Labour Party therefore undertook a study of the feasibility and viability of a district wide single member ward option. This study satisfactorily demonstrated that a 38 single member ward was feasible and viable and the Party therefore decided to undertake a public consultation on its proposals and a pattern of ward designs. A paper, together with an Excel spreadsheet identifying streets and areas in each ward accompanied by mapping undertaken on Google Maps, was published on the Party’s web-site. Invitations were sent to residents’ associations and community groups district wide to consider these proposals. Party members presented and discussed the proposals at some community association meetings, and a public meeting was also held. Feedback from individuals consulted and contacted during this process has been incorporated in the final paper, designs and submission made here.

This paper will, therefore, first describe the methodology used in arriving at its proposal, and then describe the resulting and proposed pattern of wards. Following this will be a discussion of the results. Finally, in conclusion the Canterbury and District Labour Party’s submission to the LGBCE is put.

Methodology

The Labour Party working group used an entirely objective method and approach. This included a set of practical steps to be applied as follows:

 Existing (CP) Boundaries would be respected as far as possible  Existing Polling Districts would be used to redistribute electors geographically to their nearest community of identity  A calculation of an ‘uplift’ to voter numbers was applied to polling districts/wards on the basis of the LGBCE’s 2019 projected electorate in order to estimate projected numbers of voters in streets which may be allocated to a different ward

2

 A ward electorate variance of 10% maximum was assumed as allowed by the LGBCE in order to preserve the best local community fit  A moderate approach to changing ward boundaries was applied.  As the Party has branches in each of the three urban centres in the district, Canterbury, and the initial community identification work was carried out by each of these branches with the co-ordination being provided by current and former Councillors and long standing local residents. These first drafts were shared and consulted on throughout each of the towns.

The following principles guided the exercise employed:

1. The purpose of the exercise was to consider whether single member wards could be viable across the district as a whole.

2. Wherever possible, the following priorities have been observed: a. Civil Parishes should be wholly within a single Ward b. Wards should maintain community identities c. Natural boundaries (rivers, railway lines, main roads) should be respected.

3. There should be no bias towards any generic area of the district (for example, rural or City) in terms of electors per councillor.

4. 2019 electorate figures provided by the BC have been used to assess the voters per ward. An explanation of this is set out below. The electorate base is 118,814.

5. The target range is therefore plus or minus 10% of the mean number of electors per ward: In the case of a 38 member Council, the range is 2850 to 3484, based on the 2019 electorate forecast by the Commission.

6. No increase in the number of Polling Districts should be essential, because that could increase the costs of running elections.

Because of the location of a few populous Parishes (, St Cosmus etc., , and ) achieving “whole Parish” wards has not been simple. However, other than Sturry and every CP is now entirely in a single ward. Chestfield CP, previously included in a Whitstable ward, has two wards under our proposal, and Sturry is the only village which is split in two. Even where a CP has been included in an “urban” ward ( with Herne, and Without with the west of ) the whole of the CP is in the ward. This is a significant improvement on the current warding.

The following methods of assessing voters’ number were applied:

1. For rural parish wards, the Boundary Commission documents provide an estimate of the 2019 electorate for each polling District. On the basis that

3

these largely accurately reflect local communities, those polling districts have been used as the basis with the exception of Sturry.

2. For the urban areas, the use of polling districts did not permit an effective review. We therefore used the best data we had available, the 2013 electoral roll, to identify potential new ward allocations of each street within the urban areas.

3. However, the enabling of consistent figures across the District (and with the Commission’s 2019 estimates) requires that the voter numbers should be uplifted. The working group therefore took the Commission’s figures for each polling district and applied a percentage uplift based on the difference between 2013 and 2019 to each street. In doing this, it is recognised that such an approach does not create a perfect model, since in some Polling Districts (in particular CN3, CWE5, CWI5, HHB5, RSS2, WG2, and WT1) there are above average increases reflecting current or planned housing developments. However, the data to accurately model those developments was not available to the Labour Party working group, and since the intention of this proposal is to demonstrate feasibility we think this approach allows a sufficiently detailed ward allocation to be made.

Calculating the electorate growth:

The growth applied to calculate the likely electorate in 2019 was applied by using data from LGBC’s revised overall forecast issued in November 2013. To enable us to forecast electors at a street level in the urban areas, we calculated the growth implied from 2013 to 2019, as shown in the Table below.

These figures were then applied to every street in each existing polling district, so that when a street has been moved into an adjacent ward the resulting overall population is maintained. This technique has allowed us to be broadly sure that Wards are consistent, but as we have noted it creates two impacts:

‐ There is a resulting small increase in the overall electorate in the District due to rounding errors. That increase is 182, which is 0.15% of the LGBC’s estimate of electorate numbers in 2019. ‐ Precisely where development will take place is unclear at this stage, so accordingly the boundaries cannot be defined as precisely as we have mapped and allocated them. However, we would expect in most instances that the resulting adjustments will be of the order of a few streets rather than whole polling districts

Polling Growth Description 2012 2019 district Forecast CB1 North Holmes Road Area 1332 1,387 4.1% CB2 Querns Road/Howe Barracks 774 800 3.4%

4

Polling Growth Description 2012 2019 district Forecast CB3 Oaten Hill/Longport Area 1364 1,446 6.0% CB4 Spring Lane Est/Pilgrims Way 1653 1,731 4.7% CB5 Barton Est/St Lawrence Area 2218 2,353 6.1% CN1 Northgate/Brymore Area 1837 1,903 3.6% CN2 Poets Est/Vauxhall Area 1781 1,841 3.4% Kingsmead/Northgate/Parham Rd CN3 Area 1449 1,971 36.0% CSS1 Pine Tree Ave Area 2000 2,083 4.1% CSS2 St Stephens Area 971 1,006 3.6% CSS3 Hales Place Estate 2245 2,327 3.7% CSS4 Station Road West/Broad Oak Rd 1605 1,696 5.7% CWE1 Cherry Drive/St Thomas Hill Area 1282 1,325 3.4% CWE2 BIshops Way/St Dunstans Area 1732 1,880 8.5% CWE3 London Road Estate 1271 1,319 3.8% CWE4 Cathedral Area/St Peter's Area 1035 1,075 3.8% Bingley Island/Castle St Area/Tannery CWE5 Area 1227 1,423 15.9% CWI1 Thanington Area 1604 1,667 3.9% CWI2 Thanington Without 267 276 3.4% CWI3 Wincheap/Hollowmede 1330 1,401 5.3% CWI4 Martyrs Field Area 1507 1,577 4.7% CWI5 Ethelbert Rd/Rhodaus Town Area 1556 2,199 41.3% HGE1 Greenhill (West) 1562 1,617 3.5% HGE2 Greenhill (East) 1736 1,802 3.8% HGE3 Eddington/Stillwater Park 1242 1,295 4.2% HH1 Western Avenue Area 1819 1,885 3.6% HH2 Memorial Park Area 1720 1,862 8.2% HH3 Cavendish Road Area 1572 1,628 3.6% HH4 Kings Rd/Football Ground Area 1173 1,214 3.5% HHB1 Herne Village Area 2254 2,342 3.9% HHB2 Canterbury Rd To Mill Lane Area 1356 1,404 3.5% HHB3 Hunters Forstal Rd Area 1469 1,537 4.7% HHB4 Broomfield 1186 1,226 3.4% HHB5 Blacksole 287 464 61.5% Beacon Hill/Queen Victoria Hospital HR1 Area 1435 1,524 6.2% HR2 Mickleburgh Ave/Maritime Ave Area 1747 1,814 3.8% HR3 Area 1771 1,833 3.5% HR4 Bishopstone// 2109 2,182 3.5% HWB1 Studd Hill 1135 1,173 3.4% HWB2 Hampton Area 2003 2,078 3.7% Western Esplanade/Central Avenue HWB3 Area 1848 1,916 3.7% RBD1 508 537 5.7% RBD2 Barham 1048 1,083 3.4% RBD3 Kingston 388 401 3.4% RBD4 /Woolage 248 260 4.8% RBF1 1294 1,342 3.7% RBF2 Parkwood Courts UKC 1990 2,057 3.4% RBF3 University Colleges 1990 2,787 40.1% RBF4 Tyler Hill 436 451 3.4%

5

Polling Growth Description 2012 2019 district Forecast RCS1 Chartham/Shalmsford Street 1657 1,757 6.0% RCS2 St Augustines 1109 1,147 3.4% RCS3 597 617 3.4% RCS4 Waltham 370 383 3.4% RCS5 459 482 5.1% RCS6 307 319 4.0% RH1 Chartham Hatch 393 412 4.8% RH2 626 647 3.4% RH3 1051 1,087 3.4% RLS1 Rd/ Rd 238 246 3.4% RLS2 Littlebourne 1173 1,186 1.1% RLS3 Ickham/ 357 369 3.4% RLS4 395 410 3.9% RM1 296 306 3.4% RM2 989 1,022 3.4% RM3 Hoath/Maypole 446 469 5.2% RM4 /Marshside/ 701 746 6.5% RNN1 205 214 4.3% RNN2 Bridge 1228 1,284 4.6% RNN3 110 116 5.1% RNN4 621 644 3.7% RSN1 Broad Oak/Calcott 685 712 3.9% RSN2 Park View Area 1416 1,466 3.5% RSS1 299 309 3.4% RSS2 Sturry Village/Fairview Gardens 620 691 11.4% RSS3 Meadow Road Area 1361 1,415 4.0% WCS1 Church Street Area 744 805 8.2% WCS2 South St/South Area 1575 1,632 3.6% WCS3 Chestfield (West) 1207 1,252 3.7% WCS4 Chestfield (East) 1531 1,598 4.4% WCS5 1823 1,889 3.6% WG1 Saddleton Rd/Rural Area 2394 2,489 4.0% WG2 Millstrood Rd/Thurston Park Area 2411 2,787 15.6% WH1 High Street/Coastal Area 2101 2,213 5.3% WH2 Cromwell Rd/Station Rd Area 2018 2,132 5.7% WS1 / 2544 2,638 3.7% WS2 Sherwood Estate Area 1895 1,961 3.5% WS3 Joy Lane/Shearwater Ave Area 1977 2,055 3.9% WT1 Kingsdown Park Area 1278 1,381 8.0% WT2 Manor Road Area 1189 1,248 4.9% WT3 Bridgefield Rd/Swalecliffe Rd Area 1343 1,407 4.7%

Results

The following table provides a summary of each ward electorate when the method described was employed in order to identify 38 discrete wards.

6

Electors per Councillor 3167 Max target 3484 BASED ON REVISED 2019 2850 ELECTORATE ESTIMATE Min target

Variance Area Ward Within from Area Provisional name Electorate 2019 Area electors Group range? target total per ward range

1 West Bay 3250 OK HERNE BAY 2 Western 3518 HIGH 34 HERNE BAY 3 Heron 3405 OK HERNE BAY 4 Beacon 3220 OK HERNE BAY 5 Beltinge 2930 OK HERNE BAY 6 Reculver 2808 LOW -42 HERNE BAY 7 Greenhill 3063 OK HERNE BAY 8 Herne and Hoath 3176 OK HERNE BAY Eddington and 9 Stillwater 2799 LOW -51 HERNE BAY 10 Broomfield 3152 OK HERNE BAY 31320 3132.0

11 Chestfield 2852 OK WHITSTABLE 12 Harbour 3600 HIGH 116 WHITSTABLE 13 Tankerton 3383 OK WHITSTABLE 14 Swalecliffe 3302 OK WHITSTABLE 15 Seasalter 2888 OK WHITSTABLE 16 Joy Lane / Shearwater 2902 OK WHITSTABLE 17 Gorrell 2832 LOW -18 WHITSTABLE 18 All Saints 2910 OK WHITSTABLE South Street / 19 Yorkletts 2856 OK WHITSTABLE 27525 3058.4 Littlebourne and 20 Ickham 3008 OK RURAL 21 Nailbourne 2740 LOW -110 RURAL Barham and Stone 22 Street 2804 LOW -47 RURAL 23 Chartham 3315 OK RURAL 24 Blean Forest 3399 OK RURAL 25 Tyler Hill 3238 OK RURAL 26 Sturry 3361 OK RURAL 3311 27 Island OK RURAL 25144 3143.1

28 Barton 3149 OK CITY 29 St Lawrence 3664 HIGH 181 CITY 30 Northgate 3240 OK CITY 31 Sturry Road 3443 OK CITY 32 St Stephen's 3552 HIGH 69 CITY 33 Pine Tree Avenue 3265 OK CITY 34 St Dunstans 3205 OK CITY 35 Harbledown 3055 OK CITY 36 Central 3367 OK CITY 37 Thanington 3332 OK CITY 38 Wincheap and 3228 OK CITY 36500 3318.2

7

Variance Area Ward Within from Area Provisional name Electorate 2019 Area electors Group range? target total per ward range Rhodaus Town

120,522 3170.8

LGBC estimate 120,340 Margin of error 182 0.15% Nb. The variances from the target range are expressed as a whole number of electors.

The following table shows in detail the Canterbury and District Labour Party’s proposed warding arrangements. The potential names of wards have been suggested through the consultation process, and designs of many of the wards have similarly gone through a number of iterations.

Proposed Warding Arrangements

Please note that in addition to the following table reference should be made to the accompanying Excel spreadsheet which details the road and street content of each ward, as well as the map.

The table below shows how the proposed warding arrangements reflect the three statutory criteria of: 1) Equality of representation 2) Reflecting Community Interests and Identities 3) Providing for Convenient and Effective Local Government

Key:

+10% variance or greater in electoral equality -10% variance or greater in electoral equality Nb. Variance has been rounded up and down to nearest whole figure.

Ward Name No. of Forecast Forecast Evidence and Rationale that Cllrs Electorate Electoral the proposals meet the in 2019 Variance three statutory in 2019 criteria West Bay 1 3250 +3% OK Comprised of the whole of polling districts HWB1 and HWB2 The boundaries are the coast to the north, Grand Drive (included) and Carlton Hill (not included) to the east, Thanet Way to the south, and the agricultural area between Herne Bay and Swalecliffe to the west. This includes clearly homogenous areas already

8

Ward Name No. of Forecast Forecast Evidence and Rationale that Cllrs Electorate Electoral the proposals meet the in 2019 Variance three statutory in 2019 criteria recognised by the existing polling districts.

Western 1 3518 Comprised of the whole of +11% HIGH polling districts HH1 and HWB3 Bounded to the north by the coast, to the east it ends at the junction of Western Esplanade and Central Parade, runs south across the junction of Avenue Road and The Broadway, takes in part of Western Avenue, and runs along Linden Avenue (included) to the railway Station. The south Boundary is the railway east as far as Cobblers Bridge Road, where it adjoins West Bay ward. Again, this ward design recognises the existing areas served by the polling districts

Heron 1 3405 +7% OK Comprised of the whole of the HH2 and most of HH4 polling districts, and some areas of HH3 west of Canterbury Road Again, bounded by the coast to the north, Western ward to the west, the railway to the south, and divided from Beacon along the north part of Canterbury Road, along the High Street to South Road (not included), and then down to the railway.

Beacon 1 3220 +2% OK Comprised of most of HR1 polling district plus parts of HH2, HH3 and HH4. Again, bounded to the north by the coast, to the west by Heron ward, and to the south by the railway as far as Ivanhoe Road, the boundary cuts between Ivanhoe Road and Herne Avenue down to

9

Ward Name No. of Forecast Forecast Evidence and Rationale that Cllrs Electorate Electoral the proposals meet the in 2019 Variance three statutory in 2019 criteria Mickleburgh Hill (part included), and along that road to the eastern boundary behind Sea View Road (not included)

Beltinge 1 2930 -7% OK Comprised of most of HR2 and HR3 polling districts plus part of Beltinge Road from HR1. Bounded to the east by Sea view Road (included), down to Grange Road and then along Mickleburgh Hill to Herne Avenue (included) and south to the railway. The railway forms the southern boundary, which then runs northward to the junction of Churchill Avenue and Osborne Gardens, continues north between the Horshams and Terminus Drive, along Reculver Road (included), and the at the junction of Reculver Road and Reculver Drive cuts north to the coast

Reculver 1 2808 Comprised of the remainder ‐11% LOW of HR3 and HR4 polling districts This ward is bounded to the east by the District boundary with Thanet, to the west by Beltinge ward, and to the south by the A299

Greenhill 1 3063 -3% OK Comprised of the whole of HGE1 polling district and all of HGE2 west of the High School The boundaries are Thanet Way to the north, Purchas Wood and the surrounding agricultural area to the west, the A299 to the south, and between The Fairway (not included) and Poplar

10

Ward Name No. of Forecast Forecast Evidence and Rationale that Cllrs Electorate Electoral the proposals meet the in 2019 Variance three statutory in 2019 criteria Drive/Chestnut Drive (included) and the previously noted High School site.

Herne & Hoath 1 3176 +0% OK Comprised of the whole of HHB1 and RM3 polling districts (that is, the whole of Hoath CP), together with the part of HGE2 to the east of the High School, including the Fairway estate. The boundaries include the Hoath CP boundaries with Sturry and Chislet CPs to the south and east and Mill Lane (included) down to the A299 and the A2990 Thanet Way to the north, and Greenhill ward to the west. This ward contains the communities of Herne village, Hoath and Maypole, and the distinct estate around and to the east of Bullockstone Road

Eddington & 1 2799 Comprised of the whole of ‐12% LOW Stillwater HGE3 and HHB2 polling districts. This ward is bounded to the north by the railway, to the south by Thanet Way (A299 and A2990). At the western end it terminates at the junction of Cobblers Bridge Road and Eddington lane. To the east it ends at the boundary with Reculver ward. Eddington and Stillwater are two areas which are clearly self contained communities which are isolated from other parts of the town by the railway and roads.

Broomfield 1 3152 -0% OK Comprised of the whole of HHB3 and HHB4 polling districts Bounded to the north by

11

Ward Name No. of Forecast Forecast Evidence and Rationale that Cllrs Electorate Electoral the proposals meet the in 2019 Variance three statutory in 2019 criteria Thanet Way, to the east by the agricultural area to the east of Heart in Hand road, to the south by the Broomfield Community park and the Hawe Farm, and to the west by Mill Lane (not included) Includes the communities of Broomfield and Hunter’s Forstal only

Chestfield 1 2852 -10% OK Comprised of the whole of the WCS3 and WCS4 polling districts The western boundary is the agricultural area between the A299 and West Blean Wood; the south is the Chestfield CP boundary with Sturry CP and Hackington CP; the west boundary is contiguous with St Cosmus and St Damien in the Blean and then runs along the Chestfield CP boundary line between Chestfield itself and Stone Street In essence this ward re- instates Chestfield CP as a political entity (it is currently included within a Whitstable ward) with the creation of a ward for Greenhill (see above) entirely within the CP boundary.

Harbour 1 3600 Comprised of the whole of +14% HIGH WH1 and parts of WH2 polling districts This is a triangular shaped ward, bounded to the north west by the coast, to the south by the railway, and to the east by a line running from the Harbour south east of Station Road to the railway. This compact area combining the Harbour, main retail area and mainly traditional

12

Ward Name No. of Forecast Forecast Evidence and Rationale that Cllrs Electorate Electoral the proposals meet the in 2019 Variance three statutory in 2019 criteria Victorian terraced properties has clear historical and community cohesion.

Tankerton 1 3383 +7% OK Comprised of the whole of WT1 and WT2 wards, plus one or two streets from WH2 which more naturally form part of this area than Harbour. Bounded to the west by Harbour ward, to the south by the railway, the eastern border is Bennells Avenue down to the coast. This area is a distinct community, with a clearly different character and population demographics from Harbour ward.

Swalecliffe 1 3302 +4% OK Comprised of the whole of WT3 and WCS5 polling districts only. This ward is bounded to the west by Bennells Avenue, to the south by the railway and A2990 corridor, and to the east by the agricultural area which separates Swalecliffe from Herne Bay

Seasalter 1 2888 -9% OK Comprised of parts of WS1 and WS3 polling districts. The western boundary is the District boundary with Swale borough; the south eastern boundary is the A299 and A2990; the eastern boundary then runs between various streets down to the coast

Joy Lane/ 1 2902 -8% OK Comprised of the whole of Shearwater WS2 and most of the remainder of WS3 polling districts. This ward has boundaries to the north along the railway; to the east along Borstal Hill

13

Ward Name No. of Forecast Forecast Evidence and Rationale that Cllrs Electorate Electoral the proposals meet the in 2019 Variance three statutory in 2019 criteria (included); to the south the A2990; and to the west with Seasalter ward Gorrell 1 2832 The whole of WG1 polling ‐11% LOW district along with some streets from WG2 and WS3 which more naturally sit within this warding area The boundaries are the A2990 Thanet Way to the south; the dyke running between Sydney Road to the west of Milstrood Road, and a line down to the junction of Essex Street and Belmont Road forms the eastern boundary; the railway to the north; and Joy Lane/Shearwater ward to the west.

All Saints 1 2910 -8% OK Comprised of WCS1 polling district in its entirety and substantial parts of WG2 The boundaries are the railway to the north; the A2990 Thanet Way to the southeast, terminating at the junction of Ham Shades Lane and Pier Avenue; and Gorrell Ward to the west

South Street/ 1 2856 -10% OK Comprised of all of WCS2 and Yorkletts parts of WS1, WG1 and WG2 The boundaries are the District boundary with Swale to the west; the A299 as far as Church lane, and then the A2990 Thanet Way along to the boundary with Chestfield CP; then south along the Chestfield boundary to form the eastern side; the south edge is the St Cosmus and St Damian in the Blean CP boundary along to the District boundary This ward includes two

14

Ward Name No. of Forecast Forecast Evidence and Rationale that Cllrs Electorate Electoral the proposals meet the in 2019 Variance three statutory in 2019 criteria distinct communities in Yorkletts and South Street which are clearly defined by geographic features and CP boundaries, and which do not have much affinity socially or demographically with the Whitstable wards they adjoin.

Littlebourne & 1 3008 -5% OK Comprises the whole of the Ickham CP’s of Wickhambreaux, , Littlebourne, Adisham and Womenswold, with the addition of polling district RLS1, which is within the City boundary but currently part of ward

Nailbourne 1 2740 Comprises the whole of the ‐13% LOW CP’s of Lower Hardres, Bishopsbourne, Bridge, and Bekesbourne with Patrixbourne. The addition of Lower Hardres from Chartham is both geographically consistent and necessary to balance the elector numbers in both Chartham and Nailbourne. We believe there is more community commonality between Lower Hardres and the other CP’s in this revised ward than there is in its being with Chartham

Barham & 1 2804 Comprises the whole of the Stone Street ‐11% LOW CP’s of Barham, Kingston, Petham, Waltham and Upper Hardres Again, this area has a high commonality of economic activity, geographical links and community interests

Chartham 1 3315 +5% OK Comprises Chartham CP in its entirety and no parts or whole

15

Ward Name No. of Forecast Forecast Evidence and Rationale that Cllrs Electorate Electoral the proposals meet the in 2019 Variance three statutory in 2019 criteria of any other CP Clearly a single community as recognised by its CP status and boundaries

Blean Forest 1 3399 +7% OK Comprises the whole of St Cosmus and St Damian in the Blean CP, and no parts of any other CP The key issue here was the growth in Parkwood Court UKC electors. Taken together RBF1 and RBF2 polling districts form an integrated geographical and existing political administrative area, with two clear communities in Blean and the University. It is worth noting that the University of has a clearly expressed preference not to be treated separately from the rest of the district (that is, to have wards which are composed solely of university voters), and in any case the University alone is projected to have too many voters for a single ward, and not enough for two wards or a two member ward.

Tyler Hill 1 3238 +2% OK Comprises the whole of Hackington CP, and no parts of any other CP As with Blean Forest, the key issue here is the projected growth in the University College (RBF3) electorate. The RBF3 and RB4 polling districts again form an integrated geography within a single CP administrative area

Sturry 1 3361 +6% OK Comprises Broad Oak and Calcott, the Park View area of Sturry village, Sturry village centre and half of Fairview

16

Ward Name No. of Forecast Forecast Evidence and Rationale that Cllrs Electorate Electoral the proposals meet the in 2019 Variance three statutory in 2019 criteria gardens area, half of the Meadow Road area, and Fordwich town. Sturry and the areas to the east of it provide the greatest test of the single member ward concept. On the projected numbers (and indeed currently) Sturry and the immediately adjacent polling districts are too large for single member ward but too small for a two member ward. There is thus no option but to combine some of it with the much less densely populated areas to the east (see Island, below). In this ward in particular, we are conscious that the exact location and planning of future housing developments will dictate the ward boundary to the eastern side because of the significant impact it will have on voter numbers. The somewhat arbitrary division of two polling districts into two halves is not intended to be definitive, but to accommodate a more sophisticated analysis of the developments and thus more appropriate boundaries, while demonstrating that the concept remains achievable. Broad Oak and Calcott have been included because they link directly with Sturry village and with nowhere else outside the City; and they are part of the Sturry CP. Our initial planning considered adding Broad Oak to Tyler Hill, but that was rejected in consultation with the Broad Oak society who feel there is no community commonality

17

Ward Name No. of Forecast Forecast Evidence and Rationale that Cllrs Electorate Electoral the proposals meet the in 2019 Variance three statutory in 2019 criteria between the two, and that their natural links are with Sturry village.

Island 1 3311 4.5% OK Comprises the eastern parts of Meadow Road and Fairview gardens in Sturry, with the communities of Westbere, Hersden, Chislet, Marshside and Upstreet.

Barton 1 3149 -1% OK Comprised of streets from Polling districts CB2, CB3 and CB4. Barton ward is roughly triangular. Its boundaries are: to the east, the west side of Stodmarsh Road and the CP boundary with Littlebourne; to the South, the railway line; to the south west, New Road; to the north west, Upper Chantry Lane and St Augustine’s; and to north of that St Martin’s church, which creates a boundary between Querns Road estate and the North Holmes Road area of Northgate ward. It includes clearly defined community areas of Querns Road, Spring Lane and the streets around Canterbury College.

St Lawrence 1 3664 Comprised largely of streets +16% HIGH from Polling Districts CB3 and CB5, with some adjacent streets from CWI5 and CB4. St Lawrence Ward begins at Upper Bridge Street and is centred around New Dover Road and Old Dover Road. Its other boundaries are the railway line to the north (separating it from Barton); Patrixbourne CP to the south- east; the A2/City Boundary to the south; the lower Hardres

18

Ward Name No. of Forecast Forecast Evidence and Rationale that Cllrs Electorate Electoral the proposals meet the in 2019 Variance three statutory in 2019 criteria CP boundary; and Ethelbert Road and the Cromwell Road area. It includes clearly defined communities around pilgrims Way, and the Dover Roads, and around the Kent and Canterbury Hospital

Northgate 1 3240 +2% OK Comprised of the whole of polling district CN1, plus the North Holmes Road area of CB1, and the area around Longport between Upper Chantry Lane, Lower Bridge Street, and St Augustine’s. The ward boundaries are the inner ring road from St George’s Place to Broad Street and the outer City wall line down to the River Stour; from there, Sturry Road forms the boundary, as far as the natural break between Brymore Road area and the Poets Estate, which is in Sturry Road ward. It includes the self contained community around Longport; the community around Northgate within the inner ring road; North Holmes Road area; and the Military Road / Chaucer Road estate, which is clearly a single community

Sturry Road 1 3443 +9% OK Comprised of the whole of Polling district CN2, plus all of CN3 with the exception of the area to the north of the river. The boundaries are the river to the north, the city / Sturry CP boundary to the east, the City /Littlebourne CP boundary to the south, and the previously noted natural break between Brymore Road and the Poets estate.

19

Ward Name No. of Forecast Forecast Evidence and Rationale that Cllrs Electorate Electoral the proposals meet the in 2019 Variance three statutory in 2019 criteria It contains two communities: the poets Estate itself, and the streets between Sturry road and the River, which have a clearly distinct character.

St Stephen’s 1 3552 +12% HIGH Comprised of the whole of polling districts CSS2 and CSS3, plus the Stonebridge Road parts of CN3. It boundaries are the Stour River south of Kingsmead; the City boundaries with the CP’s of Sturry and Hackington; St Stephen’s Hill (which is not in the ward); and Beverley meadow down to the north side of the railway. It contains four communities: Hales Place; St Stephens Road; Stonebridge Road area; and the Market Way estate.

Pine Tree 1 3625 +3% OK Comprised of the whole of Avenue polling districts CSS1 and CSS4, plus two streets from CSS2. Its boundaries run from the river at the foot of St Stephen’s Hill, Beverley meadow to the east, up to St Stephen’s Green and St Stephen’s Hill; then the city boundary with St Cosmus and St Damian’s in the Blean; to the west, Whitstable Road and St Dunstan’s Street (which are not included) down to the Railway; and the along the railway to the junction of Station Road West and The Spires. The area contains a clearly defined community between the railway and the river to the south east, and two communities around Pine

20

Ward Name No. of Forecast Forecast Evidence and Rationale that Cllrs Electorate Electoral the proposals meet the in 2019 Variance three statutory in 2019 criteria Tree Avenue / Salisbury Road and Beaconsfield Road/ St Stephen’s Hill.

St Dunstan’s 1 3205 +1% OK Comprised of the whole of CWE1 and most of CWE2. The boundaries are Rheims Way to the south west; the City boundary with Harbledown and Rough Common CP; and Whitstable Road and St Dunstans Street, which are included. The area contains the London Road estate, Cherry Tree estate, and the Whitehall gardens area. Harbledown 1 3055 -3% OK Comprised of the whole of Harbledown and Rough Common CP polling districts (RH2 and RH3), and the whole of London Road Estate (CWE3). The boundaries are the parish boundaries plus Rheims Way, the river Stour to the south east side, the A2, and the City boundary with Chartham CP.

Central 1 3367 +6% OK Comprised of the whole of CWE4 and CWE5 polling districts, plus the streets from CSS4 to the south east of Canterbury West Station, and streets immediately to the north east of the Cathedral from CN1 and CN3, and the Bingley court development which is otherwise isolated from all adjacent residential areas. Taken together, this ward creates a single central Canterbury ward with clear historical and community cohesion

Thanington 1 3332 +5% OK Comprised of the whole of

21

Ward Name No. of Forecast Forecast Evidence and Rationale that Cllrs Electorate Electoral the proposals meet the in 2019 Variance three statutory in 2019 criteria polling districts CWI1, CWI2 and CWI3. The ward boundaries are the Thanington Without CP boundary with Rough Common and Harbledown to the north; with Chartham CP to the south; and with Lower Hardres to the east. Inside the A2, the boundary continues along Hollow Lane down Victoria Road to Wincheap and then across Cow Lane to the Great Stour. The clearly identifiable community of Thanington Without is combined with the area around Wincheap Primary School. These areas are already combined as part of the current two member Wincheap ward.

Wincheap & 1 3228 +2% OK Comprises all of CWI4 plus Rhodaus the majority of CWI5. This Town ward is bounded by the river to the north, along with the industrial estate behind St Andrews close, down to Pin Hill and the Inner ring road around to old Dover Road (which is not included). It then runs behind Old Dover Road and Ethelbert Road (excluding the roads moved to St Lawrence ward) and out to the A2 and the city Boundary with Lower Hardres. The area comprises clear communities around nunnery Fields, Rhodaus Town, and Martyrs Field Road. and

22

Discussion

This exercise demonstrates, we believe, that:

1. The concept of district wide single member wards for the Canterbury City Council is proved as both feasible and viable. 2. We accept that some fine tuning is still required particularly for those wards which are shown as both High and Low in regards to variance. 3. This fine tuning is something which the LGBCE is capable of undertaking having access to more data in regard to where growth is likely to occur, but which the above figures of generally small numbers of electors to be reallocated to neighbouring single member wards demonstrates its essential viability. 4. This exercise demonstrates that single member wards are achievable within a 10% variance, and that such boundaries devised to achieve this will be more or less in line with those proposed and tested here. 5. These wards achieve the following priorities:  Respect for existing parish boundaries – with the exceptions of Sturry and Chestfield parishes all CP’s are within single ward boundaries which is an improvement on the current situation and any alternative proposal seen  Geographical “boundaries” – roads, railways and rivers preventing/delimiting movement across areas have been taken fully into account, and again the ward designs show improvements against the current situation and any alternative proposals we have seen  Respecting identifiable communities of interest delimited by geographical boundaries, for example, the separation of Harbour from Tankerton and Barton from St Lawrence, which maintains community identity and interest. 6. This also demonstrates it is possible to have all wards the same size electorally with a single councillor.

Canterbury and District Labour Party’s Submission

Having considered alternative multi-member ward proposals the Labour Party rejects these decisively. All those proposed which we have seen tend to result in wards which fail to respect local community identities and interests through arbitrarily enlarging wards by attaching areas with no locally common connection. These proposals also fail to provide the democratic and effective government advantages of single member wards under the existing voting system.

The Labour Party’s proposed pattern of warding on a single member ward basis has been demonstrated to be feasible and viable. For the following reasons the Labour Party also concludes it is highly desirable.

1. It has been established by an objectively applied method free of party advantage considerations.

2. It has been subject to public consultation.

3. It respects Parish boundaries and improves on the current fit between Parishes and Wards.

23

4. It respects as far as possible the geographical boundaries of local communities and recognises their identity and interests.

5. It is moderate in its proposed change requiring minimal change to existing polling districts, and is indeed ‘built out of’ current and familiar warding arrangements but scaling them down to more locally identifiable communities of interest.

6. It has a good degree of ‘future proofing’, in that single member wards offer a higher degree of flexibility and timeliness in responding to the requirements for increased councillors as a consequence of developments envisaged in the draft Local Plan beyond 2019.

7. With some fine tuning, which is recognised as necessary, it meets all the criteria required by the LGBCE.

8. It has democratic, accountability and effectiveness advantages over multi- member alternatives as follows:

 It strengthens the essential relationship between the Ward Councillor and the Ward Electorate improving both community representation and the ability of the community to hold their Councillor to account  The smaller sized single member ward improves the effectiveness of the Ward Councillor who is more likely to be able to know and represent the interests of the ward community  It opens the electoral field to both individuals and smaller groups by abolishing the ‘barriers of entry’ imposed by ever enlarged multi-member wards.

9. It ensures that one person’s one vote is of the same value and weight as another’s in a different ward, thereby removing the current anomaly by which some voters can elect a larger proportion of the Council than others due to the mix of single and multi-member wards. We recognise that the LGBCE may recommend, within small margins, a slightly larger council but we are confident in proposing 38 single member wards that a similar pattern of single member wards can be devised if that is the outcome.

In conclusion, the Canterbury and District Labour Party submits to the Local Government Boundary Commission for England that:

4. It should ensure that each ward within Canterbury District serves broadly the same numbers of electors and provides the same number of Councillors 5. It should ensure there is an equitable design of single member wards throughout the Canterbury City Council area, and 6. The 38 ward designs proposed by the Canterbury and District Labour Party are recommended as a starting point for the design of single member wards in the district.

24

Current Overall OPTION #1: 38 WARDS Electors per Councillor 2262.1Electors per Councillor 3127 BASED ON 2019 Max target 3439 ELECTORATE Min target 2814 ESTIMATE Variance Area Cllrs per Electorate Electorate Electorate Within Area Name of ward Area Ward Group from target Area electors per ward 2012 2019 2019 range? total range ward Barton 3 7,341 7702 CITY 1 3250 OK HERNE BAY Northgate 2 5,067 5379 CITY 2 3356 OK HERNE BAY St Stephens 3 6,821 7097 CITY 3 3566 HIGH 127 HERNE BAY Westgate 3 6,547 7022 CITY 4 3109 OK HERNE BAY Wincheap 3 6,264 6688 CITY 5 3118 OK HERNE BAY Greenhill and Eddington 2 4,540 4713 HERNE BAY 6 2799 LOW -15 HERNE BAY 3 6,552 6973 HERNE BAY 7 3065 OK HERNE BAY Heron 3 6,284 6589 HERNE BAY 8 3174 OK 360 HERNE BAY Reculver 3 7,062 7353 HERNE BAY 9 2799 LOW -15 HERNE BAY West Bay 2 4,986 5167 HERNE BAY 10 3152 OK HERNE BAY 31387 3138.7 Barham Downs 1 2,192 2282 RURAL 11 2852 OK WHITSTABLE Blean Forest 2 5,710 5907 RURAL 12 3600 HIGH 161 WHITSTABLE Chartham and Stone Street 2 4,499 4704 RURAL 13 3383 OK WHITSTABLE Chestfield and Swalecliffe 3 6,880 7176 RURAL 14 3302 OK WHITSTABLE Harbledown 1 2,070 2146 RURAL 15 2888 OK WHITSTABLE Little Stour 1 2,163 2211 RURAL 16 2902 OK WHITSTABLE Marshside 1 2,432 2544 RURAL 17 2758 LOW -56 WHITSTABLE North Nailbourne 1 2,164 2258 RURAL 18 3017 OK WHITSTABLE Sturry North 1 2,101 2177 RURAL 19 2856 OK WHITSTABLE 27559 3062.1 Sturry South 1 2,280 2415 RURAL 20 3008 OK RURAL Gorrell 2 4,805 5276 WHITSTABLE 21 2870 OK RURAL Harbour 2 4,119 4345 WHITSTABLE 22 2804 LOW -10 RURAL Seasalter 3 6,416 6654 WHITSTABLE 23 3315 OK RURAL Tankerton 2 3,810 4035 WHITSTABLE 24 3399 OK RURAL 50 113,105 118,814 25 2508 LOW RURAL 26 3525 HIGH 85 RURAL Total 27 3116 OK RURAL 24545 3068.1 50 38 28 3658 HIGH 218 CITY Electors per Councillor 2013 2262.1 29 2911 OK CITY 30 3240 OK CITY 31 3458 HIGH 132 CITY 32 3754 HIGH 315 CITY 33 2963 OK CITY "DO NOTHING" IMPACT 34 3417 OK CITY City Whitstable Herne Bay Rural 35 3055 OK CITY Electors per Councillor 2013 2169.7 2339.0 2263.4 2320.8 36 3033 OK CITY Electors per Councillor 2015 2421 2256.6 2368.9 2415.7 37 3332 OK CITY 38 2872 OK CITY 35693 3244.9 119,185 3136.4