LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR

REVIEW OF PART OF THE BOUNDARY BETWEEN THE COMMUNITIES OF AND DYFFRYN IN THE OF

REPORT AND PROPOSALS

LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR WALES

REVIEW OF PART OF THE BOUNDARY BETWEEN THE COMMUNITIES OF BLAENHONDDAN AND IN THE COUNTY BOROUGH OF

REPORT AND PROPOSALS

1. INTRODUCTION

2. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

3. SCOPE AND OBJECT OF THE REVIEW

4. DRAFT PROPOSALS

5. REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED IN RESPONSE TO THE DRAFT PROPOSALS

6. ASSESSMENT

7. PROPOSALS

8. CONSEQUENTIAL ARRANGEMENTS

9. RESPONSES TO THIS REPORT

The Local Government Boundary Commission For Wales Caradog House 1-6 St Andrews Place CARDIFF CF10 3BE Tel Number: (029) 20395031 Fax Number: (029) 20395250 E-mail: [email protected] www.lgbc-wales.gov.uk

Sue Essex AM Minister for Finance, Local Government and Public Services The National Assembly for Wales

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 We the Local Government Boundary Commission for Wales (the Commission) have completed the review of part of the boundary between the Communities of Blaenhonddan and Dyffryn Clydach in the County Borough of Neath Port Talbot in accordance with your directions to us dated 23 February 2005 (Appendix A).

1.2 The section of the boundary under review separates the Communities of Blaenhonddan and Dyffryn Clydach in the County Borough of Neath Port Talbot and is shown on the map at Appendix B.

2. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

2.1 We propose no change to the boundary between the Communities of Blaenhonddan and Dyffryn Clydach in the County Borough of Neath Port Talbot.

3. SCOPE AND OBJECT OF THE REVIEW

3.1 The purpose of the review is to consider whether, in the interests of effective and convenient local government, the Commission should propose changes to the present boundary. The review is being conducted under the provisions of Section 56(1) of the Local Government Act 1972 (the Act).

Procedure

3.2 Section 60 of the Act lays down procedural guidelines which are to be followed in carrying out a review. In line with that guidance we wrote on 19 May 2005 to Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council, Blaenhonddan Council, Dyffryn Clydach Community Council, the Member of Parliament for the local constituency, the Assembly Members for the area and the police authority for the area to inform them of our intention to conduct the review and to request their preliminary views. We enclosed a map showing the part of the boundary under review and invited the Councils to submit any revisions they wished to make to the suggested boundary. We also publicised our intention to conduct the review in local newspapers circulating in the area and asked the councils to display public notices.

4. DRAFT PROPOSALS

4.1 In response to our initial invitation, we received representations from Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council, Blaenhonddan Community Council, Dyffryn Clydach Community Council, Gwenda Thomas AM, Cllr G D Owen; (Neath Port Talbot), Cllr Martyn Peters (Neath Port Talbot); Cllr M Richards (Blaenhonddan Community Council), Dyffryn Clydach Neighbourhood Watch, Dyffryn Clydach Environmental Group and 11

- 1 -

letters from local residents. Previously, in 2002, we received representations from Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council, Blaenhonddan Community Council, Dyffryn Clydach Community Council, Gwenda Thomas AM, Cllr Martyn Peters (Neath Port Talbot), Cllr G Richards (Neath Port Talbot) and 40 letters from local residents. In our Draft Proposals published on 24 November 2005, we considered the issues raised in the representations.

Identifiable Boundary

4.2 We considered the change to the boundary suggested by Dyffryn Clydach Community Council (see map at Appendix B) and instructed the Secretariat to inspect the new boundary to ascertain if it followed appropriate geographic features and could be easily identified. Following the Secretariat’s inspection, we were satisfied that by using the boundary suggested by Dyffryn Clydach Community Council combined with property fence lines, an appropriate boundary could be identified that divided those properties that only have vehicular access via Taillwyd Road and those that have access via Blaenhonddan.

Council Tax/Precept

4.3 We considered the point made by Blaenhonddan Community Council that a change to the boundary would result in a loss of revenue for the Council. We agreed that in any boundary change involving a transfer of residential property, the Community Council from whose area the properties are transferred would suffer a loss of revenue as an immediate consequence of the change unless the precept were increased. We considered however that the situation is not static and future housing development would increase Blaenhonddan Community Council’s revenue. We noted that over the last 10 years the number of electors in the community of Blaenhonddan had increased by 50% compared with a 3% increase in the Community of Dyffryn Clydach. We further noted the ongoing housing development in the Community of Blaenhonddan which should offset any loss arising from the change in the community boundary.

4.4 Some of the representations pointed out that by moving the boundary those residents in the area under review will be subject to an increase in Council Tax. We considered that this however was not necessarily the case, as the impact of Council Tax on the individual tax payer will depend on the level of County Council and Community Council net expenditure and the personal circumstances of the individual, and these can vary from year to year.

4.5 With respect to the variations in Council Tax resulting from our proposals we confirmed that our approach to carrying out our duties in considering what proposals to make in the interests of effective and convenient local government, is that little weight should be accorded to consequential changes in individual council tax, and they should certainly not be determinative.

Access to Services

4.6 We noted that a number of the representations made reference to the distances of various services such as Community Halls, playing fields etc. from the review area. In terms of walking distances there did not appear to us to be a significant difference between the distance from the review area to the services in either Blaenhonddan or Dyffryn Clydach. In terms of distances by motor vehicle however there was a significant difference. The services in Dyffryn Clydach are easily accessed by motor vehicle whereas the services in

- 2 -

Blaenhonddan can only be reached by travelling down Taillwyd Road and through Dyffryn Clydach before travelling back into Blaenhonddan along Road.

Community of Interest

4.7 In our draft proposals report we noted that a number of the representations from residents of the review area expressed the view that they had greater social and economic ties with Dyffryn Clydach than with Blaenhonddan. A smaller number of residents expressed the opposite view. A number of the representations called for a referendum on this issue. We considered however that although holding a referendum would in one sense provide us with evidence as to the balance of public opinion on the narrow question, we were not satisfied that a referendum could realistically take account of the many considerations which are relevant. We did however wish to encourage all of the electors in the review area to take the opportunity to express their views on the suggested change to the community boundary. We therefore, sent a copy of our draft proposals report to all of the electors in the review area along with a reply form and postage-paid return envelope. A copy of the reply form can be found at Appendix C. The names and addresses of the electors were supplied by Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council.

Draft Proposals - Conclusion

4.8 In considering changes to the boundary between two communities we assessed the benefit, in terms of effective and convenient local government, that the change may bring. From the information that had been provided to us there appeared to be little significant difference in the nature of the services provided by Blaenhonddan or Dyffryn Clydach. Consideration therefore was given to the location of the services relevant to the review area. It was our view that there was little difference in the ease of pedestrian access from the review area to the services in either community. Where there was a significant difference however was access by vehicle where it was far easier for the residents in the review area to access the services in Dyffryn Clydach than the services in Blaenhonddan. We considered access to services to be an important factor in determining effective and convenient local government. We also attached weight to community of interest and it seemed to us on balance that there was more support on the ground for the proposed change in the boundary than there was for retaining the present boundary. We invited further representations in response to the draft proposals.

5. REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED IN RESPONSE TO THE DRAFT PROPOSALS

5.1 In response to our Draft Proposals report, we received representations from Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council, Blaenhonddan Community Council, Dyffryn Clydach Community Council, Rt. Hon. Peter Hain MP, Gwenda Thomas AM, Councillor J Dudley, Councillor G D Owen, Councillor M Richards, Community Councillor L John, Dyffryn Clydach Volunteers and four local residents. We also received 224 out of the 611 forms sent to the electors in the review area.

5.2 Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council noted the Commission’s proposals. In the event of these proposals being implemented, they made observations in respect of the

- 3 -

suggested warding arrangements. A copy of their representation can be found at Appendix D.

5.3 Blaenhonddan Community Council objected to the proposed change to the boundary giving a number of reasons. A copy of their representation can be found at Appendix E.

5.4 Dyffryn Clydach Community Council welcomed the Commission’s proposals outlined in the Draft Proposals report. A copy of their representation can be found at Appendix F.

5.5 Rt. Hon. Peter Hain MP was of the view that there was no compelling reason for a change to the existing boundary. A copy of the representation can be found at Appendix G.

5.6 Gwenda Thomas AM could see no merit in the proposed change to the boundary and was of the view that the status quo should be preserved A copy of the representation can be found at Appendix H.

5.7 Councillor J Dudley (Bryn-côch South) objected to the proposed change to the boundary and gave a number of reasons. A copy of the representation can be found at Appendix I.

5.8 Councillor G D Owen (Bryn-côch South) objected to the proposed change to the boundary and gave a number of reasons. A copy of the representation can be found at Appendix J.

5.9 Community Councillor L John (Blaenhonddan Community Council) objected to the proposed change to the boundary and gave a number of reasons. A copy of the representation can be found at Appendix K.

5.10 Councillor M Richards (Blaenhonddan Community Council) objected to the proposed change to the boundary and gave a number of reasons. A copy of the representation can be found at Appendix L.

5.11 Dyffryn Clydach Volunteers could not see any advantage in changing the existing boundary. A copy of their representation can be found at Appendix M.

5.12 A summary of the remaining representations can be found at Appendix N.

6. ASSESSMENT

6.1 We noted that of the 611 forms sent to residents of the area under review asking for their views on our Draft Proposals some 37% were returned. Of those, 54% supported the proposed change and 46% were against. We had asked that the forms be signed but 19 were returned unsigned. Of the signed forms, some 56% supported the proposed change and 44% were against. Whilst we considered this exercise to have been a useful gauge of opinion we do not consider that the results demonstrate such a degree of support for the change as would have been anticipated given the previously suggested community of interest between the review area and the Community of Dyffryn Clydach.

6.2 In our Draft Proposals report we expressed the view that there appeared to be little significant benefit in terms of the nature of local government services that would be derived

- 4 -

from a change to the boundary. From the representations we received in response to our Draft proposals we do not consider that we have been provided with any additional evidence that would change our view.

6.3 In our Draft Proposals report we noted the restrictions to vehicular access and considered that these had a detrimental affect on the ability of residents to access the Community services. The representation from Councillor Owen (Appendix J) informed us that the bollards across the road at Mill Race were due to be removed. The Commission pursued the matter with Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council and were informed that no such change was proposed - see their letter at Appendix O. From the representations we have received in respect of our Draft proposals however we do not consider that we have received further evidence which supports our earlier provisional view that the traffic restrictions have a significant detrimental affect on the accessibility of the Community services.

6.4 The conclusion in our Draft Proposals report that there would be a benefit in terms of effective and convenient local government if the boundary were changed was based on the understanding that there was a strong community of interest between the area under review and the Community of Dyffryn Clydach and that the residents of the area had difficulties in accessing services because of the road traffic restrictions. We are now of the view that there is not a significantly greater community of interest between the area under review and Dyffryn Clydach than that between the area under review and Blaenhonddan. We are also of the view that there are no significant problems in respect of access to services. As a result of the representations received we have come to the conclusion that there is insufficient evidence that changing the boundary between the Communities of Blaenhonddan and Dyffryn Clydach would confer any substantial or significant benefit in terms of effective and convenient local government.

7. PROPOSALS

7.1 Having considered all of the evidence available to us, we propose no change to the boundary between the Communities of Blaenhonddan and Dyffryn Clydach in the County Borough of Neath Port Talbot.

8. CONSEQUENTIAL ARRANGEMENTS

8.1 Under Section 54 (1) (e) of the Act, the Commission may make proposals for change of electoral arrangements for any local government area which is consequential on any proposed change in local government areas. As we propose no change to a local government area, we make no proposals for consequential changes to the electoral arrangements.

8.2 We noted the suggestions for changes to the Community Council electoral arrangements contained in the representation from Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council (Appendix D). As we are not proposing any changes to the community boundary we are unable to consider these issues. It will therefore be for the Council to consider as part of a review conducted by them under Section 57(4) of the Act.

- 5 -

9. RESPONSES TO THIS REPORT

9.1 Having completed our consideration of the review of the boundary between the Communities of Blaenhonddan and Dyffryn Clydach and submitted our recommendations to the National Assembly for Wales, we have fulfilled our statutory obligation under the Act.

9.2 It now falls to the National Assembly for Wales, if it thinks fit, to accept them or to direct the Commission to conduct a further review.

9.3 Any further representations concerning the matters in the report should be addressed to the National Assembly for Wales. They should be made as soon as possible, and in any event not later than six weeks from the date that the Commission’s recommendations are submitted to the National Assembly for Wales. Representations should be addressed to:

Democracy Team Local Government Policy Division National Assembly for Wales Cathays Park Cardiff CF10 3NQ

MRS S G SMITH LLB (Chair)

J DAVIES ICSA IPFA (Deputy Chair)

D H ROBERTS BSc DMS MBCS MCMI (Member)

E H LEWIS BSc. DPM FRSA FCIPD (Secretary)

April 2006

- 6 -