Draft Recommendations for Newcastle-Under-Lyme

Draft recommendations on the new electoral arrangements for Newcastle- under-Lyme Borough Council

Electoral review

February 2017

Translations and other formats To get this report in another language or in a large-print or Braille version contact the Local Government Boundary Commission for England:

Tel: 0330 500 1525

Email: [email protected]

The mapping in this report is reproduced from OS mapping by the Local Government Boundary Commission for England with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, © Crown Copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings.

Licence Number: GD 100049926 2017

Table of Contents Summary ...... 1 Who we are and what we do ...... 1 Electoral review ...... 1 Why Newcastle-under-Lyme? ...... 1 Our proposals for Newcastle-under-Lyme ...... 1 Have your say ...... 1 What is the Local Government Boundary Commission for England? ...... 2 1 Introduction ...... 3 What is an electoral review? ...... 3 Consultation ...... 3 How will the recommendations affect you? ...... 4 2 Analysis and draft recommendations ...... 5 Submissions received ...... 5 Electorate figures ...... 5 Number of councillors ...... 6 Ward boundaries consultation ...... 7 Draft recommendations ...... 8 Kidsgrove ...... 10 Newcastle-under-Lyme South ...... 14 The Rural Parishes ...... 16 Conclusions ...... 18 Summary of electoral arrangements ...... 18 Parish electoral arrangements ...... 18 3 Have your say ...... 20 Equalities ...... 21 Appendix A ...... 22 Draft recommendations for Newcastle-under-Lyme ...... 22 Appendix B ...... 24 Outline map ...... 24 Appendix C ...... 25 Submissions received ...... 25 Appendix D ...... 26 Glossary and abbreviations ...... 26

Summary

Who we are and what we do

1 The Local Government Boundary Commission for England (LGBCE) is an independent body set up by Parliament. We are not part of government or any political party. We are accountable to Parliament through a committee of MPs chaired by the Speaker of the House of Commons.

2 Our main role is to carry out electoral reviews of local authorities throughout England.

Electoral review

3 An electoral review examines and proposes new electoral arrangements for a local authority. A local authority’s electoral arrangements decide:

 How many councillors are needed  How many wards or electoral divisions should there be, where are their boundaries and what should they be called  How many councillors should represent each ward or division

Why Newcastle-under-Lyme?

4 We are conducting a review of Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council because the Council asked us to conduct a review of their area. The value of each vote in borough elections also varies depending on where you live in Newcastle- under-Lyme. Some councillors currently represent many more or fewer voters than others. This is ‘electoral inequality’. Our aim is to create ‘electoral equality’, where votes are as equal as possible, ideally within 10% of being exactly equal.

Our proposals for Newcastle-under-Lyme

 Newcastle-under-Lyme should be represented by 44 councillors, 16 fewer than there are now.  Newcastle-under-Lyme should have 21 wards, three fewer than are now.  The boundaries of 23 wards should change; one, Keele, will stay the same.

Have your say

5 We are consulting on our draft recommendations for an eight-week period, from 7 February 2017 to 3 April 2017. We encourage everyone to use this opportunity to contribute to the design of the new wards – the more public views we hear, the more informed our decisions will be when analysing all the views we received.

6 We ask everyone wishing to contribute ideas for the new wards to first read this Draft recommendations report and look at the accompanying map before responding to us.

You have until 3 April 2017 to have your say on the draft recommendations. See page 21 for how to send us your response.

What is the Local Government Boundary Commission for England?

7 The Local Government Boundary Commission for England is an independent body set up by Parliament.1

8 The members of the Commission are:

 Professor Colin Mellors (Chair)  Peter Knight CBE, DL  Alison Lowton  Peter Maddison QPM  Sir Tony Redmond

 Chief Executive: Jolyon Jackson CBE

1 Under the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009. 2

1 Introduction

9 This electoral review is being carried out to ensure that:

 The wards in Newcastle-under-Lyme are in the best possible places to help the Council carry out its responsibilities effectively.  The number of voters represented by each councillor is approximately the same across the borough.

What is an electoral review?

10 Our three main considerations are to:

 Improve electoral equality by equalising the number of electors each councillor represents  Reflect community identity  Provide for effective and convenient local government

11 Our task is to strike the best balance between them when making our recommendations. Our powers, as well as the guidance we have provided for electoral reviews and further information on the review process, can be found on our website at www.lgbce.org.uk

Consultation

12 We wrote to the Council to ask its views on the appropriate number of councillors for Newcastle-under-Lyme. We then held a period of consultation on warding patterns for the borough. The submissions received during consultation have informed our draft recommendations.

13 This review is being conducted as follows:

Stage starts Description

20 September 2016 Number of councillors decided 27 September 2016 Start of consultation seeking views on new wards 5 December 2016 End of consultation; we begin analysing submissions and forming draft recommendations 7 February 2017 Publication of draft recommendations, start of second consultation 3 April 2017 End of consultation; we begin analysing submissions and forming final recommendations 6 June 2017 Publication of final recommendations

How will the recommendations affect you?

14 The recommendations will determine how many councillors will serve on the Council. They will also decide which ward you vote in and which other communities are in that ward and, in some instances, which parish council ward you vote in. Your ward name may also change.

2 Analysis and draft recommendations

15 Legislation2 states that our recommendations should not be based only on how many electors3 there are now, but also on how many there are likely to be in the five years after the publication of our final recommendations. We must also try to recommend strong, clearly identifiable boundaries for our wards.

16 In reality, we are unlikely to be able to create wards with exactly the same number of electors in each; we have to be flexible. However, we try to keep the number of electors represented by each councillor as close to the average for the council as possible.

17 We work out the average number of electors per councillor for each individual local authority by dividing the electorate by the number of councillors, as shown on the table below.

2016 2022 Electorate of Area 93,733 96,708 Number of councillors 44 44 Average number of 2,130 2,198 electors per councillor

18 When the number of electors per councillor in a ward is within 10% of the average for the authority, we refer to the ward as having ‘good electoral equality’. All of our proposed wards for Newcastle-under-Lyme will have electoral equality by 2022.

19 Our recommendations cannot affect the external boundaries of the borough or result in changes to postcodes. They do not take into account parliamentary constituency boundaries. The recommendations will not have an effect on local taxes, house prices, or car and house insurance premiums and we are not able to take into account any representations which are based on these issues.

Submissions received

20 See Appendix C for details of the submissions received. All submissions may be viewed at our offices by appointment, or on our website at www.lgbce.org.uk

Electorate figures

21 The Council submitted electorate forecasts for 2022, a period five years on from the scheduled publication of our final recommendations. These forecasts were broken down to polling district level and predicted an increase in the electorate of around 2.6% by 2022.

2 Schedule 2 to the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009. 3 Electors refers to the number of people registered to vote, not the whole adult population. 5

22 The Newcastle-under-Lyme Conservative Association and the Council’s Labour Group both commented on the reflection in the forecast of current low levels of electoral registration amongst students at Keele University. They referred to the intention of both the University and the Council to introduce electoral registration as part of the academic registration process. They argued that forecasts should reflect adoption of this approach and its intended success in increasing registration. Several local authorities are adopting this registration process where students form a major element of the electoral register for parts of their area. Furthermore, in forecasts prepared as part of other reviews, we have allowed for expectations of increased registration of students.

23 The Council has confirmed that it has recently initiated, in collaboration with the University, new measures to increase student registration. We consider that the steps now being taken are likely to increase student registration during the five-year forecast period. We have therefore accepted a modification of the Council’s initial forecast by the addition of an anticipated increase in student registration. However, in doing so, we consider that the new processes by which students will become registered electors are likely to take some time to gather momentum and therefore do not consider it prudent to assume that every eligible student will register as an elector in 2022.

24 The result of these considerations is to increase the initial electorate forecast for the current Keele ward, and the total for the borough by around 560.

25 We are now satisfied that the modified electorate forecasts are the best available at the present time. We have used these figures to produce our draft recommendations.

Number of councillors

26 Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council currently has 60 councillors. We have looked at evidence provided by the Council and have concluded that decreasing it by 16 will make sure the Council can carry out its roles and responsibilities effectively.

27 We therefore invited proposals for new patterns of wards that would be represented by 44 councillors – for example, 44 one-councillor wards, 14 three- councillor wards and a two-member ward, or a mix of one-, two- and three-councillor wards.

28 We received two submissions about the number of councillors in response to our consultation on ward patterns. Two submissions expressly supported the reduction in the total number of borough councillors to 44. Kidsgrove Town Council argued that there should be no changes to electoral arrangements affecting the town. This implies no reduction in council size. However, the Town Council did not provide persuasive evidence that there is no justification for a reduction in council size.

29 The Council’s Liberal Democrat Group made a warding proposal based on their assessment of community boundaries. This would result in a total of 45 councillors. Both the Conservative Association and the Council’s Labour Group proposed

schemes for 44 councillors, also referring to their assessment of community boundaries. We have based our draft recommendations on a 44-member council.

30 The reduction in the number of councillors means, if electoral equality is to be achieved, that changes to most of the current ward boundaries will be inevitable. Ward boundaries consultation

31 In November 2015, the Council resolved to change the cycle of local elections from one of elections by thirds to a cycle of all-out elections beginning with elections to the Borough Council in 2018. This has significant implications for the process of drawing up ward boundaries because it means that we can recommend wards represented by one, two or three councillors or a warding pattern which has a combination of these. For authorities that elect by thirds, there is a presumption that we would recommend three-member wards.

32 We received 13 submissions during our consultation on ward boundaries. These included three detailed borough-wide proposals. In considering the submissions we received, we also had regard to the revision in the electorate forecasts described in paragraphs 23–4. The Newcastle-under-Lyme Conservative Association proposed a pattern of eight wards represented by three councillors and 10 represented by two.

33 The Council’s Labour Group proposed a pattern of 15 two-member wards and 14 with a single councillor.

34 The Liberal Democrat Group proposed that there should be 11 three-councillor wards and six two-councillor wards. This adds up to a total of 45 councillors. They provided an assessment of elector numbers in each ward by reference to current electorates. They acknowledged our initial conclusion on the total number of councillors by presenting a modification of their scheme to provide for 44 members. This alternative would, however, result in a higher level of electoral inequality in Loggerheads and Keele than we are prepared to recommend, having regard to the forecast electorate in 2022.

35 We also received proposals from four parish/town councils, two borough councillors and four local residents. These are described in the following pages of this report.

36 We carefully considered the proposals received and identified elements common to all proposals.

37 Each of the borough-wide proposals would lead to ward boundaries which, in many respects, would have good levels of electoral equality. We also considered that they generally used clearly identifiable boundaries.

38 Our draft recommendations are based on a combination of the borough-wide proposals that we received. We have taken into account local evidence that we received which provided evidence of community links and locally recognised boundaries. In some areas, we considered that the proposals we received did not

provide for the best balance between our statutory criteria and so we identified alternative boundaries. We also visited the area in order to look at the various different proposals on the ground. This tour of area helped us to decide between the different boundaries proposed.

39 We may move away from our initial conclusion on the total number of councillors if we consider that another number will lead to a better reflection of community identities. However, we rely on good evidence of community identity provided during consultation if we are to make such a change. Having considered the submissions made to us and the observations we made in visiting the area, we propose a pattern of wards which will give a total of 44 councillors.

40 Our draft recommendations are for six three-councillor wards, eleven 11 two- councillor wards and four one-councillor wards. We consider that our draft recommendations will provide for good electoral equality while reflecting community identities and interests where we have received such evidence during consultation.

41 A summary of our proposed new wards is set out in the table on page 18 and on the large map accompanying this report.

42 We welcome all comments on these draft recommendations, particularly on the location of the ward boundaries, and the names of our proposed wards.

Draft recommendations

43 The tables and maps on pages 10–18 detail our draft recommendations for each area of Newcastle-under-Lyme. They detail how the proposed warding arrangements reflect the three statutory4 criteria of:

 Equality of representation  Reflecting community interests and identities  Providing for effective and convenient local government

4 Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009. 8

Kidsgrove

Ward name Number of Cllrs Variance 2022 Kidsgrove & Ravenscliffe 3 7% Newchapel & Mow Cop 2 6% Talke & Butt Lane 3 7%

Kidsgrove & Ravenscliffe, Newchapel & Mow Cop and Talke & Butt Lane 44 Kidsgrove Town Council proposed that there be no change to the present electoral arrangements. The reduction in council size will mean, however, that ward boundaries throughout the borough, including those for Kidsgrove, will change.

45 We propose a pattern of wards that are coterminous with the boundary of the parish of Kidsgrove. The Council’s Labour and Liberal Democrat groups proposed patterns of wards for Kidsgrove which would provide nine borough councillors for the town whilst the Conservative Association proposed a pattern of wards to be served by eight. We consider that the allocation of eight borough council seats for Kidsgrove will be consistent with a pattern of wards which reflects community identities throughout the borough whilst giving electoral equality to those communities. We are not persuaded that this would be achieved by allocating the area nine councillors.

46 The Conservative Association proposed a three-member Kidsgrove & Ravenscliffe ward, which would include the High Street/Church Street area of Newchapel, and a two-member Newchapel & Mow Cop ward, which would include the Winghay Road and Parklands areas. The Liberal Democrat Group, meanwhile, proposed two three-member wards for a similar area. In its proposal, the Group proposed that Newchapel and Mow Cop be combined with the area to the south of Gloucester Road in a Kidsgrove ward. It proposed that the remainder of the parish lying to the east of the railway line, together with Hardings Wood and the Clough Hall Road area form a Ravenscliffe ward.

47 The Labour Group proposed three two-member wards for this area, including a Newchapel & Mow Cop ward which would have 11% fewer electors per councillor than the average for the borough in 2022. We do not normally make recommendations which would result in that degree of electoral inequality. The Group’s proposals also included a Kidsgrove North Ward and a Kidsgrove South & Clough Hall ward.

48 We have drawn on all of the submissions to propose a three-member Kidsgrove & Ravenscliffe ward and a two-member Newchapel & Mow Cop ward, the latter including both the High Street/Church Street area and Winghay Road.

49 The Labour Group proposed a two-member Butt Lane ward and a single- member Talke Pits ward having electoral variances of -8% and +10% by 2022 respectively. The Liberal Democrat Group proposed one three-member ward for that area, whilst the Conservative Association also proposed a three-member ward including the Hardings Wood and Clough Hall Road areas.

50 We consider that the Labour Group’s proposal would result in relatively high electoral variances for Butt Lane and Talke Pits and consider that any alternative boundary drawn simply to provide a better numerical equation would not satisfactorily reflect community identities. We therefore propose one three-member ward for the western part of Kidsgrove. Whilst we propose that this ward include Clough Hall Lane, we consider that the Hardings Wood area should be included in a ward which covers the central part of Kidsgrove. We propose that our three-member ward be named Talke & Butt Lane.

Newcastle-under-Lyme North

Ward name Number of Cllrs Variance 2022 Bradwell 3 1% Crackley & Red Street 2 4% Cross Heath 2 -5% Holditch & Chesterton 2 -4% May Bank 3 0% Wolstanton 2 8%

Bradwell 51 The Conservative Association and the Labour Group both proposed a two- member Bradwell ward which would have reasonable levels of electoral equality. However, their proposals would result in higher levels of electoral inequality in the area to the south of Bradwell than we are normally prepared to recommend. The Liberal Democrat Group proposed a three-member ward which would include part of the High Street and Boulton Street, which we consider to be part of Wolstanton. We therefore propose a three-member Bradwell ward which has as its south-eastern boundary Porthill Bank and Watlands View. This will have a good level of electoral equality by 2022.

Crackley & Red Street and Holditch & Chesterton 52 The proposals we received for the northern part of the town which lies to the west of Talke Road had many similarities, providing for good levels of electoral equality. The Labour Group’s proposal was for four single-member wards whilst the Conservative Association and the Liberal Democrat Group both proposed two two- member wards. We are not persuaded that the division of the area into single- member wards would reflect community identities in this area. We propose a two- member Crackley & Red Street ward, which would include the Springwood Road area, and a two-member Holditch & Chesterton ward.

Cross Heath, May Bank & Wolstanton 53 The borough-wide submissions we received were broadly similar in proposing a two-member Cross Heath ward differing only at Dimsdale Parade West and Hassam Parade. We recommend a two-member ward similar to that proposed to us. We recommend, however, that the Hempstalls Grove and Beattie Avenue areas are included in our proposed May Bank ward.

54 The Labour and Liberal Democrat groups proposed similar boundaries for a two-member May Bank ward whilst the Conservative Association proposed a three- member May Bank ward which would combine the areas to the north and south of Stratford Avenue. We consider that this combination would best reflect community identities and therefore recommend it as part of our draft recommendations.

55 The Conservative Association and the Liberal Democrat Group proposed a three-member Wolstanton & Porthill ward which followed similar boundaries whilst the Labour Group proposed single-member Porthill and Dimsdale wards and a two- member Wolstanton ward. In each case, the submissions extended those proposals into areas that we recommend be included in our Bradwell and May Bank wards. We therefore propose a two-member Wolstanton ward as part of our draft recommendations.

Newcastle-under-Lyme South

Ward name Number of Cllrs Variance 2022 Clayton 1 5% Knutton 1 -7% Thistleberry 2 -3% Town 2 -5% Westbury Park 2 -7% Westlands 3 -3%

Knutton, Thistleberry and Town 56 Both the Conservative Association and the Liberal Democrat Group proposed that Knutton be combined with Silverdale parish to form a three-member ward. The Labour Group proposed that Knutton form a single-member ward. A single-member Knutton ward would be consistent with the proposal of Silverdale Parish Council that the parish form a two-member ward. Whilst we recognise that Knutton and Silverdale are contiguous areas, we are persuaded to propose a single-member Knutton ward as part of our draft recommendations.

57 Each of the borough-wide submissions included proposals for wards with high levels of electoral inequality in the central part of Newcastle-under-Lyme town. We propose two-member Thistleberry and Town wards which reflect many aspects of the submissions we received, including evidence about community identities. However, our draft recommendations would provide for improved electoral equality.

Clayton, Westbury Park and Westlands 58 The Conservative Association and the Liberal Democrat Group made similar proposals for three-member wards in the southern part of the Newcastle-under-Lyme town. However, they would lead to a high degree of electoral inequality in the Westlands area in particular with around 10% fewer electors per councillor than the average for the borough by 2022. The Labour Group proposed a different approach, including two single-member and two two-member wards. That Group’s proposed single-member Clayton ward would have a particularly high level of electoral inequality, with 17% more electors than the average number of electors per councillor in 2022 and 11% more than the average in Westbury & Northwood.

59 We are persuaded by evidence of community identity in relation to Clayton but consider that a modification of the Labour Group’s proposal will both provide for improved electoral equality while reflecting community identity on the periphery of the area. We therefore propose a single-member Clayton ward having 5% more electors per councillor than the average for the borough by 2022.

60 The submissions we received were accompanied by some consistent views about community identity in the Seabridge, Westlands and Westbury Park areas. However, in order to provide for good levels of electoral equality whilst being consistent with our proposal for Clayton, we propose a three-member Westlands ward which includes the whole of Seabridge Lane and the Windermere Road area, and a two-member Westbury Park ward which includes the housing areas in the southernmost part of the town.

The Rural Parishes

Ward name Number of Cllrs Variance 2022 Audley 3 2% Keele 1 0% Loggerhheads 2 -9% Madeley & Betley 2 3% Maer & Whitmore 1 -6% Silverdale 2 -4%

Audley, Keele and Silverdale 61 The Liberal Democrat Group proposed a three-member ward which would be coterminous with the boundaries of Audley Rural parish whilst the Conservative Association proposed a similar ward but one which would exclude the Scot Hay part of the parish. Audley Parish Council proposed that the parish be divided into three wards, each represented by a single councillor, with the Scot Hay area added to Silverdale ward. The Labour Group proposed that the parish be divided into two borough wards: an Audley ward with an electoral variance of +8% and a Halmerend ward having a variance of -8%. We consider that electoral variances can be further minimised here and do not consider that the division of the parish into three wards would ensure good electoral equality or reflect the communities identified by the Parish Council. We therefore recommend a three-member Audley ward providing a good level of electoral equality by 2022. We propose, however, that the Apedale Community Country Park, an unparished area, be included in this ward.

62 The submissions we received made reference to the current level of electoral registration amongst Keele University students. The proposals we received endeavoured to address electoral equality by combining the parish of Keele with other areas. Revised forecasts indicate, however, that a single-member ward for Keele parish would have electoral equality by 2022 as shown in the table above, and this forms the basis of our draft recommendation for Keele. We propose to include in our Keele ward a small unparished area which includes part of the Keele University campus and some woodland areas.

63 The Labour Group and Silverdale Parish Council proposed that borough ward boundaries match the boundaries of the parish. That approach was supported by Councillor Snell who, along with Councillor Kearon, also argued that Keele parish should form a distinct ward. The Liberal Democrat Group and Conservative Association proposed that Silverdale be combined with the Knutton area. Taking into account all the considerations we must make, we propose a two-member Silverdale ward, coterminous with the parish boundary.

Loggerheads, Madeley & Betley and Maer & Whitmore 64 Loggerheads Parish Council, whilst supporting the proposed reduction in the total number of councillors, proposed that the boundaries of the current Loggerheads & Whitmore ward be retained. The Liberal Democrat Group made a similar proposal. The Conservative Association proposed that Chapel & Hill Chorlton, Loggerheads and Maer parishes form a two-member ward and that Whitmore parish be combined with Keele. In proposing that Loggerheads parish should form a two-member ward the Labour Group said that this would reflect the growing status of Loggerheads as the principal settlement in the rural south of the borough. We are persuaded by this proposition and have included it as part of our draft recommendations.

65 Commensurate with our proposal for Loggerheads, we propose that the parishes of Chapel & Hill Chorlton, Maer and Whitmore should together form a single-member ward.

66 The three borough-wide submissions we received each proposed that the parishes of Balterley, Betley and Madeley be combined to form a two-member ward.

This would provide good electoral equality and we therefore propose such a ward as part of our draft recommendations.

Conclusions

67 The table below shows the impact of our draft recommendations on electoral equality, based on 2016 and 2022 electorate figures.

Summary of electoral arrangements

Draft recommendations

2016 2022

Number of councillors 44 44

Number of electoral wards 21 21

Average number of electors per councillor 2,130 2,198

Number of wards with a variance more 3 0 than 10% from the average

Number of wards with a variance more 1 0 than 20% from the average

Draft recommendation Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council should be made up of 44 councillors serving 21 wards representing four single-councillor wards, 11 two-councillor wards and six three-councillor wards. The details and names are shown in Appendix A and illustrated on the large map accompanying this report.

Mapping Sheet 1, Map 1 shows the proposed wards for the Newcastle-under-Lyme. You can also view our draft recommendations for Newcastle-under-Lyme on our interactive maps at http://consultation.lgbce.org.uk

Parish electoral arrangements

68 As part of an electoral review, we are required to have regard to the statutory criteria set out in Schedule 2 to the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009 (the 2009 Act). The Schedule provides that if a parish is to be

divided between different wards or divisions it must also be divided into parish wards, so that each parish ward lies wholly within a single wards or divisions. We cannot recommend changes to the external boundaries of parishes as part of an electoral review.

69 Under the 2009 Act we only have the power to make changes to parish electoral arrangements where these are as a direct consequence of our recommendations for principal authority warding arrangements. However, Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council has powers under the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007 to conduct community governance reviews to effect changes to parish electoral arrangements.

70 As a result of our proposed ward boundaries and having regard to the statutory criteria set out in schedule 2 to the 2009 Act, we are providing revised parish electoral arrangements for Kidsgrove.

Final recommendation Kidsgrove Council should comprise 20 councillors, as at present, representing six wards: Parish ward Number of parish councillors Butt Lane 4 Harding’s Wood 1 Kidsgrove 3 Newchapel 5 Ravenscliffe 4 Talke 3

3 Have your say

71 The Commission has an open mind about its draft recommendations. Every representation we receive will be considered, regardless of who it is from or whether it relates to the whole borough or just a part of it.

72 If you agree with our recommendations, please let us know. If you don’t think our recommendations are right for Newcastle-under-Lyme, we want to hear alternative proposals for a different pattern of wards.

73 Our website has a special consultation area where you can explore the maps and draw your own proposed boundaries. You can find it at consultation.lgbce.org.uk

74 Submissions can also be made by emailing [email protected] or by writing to: Review Officer (Newcastle-under-Lyme) The Local Government Boundary Commission for England 14th Floor, Millbank Tower Millbank London SW1P 4QP

You have until 3 April 2017 to have your say on the draft recommendations.

75 The Commission aims to propose a pattern of wards for the Newcastle-under- Lyme which delivers:

 Electoral equality: each local councillor represents a similar number of voters  Community identity: reflects the identity and interests of local communities  Effective and convenient local government: helping your council discharge its responsibilities effectively

76 A good pattern of wards should:

 Provide good electoral equality, with each councillor representing, as closely as possible, the same number of voters  Reflect community interests and identities and include evidence of community links  Be based on strong, easily identifiable boundaries  Help the council deliver effective and convenient local government

77 Electoral equality:

 Does your proposal mean that councillors would represent roughly the same number of voters as elsewhere in the council area?

78 Community identity:

 Community groups: is there a parish council, residents’ association or other group that represents the area?  Interests: what issues bind the community together or separate it from other parts of your area?  Identifiable boundaries: are there natural or constructed features which make strong boundaries for your proposals?

79 Effective local government:

 Are any of the proposed wards too large or small to be represented effectively?  Are the proposed names of the wards appropriate?  Are there good links across your proposed wards? Is there any form of public transport?

80 Please note that the consultation stages of an electoral review are public consultations. In the interests of openness and transparency, we make available for public inspection full copies of all representations the Commission takes into account as part of a review. Accordingly, copies of all representations will be placed on deposit at our offices in Millbank (London) and on our website at www.lgbce.org.uk A list of respondents will be available from us on request after the end of the consultation period.

81 If you are a member of the public and not writing on behalf of a council or organisation we will remove any personal identifiers, such as postal or email addresses, signatures or phone numbers from your submission before it is made public. We will remove signatures from all letters, no matter who they are from.

82 In the light of representations received, we will review our draft recommendations and consider whether they should be altered. As indicated earlier, it is therefore important that all interested parties let us have their views and evidence, whether or not they agree with the draft recommendations. We will then publish our final recommendations.

83 After the publication of our final recommendations, the changes we have proposed must be approved by Parliament. An Order – the legal document which brings into force our recommendations – will be laid in draft in Parliament. The draft Order will provide for new electoral arrangements to be implemented at the all-out elections for the Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council in 2018.

Equalities

84 This report has been screened for impact on equalities, with due regard being given to the general equalities duties as set out in section 149 of the Equality Act 2010. As no potential negative impacts were identified, a full equality impact analysis is not required.

Appendix A

Draft recommendations for Newcastle-under-Lyme

2 Bradwell 3 6,630 2,210 4% 6,637 2,212 1%

3 Clayton 1 2,285 2,285 7% 2,316 2,316 5% Crackley & Red 4 2 4,461 2,231 5% 4,575 2,287 4% Street 5 Cross Heath 2 4,000 2,000 -6% 4,176 2,088 -5% Holditch & 6 2 4,180 2,090 -2% 4,219 2,109 -4% Chesterton 7 Keele 1 1,468 1,468 -31% 2,194 2,194 0% Kidsgrove & 8 3 7,041 2,347 10% 7,049 2,350 7% Ravenscliffe 9 Knutton 1 2,034 2,034 -5% 2,038 2,038 -7%

10 Loggerheads 2 3,630 1,815 -15% 3,999 2,000 -9%

11 Madeley & Betley 2 4,428 2,214 4% 4,508 2,254 3%

12 Maer & Whitmore 1 1,992 1,992 -6% 2,056 2,056 -6%

Number of Variance Number of Variance Number of Electorate Electorate Ward name electors per from average electors per from average councillors (2016) (2022) councillor % councillor % 13 May Bank 3 6,484 2,161 1% 6,597 2,199 0% Newchapel & 14 2 4,649 2,325 9% 4,658 2,329 6% Mow Cop 15 Silverdale 2 4,184 2,092 -2% 4,225 2,112 -4%

16 Talke & Butt Lane 3 6,670 2,223 4% 7,041 2,347 7%

17 Thistleberry 2 4,074 2,037 -4% 4,277 2,138 -3%

18 Town 2 3,808 1,904 -11% 4,183 2,092 -5%

19 Westbury Park 2 4,097 2,049 -4% 4,104 2,052 -7%

20 Westlands 3 6,345 2,115 -1% 6,374 2,125 -3%

21 Wolstanton 2 4,670 2,335 10% 4,726 2,363 8%

Totals 44 93,733 – – 96,708 – –

Averages – – 2,130 – – 2,198 –

Source: Electorate figures are based on information provided by the Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council.

Note: The ‘variance from average’ column shows by how far, in percentage terms, the number of electors per councillor in each electoral ward varies from the average for the borough. The minus symbol (-) denotes a lower than average number of electors. Figures have been rounded to the nearest whole number.

Appendix B

Outline map

A more detailed version of this map can be seen on the A1 sheet accompanying this report, or on our website: https://www.lgbce.org.uk/current-reviews/west- midlands/staffs/newcastle-under-lyme

Appendix C

Submissions received

All submissions received can also be viewed on our website at https://www.lgbce.org.uk/current-reviews/west-midlands/staffs/newcastle-under-lyme

Political Group

 Newcastle-under-Lyme Conservative Association  Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council Labour Group  Newcastle-under-Lyme Liberal Democrats

Councillors

 Councillor T. Kearon (Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council)  Councillor G. Snell (Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council)

Parish and Town Councils

 Audley Rural Parish Council  Kidsgrove Town Council  Loggerheads Parish Council  Silverdale Parish Council

Local Residents

 Four local residents

Appendix D Glossary and abbreviations

Council size The number of councillors elected to serve on a council

Electoral Change Order (or Order) A legal document which implements changes to the electoral arrangements of a local authority

Division A specific area of a county, defined for electoral, administrative and representational purposes. Eligible electors can vote in whichever division they are registered for the candidate or candidates they wish to represent them on the county council

Electoral fairness When one elector’s vote is worth the same as another’s

Electoral inequality Where there is a difference between the number of electors represented by a councillor and the average for the local authority

Electorate People in the authority who are registered to vote in elections. For the purposes of this report, we refer specifically to the electorate for local government elections

Number of electors per councillor The total number of electors in a local authority divided by the number of councillors

Over-represented Where there are fewer electors per councillor in a ward or division than the average

Parish A specific and defined area of land within a single local authority enclosed within a parish boundary. There are over 10,000 parishes in England, which provide the first tier of representation to their local residents

Parish council A body elected by electors in the parish which serves and represents the area defined by the parish boundaries. See also ‘Town council’

Parish (or Town) council electoral The total number of councillors on arrangements any one parish or town council; the number, names and boundaries of parish wards; and the number of councillors for each ward

Parish ward A particular area of a parish, defined for electoral, administrative and representational purposes. Eligible electors vote in whichever parish ward they live for candidate or candidates they wish to represent them on the parish council

Town council A parish council which has been given ceremonial ‘town’ status. More information on achieving such status can be found at www.nalc.gov.uk

Under-represented Where there are more electors per councillor in a ward or division than the average

Variance (or electoral variance) How far the number of electors per councillor in a ward or division varies in percentage terms from the average

Ward A specific area of a district or borough, defined for electoral, administrative and representational purposes. Eligible electors can vote in

whichever ward they are registered for the candidate or candidates they wish to represent them on the district or borough council