New electoral arrangements for Ealing Council

Final recommendations July 2019 Translations and other formats:

To get this report in another language or in a large-print or Braille version, please contact the Local Government Boundary Commission for England at: Tel: 0330 500 1525

Email: [email protected]

Licensing:

The mapping in this report is based upon Ordnance Survey material with the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of the Keeper of Public Records © Crown copyright and database right. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and database right.

Licence Number: GD 100049926 2019

A note on our mapping:

The maps shown in this report are for illustrative purposes only. Whilst best efforts have been made by our staff to ensure that the maps included in this report are representative of the boundaries described by the text, there may be slight variations between these maps and the large PDF map that accompanies this report, or the digital mapping supplied on our consultation portal. This is due to the way in which the final mapped products are produced. The reader should therefore refer to either the large PDF supplied with this report or the digital mapping for the true likeness of the boundaries intended. The boundaries as shown on either the large PDF map or the digital mapping should always appear identical.

Contents

Introduction 1 Who we are and what we do 1 What is an electoral review? 1 Why Ealing? 2 Our proposals for Ealing 2 How will the recommendations affect you? 2 Review timetable 3 Analysis and final recommendations 5 Submissions received 5 Electorate figures 5 Number of councillors 6 Ward boundaries consultation 6 Draft recommendations consultation 7 Final recommendations 7 South-west Ealing 9 Northolt 12 Greenford and Perivale 13 Central Ealing 15 Acton and Ealing Common 18 South Ealing 23 Conclusions 27 Summary of electoral arrangements 27 What happens next? 29 Equalities 31 Appendices 33 Appendix A 33 Final recommendations for Ealing 33 Appendix B 36 Outline map 36 Appendix C 38 Submissions received 38 Appendix D 39

Glossary and abbreviations 39

Introduction Who we are and what we do

1 The Local Government Boundary Commission for England (LGBCE) is an independent body set up by Parliament.1 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. Our main role is to carry out electoral reviews of local authorities throughout England.

2 The members of the Commission are:

• Professor Colin Mellors OBE • Amanda Nobbs OBE (Chair) • Steve Robinson • Andrew Scallan CBE (Deputy Chair) • Jolyon Jackson CBE • Susan Johnson OBE (Chief Executive) • Peter Maddison QPM

What is an 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 there should be, where their boundaries are and what they should be called. • How many councillors should represent each ward.

4 When carrying out an electoral review the Commission has three main considerations:

• Improving electoral equality by equalising the number of electors that each councillor represents. • Ensuring that the recommendations reflect community identity. • Providing arrangements that support effective and convenient local government.

5 Our task is to strike the best balance between these three considerations when making our recommendations.

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

1

6 More detail regarding the powers that we have, as well as the further guidance and information about electoral reviews and review process in general, can be found on our website at www.lgbce.org.uk

Why Ealing?

7 We are conducting a review of Ealing Council (‘the Council’) as its last review was completed in 1999 and we are required to review the electoral arrangements of every council in England ‘from time to time’.2 In addition, the value of each vote in borough council elections varies depending on where you live in Ealing. 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.

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

• The wards in Ealing 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.

Our proposals for Ealing

9 Ealing should be represented by 70 councillors, one more than there is now.

10 Ealing should have 24 wards one more than there is now.

11 The boundaries of all wards should change; none will stay the same.

12 We have now finalised our recommendations for electoral arrangements for Ealing.

How will the recommendations affect you?

13 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. Your ward name may also change.

14 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.

2 Local Democracy, Economic Development & Construction Act 2009 paragraph 56(1).

2

Review timetable 15 We wrote to the Council to ask its views on the appropriate number of councillors for Ealing. We then held two periods of consultation with the public on warding patterns for the borough. The submissions received during consultation have informed our final recommendations.

16 The review was conducted as follows:

Stage starts Description

21 July 2018 Number of councillors decided 28 August 2018 Start of consultation seeking views on new wards End of consultation; we began analysing submissions and 5 November 2018 forming draft recommendations Publication of draft recommendations; start of second 5 February 2019 consultation End of consultation; we began analysing submissions and 15 April 2019 forming final recommendations 2 July 2019 Publication of final recommendations

3

4

Analysis and final recommendations 17 Legislation3 states that our recommendations should not be based only on how many electors4 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.

18 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.

19 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.

2018 2024 Electorate of Ealing 246,483 256,939 Number of councillors 69 70 Average number of electors per 3,521 3,671 councillor

20 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 Ealing will have good electoral equality by 2024.

Submissions received 21 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 22 The Council submitted electorate forecasts for 2024, a period five years on from the scheduled publication of our final recommendations in 2019. These forecasts were broken down to polling district level and predicted an increase in the electorate of around 4% by 2024.

23 During our consultations, we received a number of submissions querying the Council’s electorate forecast in Acton. The respondents argued that because of the number of developments scheduled to take place, the electorate forecast for East Acton and North Acton wards was too low.

3 Schedule 2 to the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009. 4 Electors refers to the number of people registered to vote, not the whole adult population.

5

24 The forecast produced by the Council was based on the Greater London Authority (GLA) population projections, which take into account patterns of population change, the Office for National Statistics population figures and the impact of likely housing and economic developments. The variation of the GLA population projections that was used to create the electorate forecast takes into account local development data that was provided to the GLA by Ealing Council

25 We acknowledge that forecasting electorates is an inexact science. In this context, we have reconsidered the information provided by the Council and remain satisfied that the projected figures are the best available at the present time. We have used these figures to produce our final recommendations.

Number of councillors 26 Ealing Council currently has 69 councillors. At the start of the review, we looked at evidence provided by the Council and concluded that keeping this number the same would ensure the Council would be able to carry out its roles and responsibilities effectively.

27 We therefore invited proposals for new patterns of wards that would be represented by 69 councillors – for example, 69 one-councillor wards, 23 three- councillor wards, or a mix of one-, two- and three-councillor wards.

28 We did not receive any alternative proposals regarding the number of councillors for Ealing during our consultation on warding patterns. However, when formulating our draft recommendations, we found that increasing the number of councillors by one to 70 would allow for better electoral equality across the borough, and in particular for the south-west of the borough. We remain of the view that this number of councillors will ensure that the Council can carry out its responsibilities effectively and provide for an effective pattern of wards. We have therefore based our final recommendations on 70 councillors.

Ward boundaries consultation 29 We received 43 submissions in response to our consultation on ward boundaries. These included three borough-wide proposals from the Council, the Conservative Group on the Council and the Liberal Democrat Group on the Council. The Conservative and Liberal Democrat proposals were based on 69 councillors representing 23 three-councillor wards. The Council’s scheme was based on 70 councillors, representing 22 three-councillor wards and two two-councillor wards. Five of the submissions that we received from local residents proposed that no changes should be made to any of the current ward boundaries. The remainder of the submissions provided localised comments for warding arrangements in particular areas of the borough.

6

30 In some areas the schemes proposed the same ward boundaries. We carefully considered the proposals received and were of the view that the proposed patterns of wards resulted in good levels of electoral equality in most areas of the authority and generally used clearly identifiable boundaries.

31 Our draft recommendations were predominantly based on the Council’s proposals, but also took into account local evidence that we received, which provided further evidence of community links and locally recognised boundaries. In some areas we considered that the proposals did not provide for the best balance between our statutory criteria and so we identified alternative boundaries.

32 We visited the area in order to look at the various proposals on the ground. This tour of Ealing helped us to decide between the different boundaries proposed.

33 Our draft recommendations were for 22 three-councillor wards and two two- councillor wards. We considered that our draft recommendations would provide for good electoral equality while reflecting community identities and interests where we received such evidence during consultation.

Draft recommendations consultation 34 We received 183 submissions during consultation on our draft recommendations. These included three modified schemes from the Council, the Conservative Group and the Liberal Democrat Group. The majority of the other submissions focused on specific areas, particularly our proposals in Acton, North Hanwell and Pitshanger.

35 Our final recommendations are based on the draft recommendations with minor modifications to the ward boundaries in Ealing Broadway, Hanger Hill, North Acton, North Greenford, North Hanwell, Perivale, Pitshanger and South Acton.

Final recommendations 36 Our final recommendations are for 22 three-councillor wards and two two- councillor wards. We consider that our final recommendations will provide for good electoral equality while reflecting community identities and interests where we received such evidence during consultation.

37 The tables and maps on pages 9–25 detail our final recommendations for each area of Ealing. They detail how the proposed warding arrangements reflect the three statutory5 criteria of:

5 Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009.

7

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

38 A summary of our proposed new wards is set out in the table starting on page 33 and on the large map accompanying this report.

8

South-west Ealing

Number of Ward name Variance 2024 councillors Dormers Wells 3 -5% Lady Margaret 3 5% Norwood Green 3 -1% Southall Broadway 2 6% Southall Green 3 -2% Southall West 2 4%

Lady Margaret and Dormers Wells 39 We received three borough-wide schemes in response to our draft recommendations from the Council, the Conservative Group and the Liberal Democrat Group. All three schemes supported our draft recommendations in Dormers Wells and Lady Margaret.

9

40 We received one submission from a local resident that questioned whether it was necessary to move Mansell Road (and the surrounding roads) from Lady Margaret ward into Dormers Wells ward. We amended the boundary between these two wards to improve electoral equality. Moving Mansell Road and the surrounding roads back into Lady Margaret would result in worse electoral equality in both wards (Lady Margaret at 7% and Dormers Wells at -8%).

41 We remain satisfied that our draft recommendations for Lady Margaret and Dormers Wells wards offer the best balance of our statutory criteria and therefore confirm them as final. Both will have good electoral equality by 2024.

Norwood Green and Southall Green 42 We received one submission regarding Norwood Green from a local resident, arguing that electors north of the Grand Union Canal Walk, east of Windmill Lane and south of the railway line would be better placed in Hanwell Broadway ward, as opposed to Norwood Green. The respondent argued that local residents here consider themselves part of Hanwell, with local shopping amenities and transport links also located in Hanwell. Moving electors here into Hanwell Broadway ward would result in poor electoral equality for both wards (Norwood Green at -21% and Hanwell Broadway at 14%). We consider these electoral variances are too high and are therefore not adopting this proposal.

43 The three borough-wide schemes supported our draft recommendations for both Norwood Green and Southall Green. We therefore confirm our draft recommendations for these wards as final.

Southall Broadway and Southall West 44 We are not proposing any changes to our draft ward boundaries in Southall Broadway and West Southall. We received one submission from a local resident stating that they disagreed with our proposal to move away from one three-councillor ward to create two two-councillor wards in this area. They suggested that electors should instead be moved into either Southall Green or Lady Margaret wards to reduce the size of a three-councillor Southall Broadway ward. We carefully considered moving some electors into Lady Margaret ward. However, we were unable to identify ward boundaries that would ensure good electoral equality in both wards. The forecast growth in this area is large enough that a single three-member ward will always have an unacceptably high electoral variance. We consider that the railway line presents a strong boundary between West Southall and Southall Green wards and therefore did not consider moving electors between wards in this area.

45 The three borough-wide schemes supported our draft recommendations here, although the Council requested a name change from West Southall to Southall West to keep a degree of continuity between the ward names in Southall. We have accepted this proposal.

10

46 We confirm our draft recommendations for Southall Broadway and Southall West wards as final, subject to the name change. Both wards will have good electoral equality by 2024.

11

Northolt

Number of Ward name Variance 2024 councillors Northolt Mandeville 3 3% Northolt West End 3 -4%

Northolt Mandeville and Northolt West End 47 The three borough-wide schemes that we received supported our draft recommendations in Northolt Mandeville and Northolt West End wards. We received one submission from a local resident that argued that the entirety of Carr Road should be located in a Northolt ward, as opposed to the neighbouring ward of Central Greenford. The respondent argued that the closest rail and London Underground stations were both in Northolt, with the local church, St Barnabas, located in the ecclesiastical parish of Northolt Park.

48 Moving the section of Carr Road in question from Central Greenford into Northolt Mandeville ward in isolation would not negatively impact electoral equality for either ward. However, we do not consider that it represents a clear and identifiable boundary. In addition, we note that St Barnabas is located in the council ward of Central Greenford. On balance, we do not feel enough evidence has been provided to move Carr Road from Central Greenford into Northolt Mandeville.

49 We therefore confirm our draft recommendations here as final.

12

Greenford and Perivale

Number of Ward name Variance 2024 councillors Central Greenford 3 3% Greenford Broadway 3 4% North Greenford 3 2% Perivale 3 2%

North Greenford and Perivale 50 The three borough-wide schemes that we received supported our draft recommendations for North Greenford and Perivale.

51 We have made a small modification to the boundary between North Greenford and Perivale to include electors living east and west of Horsenden Lane, north of Ballot Box Bridge, in Perivale ward. This was based on a submission from a local resident who argued that electors here feel part of Perivale ward, rather than North Greenford.

52 We received three submissions from local residents living on Perivale Lane that requested this road (and the surrounding roads south of the A40 and north of the

13

River Brent) become part of Pitshanger ward. The respondents argued that the boundary should follow the A40, which acts as a barrier between electors here and the wider Perivale ward.

53 To move electors along Perivale Lane and the surrounding roads into Pitshanger ward would create an effective bottleneck in the Perivale ward boundary in the Leaver Gardens area. In order to facilitate moving Perivale Lane into Pitshanger we considered some alternative options for electors in Leaver Gardens, Anthony Road, David Avenue and Hicks Avenue. To move electors here into the neighbouring Central Greenford ward would result in a high electoral variance of 10% in Central Greenford. Moving these electors, as well as those in Perivale Lane and the surrounding roads, into Pitshanger would result in a poor electoral equality in both Perivale (-12%) and Pitshanger (11%).

54 While we accept that the A40 could be viewed as a strong and identifiable boundary, on balance we do not feel that enough evidence has been provided to justify the poor electoral equality that would occur in the neighbouring wards as a result. We are therefore not adopting this proposal. Subject to the small amendment outlined in paragraph 51, we are confirming our draft recommendations as final for these wards.

Central Greenford and Greenford Broadway 55 The three borough-wide schemes that we received supported our draft recommendations in Central Greenford and Greenford Broadway. We also received a submission from a ward councillor for the existing Greenford Green ward that supported our draft recommendations.

56 We received two submissions that did not support our proposed southern extension of the boundary of Central Greenford ward, arguing that there was little connectivity across the A40 and that electors here may be better suited in Greenford Broadway ward. Neither of the respondents proposed an alternative boundary. We visited this area on our tour of Ealing and were of the opinion that there was a continuity in the roads and housing south of the A40 and east of Greenford Road, and that electors here are likely to consider themselves part of the same community. We are therefore not proposing any changes to the ward boundaries for Central Greenford or Greenford Broadway.

57 We received a submission from a local resident that stated a preference for the ward name Greenford Green as opposed to Central Greenford. No evidence was provided to support this name change. On balance, we are not persuaded to make this change and confirm our draft recommendations for these wards as final.

58 Greenford Broadway and Central Greenford will both have good electoral equality by 2024.

14

Central Ealing

Number of Ward name Variance 2024 councillors Ealing Broadway 3 5% Hanger Hill 3 -3% North Hanwell 3 -5% Pitshanger 3 -3%

Hanger Hill 59 The Liberal Democrats and a local resident supported our draft recommendations for Hanger Hill. The Council and Conservative Group requested a small modification to the boundary between Hanger Hill and Pitshanger to include the Brentham Club entirely within Hanger Hill ward. This change affects no electors. We have therefore adopted this proposal. We do not propose to make any other changes to our proposed Hanger Hill ward.

Ealing Broadway, North Hanwell and Pitshanger 60 Our draft recommendations in North Hanwell and Pitshanger were based on the Conservative and Liberal Democrat schemes submitted during our warding patterns consultation. Both proposed moving Copley Close and Whitstone Avenue from Pitshanger into North Hanwell. We visited this area on our tour of Ealing and considered that the railway line provided a clear and identifiable boundary on the ground. Both the Conservative Group and Liberal Democrat Group supported our proposals here, following the draft recommendations consultation.

15

61 We received 15 submissions from local residents, as well as the Council, who strongly objected to this proposal stating that electors here are much more connected to the Pitshanger area. Residents use the community centre, schools, leisure and shopping facilities in Pitshanger. The respondents also argued that although the railway line appears a strong physical boundary, it is easily crossed, with residents more likely to use the parks and open spaces in Pitshanger than North Hanwell. Lastly, respondents not only argued that residents here have close ties with Pitshanger, but that they have very few community ties with North Hanwell.

62 Although we remain of the opinion that the railway line could represent a clear boundary between North Hanwell and Pitshanger, we accept that, in practice, residents in Copley Close do not view it as such. We found the evidence presented by local residents to be persuasive and are therefore recommending to move the area in question back into Pitshanger ward.

63 As a consequence of moving Copley Close into North Hanwell under our draft recommendations, we needed to move more electors into Pitshanger ward to compensate and ensure good electoral equality. We proposed to move electors north of St Stephen’s Road and St Stephen’s Avenue, and south of Cleveland Road, out of Ealing Broadway and in to Pitshanger ward. We received eight submissions that objected to this proposal. These submissions were from a local organisation, a ward councillor and six local residents. The Council and Conservative Group also opposed our boundary here. The submissions argued that our proposals split a distinct community within the St Stephen’s Conservation Area and separated St Stephen’s vicarage from St Stephen’s Church.

64 The Council and Conservative Group proposed an alternative boundary running to the rear of properties on Cleveland Road, before turning south to meet St Stephen’s Road and then continuing east until Castlebar Road. Here it would turn north and immediately east again along Montpelier Avenue, before meeting the existing ward boundary at Montpelier Road.

65 The inclusion of electors in Copley Close leads to good electoral equality in Pitshanger (-3%). The Council’s and Conservative Group’s proposed ward boundary discussed in paragraph 64 would slightly improve electoral equality in Pitshanger to 0%. However, based on our tour of Ealing, we feel that the justification for amending our draft recommendations and following the existing ward boundary along Castlebar Hill and Mount Avenue is stronger. We also had support for the existing ward boundary amongst submissions received during both stages of consultation. Our final recommendations are therefore to follow the existing ward boundary between Pitshanger and Ealing Broadway.

16

66 We are proposing no further changes to our proposed Ealing Broadway ward as part of our final recommendations.

67 We received four submissions from local residents arguing against our proposed ward name of Pitshanger, on the basis that it might not be considered representative of the entire ward. The submissions argued that we should retain the existing ward name of Cleveland. Conversely, we received support for our proposed ward name of Pitshanger from the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats as well as two further submissions from local residents. On balance, we do not consider that sufficient evidence has been submitted to show that Cleveland is a more locally identifiable ward name than Pitshanger. We therefore confirm our recommended ward name of Pitshanger as final.

68 Ealing Broadway, North Hanwell and Pitshanger wards will all have good electoral equality by 2024.

17

Acton and Ealing Common

Number of Ward name Variance 2024 councillors Ealing Common 3 5% East Acton 3 -4% North Acton 3 -1% South Acton 3 1% Southfield 3 5%

East Acton 69 The three borough-wide schemes that we received during consultation supported our proposed boundaries in East Acton ward. In addition, we received two submissions from a local resident and a local organisation that supported our East

18

Acton ward. The local organisation argued that it was a better reflection of the East Acton area and would allow councillors to better focus on local residents’ needs, arguably promoting effective and convenient local government.

70 We have therefore decided to confirm our proposed East Acton ward as final. East Acton will have good electoral equality by 2024.

Ealing Common, North Acton and South Acton 71 Our draft ward boundaries in Ealing Common, North Acton and South Acton were supported by the Council and the Conservative Group. We also received a submission from a local resident that supported our ward boundaries in Ealing Common and Acton, as well as a submission from a local resident that supported our proposed North Acton ward.

72 We received four submissions that directly objected to the abolition of the existing Acton Central ward, arguing that it has its own town centre with a specific character and needs. One respondent suggested that the existing Acton Central ward boundaries should be retained, with a reduction from three councillors to two. Such a ward would have the unacceptably high electoral variance of 36% more electors per councillor by 2024. Given the forecast electorate growth in the neighbouring ward of East Acton (an anticipated electoral variance of 27% by 2024), it is necessary to redraw the ward boundaries across Acton. As such, we have not been able to identify a way to retain the existing Acton Central ward while also achieving good electoral equality and using strong ward boundaries across the rest of Acton.

73 We received three submissions from local residents that objected to our proposed ward boundaries north of Churchfield Road. The submissions argued that we were separating a cohesive community that gravitated towards the local commercial area of Churchfield Road. The submissions argued that residents encompassed by Acacia Road, Cumberland Park, Woodhurst Road and Horn Lane would be better placed in a South Acton ward. While we gave this proposal consideration, we note that this would lead to poor electoral equality in North Acton (-13%) and South Acton (13%). We have therefore not been persuaded to adopt this proposal as part of our final recommendations.

74 We received 35 submissions from local residents and three submissions from local organisations that objected to our proposed ward boundaries between Ealing Common, North Acton and South Acton in the area around Twyford Avenue. Many of the respondents supported and echoed the submission from the Creffield Area Residents’ Association. They argued that our proposal to move electors west of Twyford Avenue into Ealing Common ward and electors east of Twyford Avenue (including Rosemont Road, Buxton Gardens, Lexden Road, Chatsworth Gardens and Twyford Crescent) into North Acton ward ignored that these electors are part of

19

a cohesive community represented by an established and active residents’ association. They also argued that our proposals ignored the common architecture of this area, which is not shared with the wider North Acton ward. Many of the submissions argued that we should keep the entire Creffield Conservation Area together in Ealing Common ward. Respondents suggested that they have similar needs and interests to electors in Ealing Common ward and have little connection to North Acton. It was also noted that under our draft recommendations, electors in the Creffield Conservation Area would actually be split across three wards, with a small number of electors south of Creffield Road included in our proposed South Acton ward.

75 While we acknowledge that our proposals will separate an area covered by an active residents’ association, to move electors on Rosemont Road, Buxton Gardens, Lexden Road, Chatsworth Gardens and Twyford Crescent into Ealing Common ward would result in poor electoral equality in both Ealing Common (17%) and North Acton (-13%). Given that the forecast electorate of the Creffield area is approximately 2,000 electors by 2024, we were unable to identify a warding pattern that accommodates all these electors in Ealing Common ward and has good electoral equality. The only way to make this change would be to significantly amend the boundaries of surrounding wards for which we have received good supporting evidence. We are therefore not proposing to alter the boundary between Ealing Common and North Acton wards as part of our final recommendations.

76 We do, however, propose to amend the boundary between North Acton and South Acton wards to include those electors south of Creffield Road that are part of the wider Creffield Conservation Area in North Acton ward. This will ensure the conservation area will be covered by two rather than three wards.

77 The Liberal Democrat Group proposed an alternative boundary between Ealing Common and North Acton wards, based on the postal district boundary between W3 and W5, stating that there is a clear and historical distinction here between the Ealing and Acton communities. Electors in Birch Grove, Hale Gardens, Layer Gardens and Stanway Gardens would move into North Acton ward from Ealing Common. In addition, electors in Lodge Avenue would move into South Acton ward from Ealing Common.

78 Based on the evidence received from local organisations and residents in the Creffield area, we do not believe that the postal boundary between W3 and W5 represents a distinct enough break in community between Ealing Common and North Acton to move away from our draft recommendations. Using the postal code boundary between W3 and W5 would not reflect the access routes of electors on Phillimore Gardens, who would have to travel through South Acton ward to access the rest of Ealing Common ward. Although this proposal offers slightly better electoral equality for Ealing Common (1%) and South Acton (2%), we remain of the

20

view that our draft recommendations offer a better balance of our statutory criteria. We are therefore not adopting this proposal.

79 We received a submission from a local resident proposing that we should rename our South Acton ward Bedford Park, arguing that this is how the area is identified on social media and Google Maps. Given that the ward name of South Acton is pre-existing and was supported by the three borough-wide schemes that we received, we do not propose to change it as part of our final recommendations.

Southfield 80 The three borough-wide schemes supported our proposed boundaries for Southfield. We also received support for our boundaries from four local residents who agreed that Uxbridge Road was a strong and identifiable boundary in this area. Four of the submissions we received opposed our draft boundaries, arguing that the number of electors in the ward will increase as a result of this change. Southfield is forecast to have an electoral variance of 5% by 2024, which we consider to be a good level of electoral equality. We are therefore confirming our draft ward boundaries here as final.

81 During the consultation on warding patterns, the Council proposed the ward name Acton Green, the Conservative Group proposed the ward name North Chiswick and the Liberal Democrat Group proposed retaining the existing ward name of Southfield. All three borough-wide schemes reiterated their support for their proposed ward names during our consultation on draft recommendations.

82 We received 58 submissions from local residents objecting to the proposed ward name of Acton Green. One local resident supported the name. The submissions predominantly supported either renaming the ward North Chiswick or retaining the existing ward name of Southfield. One submission suggested the name Southfield Chiswick.

83 Respondents arguing in favour of North Chiswick stated that they felt an affinity with the wider Chiswick area, located predominantly in the neighbouring London Borough of Hounslow. Those arguing in favour of Southfield stated that Southfield was a more representative name than either Acton Green or North Chiswick, with Southfield Road and Southfields Recreation Ground located more centrally in the ward than Acton Green Common.

84 We have carefully considered the alternative ward names put forward during consultation and recognise that this was a particularly contentious issue. Overall, we received more submissions arguing in favour of retaining the existing ward name of Southfield than creating a new ward name of North Chiswick. Additionally, we are not persuaded that we have received sufficient evidence to demonstrate the wider

21

area covered by this ward identifies as North Chiswick. We are therefore proposing to retain the existing ward name of Southfield as part of our final recommendations.

85 Southfield ward will have good electoral equality by 2024.

22

South Ealing

Number of Ward name Variance 2024 councillors Hanwell Broadway 3 -5% Northfield 3 -6% Walpole 3 -3%

Hanwell Broadway, Northfield and Walpole 86 The Council and Conservative schemes supported our draft ward boundaries for Hanwell Broadway, Northfield and Walpole. We also had support for our draft Walpole ward from a local resident.

87 The Liberal Democrats proposed an alternative ward pattern across this area that included the creation of a West Ealing ward. They proposed to move electors south of the main line, east of the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea Cemetery and west of Drayton Green Road from our proposed Hanwell Broadway ward and into a new West Ealing ward. They argued that West Ealing was an area with its own distinct identity and a large shopping centre. This assertion was supported by submissions from two local residents based in this area. One submission from a local resident agreed that electors here should not be part of Hanwell Broadway, but instead suggested they should form part of Ealing Broadway

23

ward. Moving electors here from Hanwell Broadway ward would result in an electoral variance of -25% in Hanwell Broadway ward which we consider to be unacceptably high.

88 In order to facilitate a West Ealing ward, the Liberal Democrats redrew the ward boundaries in Hanwell Broadway and Northfield based on existing polling district boundaries. This proposal would result in electors in polling district VC (east of Northolt Road, south of Leighton Road, Dudley Gardens and Lyncroft Gardens, west of Lammas Park and north of Belsize Avenue) moving from Walpole ward into Northfield ward. Electors in polling district WE (east of Boston Road, south of Elthorne Park Road and Leighton Road, west of Northolt Road and north of Haslemere Avenue and Fielding Primary School) would move into Hanwell Broadway ward. No community-based evidence was provided to support these proposed changes. As purely administrative units, we do not believe that polling districts always represent clear and identifiable ward boundaries or are necessarily reflective of the communities within them. Additionally, the proposed West Ealing ward would have poor electoral equality at -11%. We are therefore not persuaded to adopt this amendment as part of our final recommendations.

89 In addition to the submissions discussed above, we also received submissions from three local residents and a local political group relating to our proposed Hanwell Broadway ward. Respondents suggested that Hanwell Broadway was not the most appropriate name for the ward and suggested the alternatives of South Hanwell, Elthorne or Hobbayne South. On balance, we have not been persuaded by any of the alternative proposals and confirm the draft ward name of Hanwell Broadway as final.

90 We received 10 submissions regarding our proposed South Ealing ward. Seven of these submissions objected to our proposed ward name and stated a strong preference to retain the existing ward name of Northfield. Respondents felt this was more reflective of the area than South Ealing, which they felt did not accurately describe the area. On balance, we are persuaded that we have received sufficient evidence to rename our proposed ward Northfield.

91 We received two submissions from local residents near Southdown Avenue. One objected to our draft recommendations to include this area in Northfield ward and stated a preference to remain in Hanwell Broadway. The other local resident supported our draft recommendations for the boundary between Hanwell Broadway and Northfield wards, stating that this better reflected where electors used local amenities and where children attended schools. We remain of the opinion that the inclusion of these electors in Northfield represents the best balance of our statutory criteria.

24

92 Another local resident suggested that we modify the boundary of our Northfield ward to use Northfield Avenue as an eastern boundary, as opposed to Northolt Road. We considered this option during the formulation of our draft recommendations. However, this would result in poor electoral equality in the neighbouring ward of Walpole (-17%). We are therefore not adopting this proposal as part of our final recommendations.

93 We therefore confirm our draft ward boundaries in Hanwell Broadway, Northfield and Walpole as final. All of these wards will have good electoral equality by 2024.

25

26

Conclusions 94 The table below provides a summary as to the impact of our final recommendations on electoral equality in Ealing, referencing the 2018 and 2024 electorate figures. A full list of wards, names and their corresponding electoral variances can be found at Appendix A to the back of this report. An outline map of the wards is provided at Appendix B.

Summary of electoral arrangements

Final recommendations

2018 2024 Number of councillors 70 70 Number of electoral wards 24 24 Average number of electors per councillor 3,521 3,671 Number of wards with a variance more than 10% 2 0 from the average Number of wards with a variance more than 20% 1 0 from the average

Final recommendations

Ealing Council should be made up of 70 councillors serving 24 wards representing two two-councillor wards and 22 three-councillor wards. The details and names are shown in Appendix A and illustrated on the large maps accompanying this report.

Mapping Sheet 1, Map 1 shows the proposed wards for Ealing. You can also view our final recommendations for Ealing on our interactive maps at www.consultation.lgbce.org.uk

27

28

What happens next? 44 We have now completed our review of Ealing Council. The recommendations must now be approved by Parliament. A draft Order – the legal document which brings into force our recommendations – will be laid in Parliament. Subject to parliamentary scrutiny, the new electoral arrangements will come into force at the local elections in 2022.

29

30

Equalities 45 The Commission has looked at how it carries out reviews under the guidelines set out in Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010. It has made best endeavours to ensure that people with protected characteristics can participate in the review process and is sufficiently satisfied that no adverse equality impacts will arise as a result of the outcome of the review.

31

32

Appendices Appendix A Final recommendations for Ealing Number of Variance Number of Variance Number of Electorate Electorate Ward name electors per from electors per from councillors (2018) (2024) councillor average % councillor average % 1 Central Greenford 3 9,887 3,296 -6% 11,387 3,796 3%

2 Dormers Wells 3 10,441 3,480 -1% 10,476 3,492 -5%

3 Ealing Broadway 3 9,854 3,285 -7% 11,592 3,864 5%

4 Ealing Common 3 11,924 3,975 13% 11,603 3,868 5%

5 East Acton 3 9,858 3,286 -7% 10,554 3,518 -4% Greenford 6 3 11,145 3,715 6% 11,432 3,811 4% Broadway 7 Hanger Hill 3 10,841 3,614 3% 10,706 3,569 -3% Hanwell 8 3 10,175 3,392 -4% 10,444 3,481 -5% Broadway 9 Lady Margaret 3 11,311 3,770 7% 11,512 3,837 5%

10 North Acton 3 10,310 3,437 -2% 10,936 3,645 -1%

11 North Greenford 3 11,124 3,708 5% 11,220 3,740 2%

12 North Hanwell 3 10,478 3,493 -1% 10,450 3,483 -5%

33

Number of Variance Number of Variance Number of Electorate Electorate Ward name electors per from electors per from councillors (2018) (2024) councillor average % councillor average % 13 Northfield 3 10,581 3,527 0% 10,347 3,449 -6% Northolt 14 3 11,457 3,819 8% 11,299 3,766 3% Mandeville 15 Northolt West End 3 10,664 3,555 1% 10,590 3,530 -4%

16 Norwood Green 3 9,465 3,155 -10% 10,856 3,619 -1%

17 Perivale 3 11,367 3,789 8% 11,246 3,749 2%

18 Pitshanger 3 10,736 3,579 2% 10,695 3,565 -3%

19 South Acton 3 10,365 3,455 -2% 11,068 3,689 1% Southall 20 2 7,448 3,724 6% 7,776 3,888 6% Broadway 21 Southall Green 3 10,668 3,556 1% 10,842 3,614 -2%

22 Southall West 2 4,375 2,188 -38% 7,624 3,812 4%

23 Southfield 3 11,405 3,802 8% 11,560 3,853 5%

24 Walpole 3 10,604 3,535 0% 10,727 3,576 -3%

Totals 70 246,483 – – 256,939 – –

Averages – – 3,521 – – 3,671 –

Source: Electorate figures are based on information provided by Ealing Council.

34

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.

35

Appendix B Outline map

Number Ward name 1 Central Greenford 2 Dormers Wells 3 Ealing Broadway 4 Ealing Common 5 East Acton 6 Greenford Broadway 7 Hanger Hill 8 Hanwell Broadway 9 Lady Margaret 10 North Acton 11 North Greenford 12 North Hanwell 13 Northfield 14 Northolt Mandeville 15 Northolt West End 16 Norwood Green 17 Perivale 18 Pitshanger

36

19 South Acton 20 Southall Broadway 21 Southall Green 22 Southall West 23 Southfield 24 Walpole

A more detailed version of this map can be seen on the large map accompanying this report, or on our website: https://www.lgbce.org.uk/all-reviews/greater- london/greater-london

37

Appendix C Submissions received

All submissions received can also be viewed on our website at: https://www.lgbce.org.uk/all-reviews/greater-london/greater-london/ealing

Local Authority

• Ealing Council

Political Groups

• Conservative Group (Ealing Council) • Ealing Liberal Democrats • Elthorne Branch Labour Party

Councillors

• Councillor A. Raza (Ealing Council) • Councillor A. Young (Ealing Council)

Local Organisations

• Creffield Area Residents’ Association • Ealing Common & Creffield Conservation Area • Ealing Matters • East Acton Golf Links Residents’ Association • St Stephen’s Conservation Area Advisory Panel

Local Residents

• 172 local residents

38

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

39

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 any arrangements 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

40

The Local Government Boundary Local Government Boundary Commission for Commission for England (LGBCE) was set England up by Parliament, independent of 1st Floor, Windsor House Government and political parties. It is 50 Victoria Street, London directly accountable to Parliament through a SW1H 0TL committee chaired by the Speaker of the House of Commons. It is responsible for Telephone: 0330 500 1525 conducting boundary, electoral and Email: [email protected] Online: www.lgbce.org.uk or structural reviews of local government. www.consultation.lgbce.org.uk Twitter: @LGBCE