Copeland Borough Council
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR ENGLAND REVIEW SUBMISSION ON WARDING ARRANGEMENTS EXECUTIVE MEMBER: Councillor David Moore LEAD OFFICER: Pat Graham, Managing Director REPORT AUTHOR: Tim Capper, Boundary Review Project Officer SUMMARY: Seeks agreement from Council to a submission to the Local Government Boundary Commission for England on warding and boundary arrangements in connection with the current review of the Council’s electoral arrangements RECOMMENDATIONS: That the wards and boundaries as set out in Appendix “A” and the accompanying plans be approved as the Council’s submission to the Local Government Boundary Commission for England in this phase of the review 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Council at its meeting on 1 October 2015 agreed to ask the Local Government Boundary Commission for England (LGBCE) to review the electoral arrangements of the Council. 1.2 LGBCE has already determined in the preliminary phase of the review that the total number of Councillors to be elected to the Council in future (Council size) will be 33. The present phase of the review will determine new ward boundaries, the number of Councillors to be elected for each ward, and ward names. LGBCE has invited the Council to submit proposals to them on warding by 12 February 2018, along with a wide range of other local stakeholders including, for example, parish councils. 2 WARDING – STATUTORY CRITERIA 2.1 In considering warding arrangements, Members need to be aware of the statutory criteria by which LGBCE are bound in deciding on warding arrangements. These are: Delivering electoral equality for local voters – meaning ensuring that each councillor represents roughly the same number of electors so that the value of the elector’s vote is the same regardless of where in the Borough an elector lives. Interests and identities of local communities – meaning establishing electoral arrangements which as far as possible avoid splitting local ties and where boundaries are easily identifiable Effective and convenient local government – meaning ensuring that the wards can be represented effectively by their elected representative(s) and that the electoral arrangements as a whole allow the Council to conduct its business effectively. 2.2 As far as electoral equality is concerned, the new electoral arrangements need to be drawn up using a projected electorate in 2023 of 56909. With a Council size of 33, this means a Councillor:elector ratio for the whole Borough of 1:1725. Using a 10% tolerance either up or down, this means the ratio in the new wards will need to be as follows: For a single member ward, between 1:1553 and 1:1897 For a 2 member ward between 2:3106 and 2:3794 For a 3 member ward between 3:4659 and 3:5691 2.3 It should be noted for clarity that the 10% tolerances referred to in 2.2 above are for guidance and are not themselves part of the statutory criteria. 3 PROPOSALS 3.1 An officer project team led by the report author has drawn up a draft configuration of new wards based on a Council size of 33 as a basis of consultation with Members. 3.2 A number of meetings have been held with a group of Members from the north of the Borough and a similar group representing the south. Both political groups and independent Members were represented on each group. As a result of Member consultations, significant amendments have been made to the configuration of new wards, and the proposals in this report now have cross‐party support. 3.3 Nineteen new wards are proposed: ten single member wards, four two‐member wards and five three‐member wards. The polling districts contained in each proposed new ward, the projected 2023 electorate for each ward, the number of Councillors proposed for each, and the proposed ward names are shown in Appendix “A”. Also shown is a commentary on each individual proposed ward explaining why polling districts have been grouped together as they have, and explaining why we believe the statutory criteria referred to in para 2.2 above have been complied with as far as is reasonably practicable, in all but one of the proposed new wards. 3.4 On new ward names, it should be noted that the names shown in Appendix “A” are working labels at this stage and may not be the names that appear in the final proposals later in 2018. It is expected that the question of ward names will be the subject of much discussion in the next round of public consultation in April‐June 2018. 3.5 Plans showing the areas of the proposed new wards for the north of Copeland, the south of Copeland and for Whitehaven are attached at Appendices “B”, “C” and “D” respectively. 4 CONSEQUENTIAL CHANGES TO PARISHES 4.1 The legislation underpinning reviews of electoral arrangements of principal councils undertaken by LGBCE (Part 3 of the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009) requires that, following a review, each parish or parish ward in the review area must fall within a single ward of the principal council concerned. Such consequential changes are brought into force by a part of the Statutory Instrument that gives effect to the changes to the principal council’s electoral arrangements, by creation of additional parish wards where necessary. 4.2 In the event of LGBCE accepting the warding proposals in this report in their entirety, it appears that the parishes in Copeland that would be affected by consequential changes would be: Whitehaven Moresby Weddicar Cleator Moor Lowside Quarter Drigg and Carlton Millom Without 5 NEXT STEPS 5.1 The deadline for the Council and other interested stakeholders to submit warding proposals to LGBCE is 12th February 2018. LGBCE is expected to make their decision by late March, and their draft recommendations on new electoral arrangements will be the subject of a further period of consultation from 3rd April to 11th June. 6 CONCLUSION 6.1 This report finalises the Council’s proposals for submission to LGBCE on new electoral arrangements. A further report will be submitted to Members when LGBCE’s decision and draft recommendations are known. 7 STATUTORY OFFICER COMMENTS 7.1 The MO comments are: 7.2 The Section 151 Officer comments are: List of Appendices: Appendix “A” – Proposals for New Wards Appendix “B”, “C” and “D” – Plans List of Background Documents: LGBCE Guidance on Electoral Arrangements Reviews Electoral Polling Forecast Number Of New Ward District 2023 Councillors Name Commentary G2, G1, 3107 2 North G3, G4, G5 Copeland A 2‐member ward combining the northern communities of Parton, Lowca, Distington, Pica and Gilgarran, the first three of which consist mainly of predominantly early 20th century terraced housing with some newer development. All 3 have some local services such as primary schools and small shops, and are linked by the A595 trunk road.Gilgarran is a relatively isolated rural hamlet consisting of modern private housing with little by way of local services. Originally proposed as 2 single member wards for Distington/Gilgarran, and Parton/Lowca but amended following consultation with Members K1, U1, 3670 2 Frizington A 2‐ member ward combining the communities of Frizington and D5, K2, and Moresby Parks. Both are relatively isolated rural villages dominated U3, A1A Moresby by early 20th century private terraced housing supplemented by more modern development. Both have relatively good self‐contained services such as Post Offices, primary schools, shops, pubs, and business parks, in the case of Moresby Parks on a relatively large scale. Both have substantial amounts of rented social housing. The land between the villages is sparsely populated and is a combination of agricultural land and open fell. J1, J3, J4, 1758 1 Arlecdon A single member ward combining Ennerdale Bridge and the J2, A2, A3 and remainder of the sparsely‐populated polling district J2, with the Ennerdale hamlets of Arlecdon, Asby, Kirkland and Lamplugh. These four villages are in relatively close proximity with each other and are dominated by early 20th century terraced housing. There are primary schools at Arlecdon and Lamplugh whose catchment areas include all 4 villages. There is a primary school at Ennerdale Bridge together with a community centre, two pubs and a hotel. Most of the remainder of this ward south of Ennerdale Bridge consists of sparsely‐populated agricultural and open fell land, and is wholly in the National Park. E2, F3, E1, 5371 3 Cleator A 3 member ward comprising the majority of the urban area of the F2, E3, K3 Moor former iron ore town of Cleator Moor but not including the hamlets of Cleator and Wood End which for reasons of service delivery are included in the proposed Egremont ward. Cleator Moor has good road links with Whitehaven, Egremont and Cockermouth. There are large areas of rented social housing. There are regular bus services to Whitehaven and Egremont. There are good local services in the town incuding a combined supermarket and Post Office, a variety of other retail shops, two primary schools, and a civic hall/community centre. B8, F1, I1, 5375 3 Egremont A 3 member ward comprising the urban area of Egremont and some I2, I3, H3, and of its hinterlands to the east and south including Wood End, Cleator, H4 Cleator and the area around Longbarrow Fell. Egremont is the second largest town in the Borough. The A595 runs through the town connecting to Whitehaven some 5 miles away. Egremont has a town council which also includes the more northern villages of Bigrigg and Moor Row which each have their own limited local services. This ward also includes Cleator which has some service links to Cleator Moor but some also with Egremont, including for example secondary schools and road links via the A 5086 H1, H2, 1955 1 Moor Row A single member ward comprising the 3 former mining villages of A1B and Moor Row, Bigrigg and Keekle.