Summary of representations received on Boundary Commission 2018 review proposals relating to constituencies containing wards from within Enfield

In total the BCE consultation website lists 5,391 representations as having been submitted in relation to their current review proposals for the London region as a whole.

The consultation website enables you to filter representations made as they relate to the existing Parliamentary constituencies, although there is some duplication in responses submitted e.g. submitted more than once or written comments to support oral representations at public hearings.

The summary of representations filtered in relation to the existing three Parliamentary constituencies are as follows:

1. ENFIELD SOUTHGATE

1.1 248 representations are listed in relation to Enfield Southgate, although 2 of these relate to constituencies outside of Enfield and 7 are duplicate comments (either submitted more than once or written submission of oral evidence at public hearing).

1.2 Of the remaining 239 responses – 231 (96.7%) were against and 8 (3.3%) were in favour of the proposed changes. It is worth noting that one of the representations submitted against the proposals on behalf of the “Save our Southgate” campaign group, also contained a petition with 945 signatures and referred to a further online petition containing 710 signatures.

1.3 Common themes in relation to the representations made were as follows:

 Strong historical, geographical, transport, cultural and community links  Old parish boundaries created strong ties  Proposals lack community connections or cohesion  Would new MP understand local Enfield issues  No links to Finchley, areas very different no natural fit  Transport to Finchley very poor, very difficult for those without a car or less able bodied to visit their MP in Finchley  A10 acts as a natural barrier between Palmers Green and Edmonton so does not make sense to become part of Edmonton  Harder for residents associations, residents and local businesses if they now have potentially 5 MP’s to contact  Should be co terminus with borough boundaries  3 MPs would have the majority of their constituency in another borough great concern that local issues would be championed- would the MP be able or interested in looking after the needs or minority areas in a different borough

1.4 Included within the representations were a series of counter proposals, which can be summaries as follows:

 Create new Barnet & Haringey constituencies  Move Oakwood & Cockfosters to Finchley  Move Palmers Green & Bowes to Hornsey & Wood Green  Move Cockfosters to Finchley & Southgate  Combine Finchley with Haringey  Reconsider 2012 proposal  Keep the status quo  Include Bush Hill Park within a retained Enfield Southgate constituency

2. ENFIELD NORTH

2.1 67 representations are listed in relation to Enfield North, although 11 of these raise objections to the proposals affecting Enfield Southgate.

2.2 Duplicate responses total 8 (either submitted more than once or written submission of oral evidence at public hearing).

2.3 Of the remaining 48 responses – 30 (62.5%) were against and 18 (37.5%) were in favour of the proposed changes.

2.4 Common themes in relation to the representations made were as follows:

Against:  Need MP to focus on needs of local community and area;  Need to protect existing community and cultural ties and links between communities;  Support (as counter proposal) to reconsider 2012 review recommendations for Ponders End & Jubilee rather than Grange to be located within the constituency given transport and community links

In favour:  Reunite former constituency;  Inclusion of Grange recognises historic and community links with Enfield

3. EDMONTON

3.1 39 representations are listed in relation to Edmonton, although 4 of these make no reference to Edmonton and are focused purely on the proposals affecting Enfield Southgate.

3.2 Duplicate responses total 3 (either submitted more than once or written submission of oral evidence at public hearing) and 3 are submissions that relate to constituencies completely unrelated to Enfield

3.3 Of the remaining 29 responses – 26 (89.7%) were against and 3 (10.3%) were in favour of the proposed changes.

3.4 Common themes in relation to the representations made were as follows:

 No account taken of natural boundaries or community cohesion. Palmers Green tied to Southgate geographically. Relocating will server community and historical ties with Southgate.  MP needs to represent the whole community. Regeneration developments in Edmonton will increase population over next few years.  Need for coherent boundaries that fall within the boundary of the local authority.  Concern about dilution of local democracy and community cohesion.  Palmers Green separated from Edmonton by A10 and east west transport links between Palmers Green and Edmonton are not strong

3.5 Included within the representations made were a series of counter proposals, which can be summarised as follows:

 Relocate Ponders End & Jubilee wards to the new Enfield constituency  Retain Edmonton Green, Jubilee, Haslebury, Lower Edmonton and Upper Edmonton and incorporate with White Hart Lane and Northumberland Park wards from within Haringey.

4. CHIPPING BARNET

4.1 59 representations are listed in relation to Chipping Barnet (which include views on the relocation of Cockfosters ward within the proposed Chipping Barnet & Mill Hill constituency).

4.2 Of the 59 representations listed 26 specifically stated there were against the proposed inclusion of Cockfosters within the constituency. A further 14 representations raised comments objecting to the proposals for the Finchley and Southgate constituency. 5 stated they were in favour of the proposals (including the relocation of Cockfosters) and the remainder included comments about other changes proposed within the constituency.

4.3 Common themes in relation to the representations made were as follows:

 Concerns about the loss of strong local and community links between Cockfosters and Southgate/Enfield  Strong links and identity currently exists between Cockfosters and Southgate reinforced by the transport links  Loss of existing community & geographical links within the current borders.

5. HORNSEY & WOOD GREEN

5.1 203 representations are listed in relation to the proposals for the Hornsey and Wood Green constituency. The majority of these, however, are objecting to the proposal to relocate Stroud Green from Hornsey and Wood Green into Tottenham.

5.2 Specific reference is only made to the proposal for inclusion of Bowes ward within the constituency in seven representations, with six of those being against the proposal and one in favour. Common themes in relation to these representations were as follows:

 Geographically Bowes is more part of Enfield than Haringey;  Contradiction to approach local councillors from Enfield about local services with an MP based in Hornsey and Wood Green and focussed on Haringey.

Counter proposals from Political Parties relating to Enfield:

Labour Party:

 Enfield North – retain Chase, Enfield Highway, Enfield Lock, Southbury & Turkey Street and include Jubilee, Lower Edmonton & Ponders End (currently in Edmonton constituency)  Enfield Southgate – retain Cockfosters, Grange, Highlands, Southgate, Southgate Green & Winchmore Hill and include Bush Hill Park (currently in Edmonton constituency) and Town (currently in Enfield North constituency)  Hornsey & Wood Green – include Bowes and Palmers Green (currently in Enfield Southgate constituency) with Alexandra, Bounds Green, Fortis Green, Highgate, Hornsey, Muswell Hill, Noel Park & Woodside (LB Haringey wards)  Tottenham & Edmonton – combine Edmonton Green, Haselbury & Upper Edmonton (currently in Edmonton constituency) with Bruce Grove, Northumberland Park, Tottenham Green, Tottenham Hal, West Green and White Hart Lane (LB Haringey wards)

Conservative Party:

 Edmonton & Tottenham Hale – combine Edmonton Green, Haselbury, Jubilee, Lower Edmonton and Upper Edmonton (currently in Edmonton constituency) with Bruce Grove, Northumberland Park, Tottenham Hale and White Hart Lane (LB Haringey wards)  Enfield North – retain Chase, Enfield Highway, Enfield Lock, Highlands, Southbury, Town, Turkey Street and include Ponders End (currently in Edmonton constituency)  Enfield Southgate – retain Bowes, Cockfosters, Grange, Palmers Green, Southgate, Southgate Green, Winchmore Hill and include Bush Hill Park (currently in Edmonton constituency)