Local Organisation Submissions to the Newcastle City Council Electoral Review

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Local Organisation Submissions to the Newcastle City Council Electoral Review Local Organisation submissions to the Newcastle City Council electoral review This PDF document contains submissions from Local Organisations. Some versions of Adobe allow the viewer to move quickly between bookmarks. Friends of the Valley and the Little Dene Chairperson: Audrey Kingham, Secretary: John Stephenson, To: The Review Officer (Newcastle upon Tyne), Local Government Boundary Commission for England, 14th Floor Millbank Tower, 21-24 Millbank, London SW1P 4QP 3rd April 2016 Dear Sir/Madam Consultation on Ward Arrangement – Newcastle Upon Tyne I am responding to the above consultation as the secretary of Friends of the Valley and the Little Dene (FOVALD), an organisation based in High West Jesmond, Newcastle upon Tyne. We adopted a local open space in our neighbourhood in 2000 and we have been maintaining it, improving it and holding community events on it since then. The space provides recreational opportunities mainly for residents and families living in our neighbourhood (see attached plan). FOVALD is open to all neighbourhood residents. We were consulted by the City Council on the proposals to adjust the ward boundaries in February last. Our neighbourhood is currently in East Gosforth ward and the initial proposal was to take our community out of the Gosforth ward and attach it to communities further east, i.e. towards High Heaton & Benton. In terms of general services, our community links are north-south – we have strong links with Gosforth as well as Jesmond. Therefore, we commented that, from a community perspective, we thought the proposal would have a negative impact and suggested that High West Jesmond be included in either the Gosforth or Jesmond wards. We have not received a response from the Council, but we have seen the report to the Constitutional Committee and the revised maps and options. We were quite astounded to see that the proposed ward boundaries have been further adjusted and that our neighbourhood is now completely split into two. The proposed boundary between Gosforth ward (ward 18) and Haddricks Mill/Jesmond Dene ward (ward 12) now runs along Lodore Road, before it hits the metro line and turns north. The consequence is that our open space, the Valley, and approx 77 households in our neighbourhood are in one ward and the rest of our households are in a different ward! Our High West Jesmond neighbourhood has been a well defined community since it was built between 1895-1910, with community activity centred around our open space (the Valley), the local shops on Newlands Road and the allotments on the south side of Moorfield (see plan). The Valley is used by residents and families from the whole neighbourhood. For our Village Green application we collected information about usage from almost 100 households who had been using the Valley for a long period of time. I’ve attached a table showing each evidence form listed by address. Many of these residents submitted statements regarding the importance of the Valley as a community resource. You will note that the current ward boundary proposal will mean that the great majority of those households would be residing in a different ward to one of our community’s main social assets, which is not only used by them but also looked after!. That does not appear to fit with the criteria for changing ward boundaries. Of course, the Valley is also very well used by residents who moved in after 2000. I’ve attached copies of our Annual Reports for 2015, 2014 and 2013 to give you a flavour of the community activity that takes place. Therefore, our view is that the proposed ward boundary along Lodore Road will divide our community. It appears to be an arbitrary boundary with no community rationale underpinning it. So what would we suggest as an alternative? Our main preference is to remain part of Gosforth ward, in that many High West Jesmond residents use the shops, GP’s, dentists and other services on Gosforth High Street, in addition to the Gosforth schools. Plus, we have been part of the wider Gosforth community (East Gosforth ward) for the last 20 years and we have established good links with other community organisations in Gosforth. To achieve this, the eastern boundary of Ward 18 Option 1 & 2 (the metro line) could be extended south to Jesmond Dene Road, thus enclosing within Gosforth ward that part of the High West Jesmond community that is west of the railway, including the Little Moor and the allotments. Please see the attached plan of our neighbourhood. However, we can also appreciate the need to achieve electoral equality and that if this part of our housing area is removed from the Haddricks Mill/Jesmond Dene ward, then, without compensating amendments, there could be electoral imbalance. Therefore, if this was deemed to be necessary, we would propose moving the suggested ward boundary from Lodore Road to the north edge of the Valley, i.e. from the west it would follow Moor Road South for a short distance, before turning east along the line of the Little Dene and then following the rear of the Rectory Road houses, before linking across to the metro line.. We have shown this on the attached neighbourhood plan. It follows the old City boundary. Of the two options that the City has submitted for Area C, we would have a preference for Option 2, i.e. the proposed Jesmond Dene ward. This is because we feel that we have a closer identity with those communities bordering Jesmond Dene rather than those situated further east. Yours sincerely John Stephenson Audrey Kingham Secretary Chairperson . List of evidence forms Form Years using the no. Addre ss Name Valley Statem ent 1 1990-2014 2 1969-2014 3 1998-2014 4 1991-2014 5 1982-2014 6 1985-2014 7 1971-2014 * 8 1992-2014 9 1976-2014 10 1950-2014 * 11 1980-2014 12 1984-2014 13 1989-2014 14 1988-2014 15 1971-2014 16 1983-2014 17 1973-2014 18 1994-2014 19 1994-2014 20 1969-2014 * 21 1980-2014 22 1970-2014 23 1976-2014 * 24 1984-2014 * 25 1996-2014 * 26 1972-2014 27 1984-2014 28 1993-2014 29 1993-2014 30 1994-2014 31 1966-2014 * 32 e 1976-2014 * 33 1948-2014 * 34 1978-2014 * 35 1986-2014 36 1988-2014 37 1987-2014 38 1886-2014 * 39 1998-2014 * 40 1991-2014 41 1992-2014 42 1977-2014 * 43 1977-2014 * 44 1970-2012 * 45 1960-2014 46 1971-2014 47 1996-2014 48 1970-2014 49 1935-2014 * 50 1985-2014 51 1996-2014 52 1970-2014 53 1983-2014 * 54 1991-2014 55 1935-2014 * 56 1965-2014 * 57 1980-2014 58 1959-2005 59 1981-2014 * 60 1994-2014 61 1978-2014 62 1991-2014 63 1997-2014 64 1986-2014 65 1985-2014 66 1980-2014 67 1999-2014 68 1996-2014 69 1998-2014 70 1992-2014 71 1995-2014 72 1950-2014 73 1988-2014 74 1992-2014 75 1996-2014 76 1963-2014 77 1976-2014 78 1984-2014 79 1951-2014 * 80 s 1976-2014 81 1990-2014 * 82 1969-1990 83 1984-2014 84 1978-2014 85 1965-2006 86 1993-2014 87 1991-2014 88 1982-2014 89 1986-2014 90 1985-2014 91 1966-2007 Friends of the Valley and the Little Dene Annual Report 2014 This has been our most difficult year so far! The application for Village Green status under the Commons Act 2006 proved to be a much more complex project than first envisaged. However, we soldered on and, with great support from many residents and from the High West Jesmond Residents Association, we managed to submit the application on 10th June. It was verified in early July. Since then we have had virtually no communication, although, as most residents will have seen, notices were placed on the Valley in early November informing people of our application and requesting people who wish to object to do so before 31st December. E.mails to the City’s contact solicitor, asking about the process for dealing with the application in the new year have failed to attract a response (at time of going to print!). All a bit frustrating after the community effort involved. Whilst HWJ residents have accessed the Valley for a long time, for the land to be registered as a Village Green a range of criteria have to be met. In particular, it has to be shown that the land was not meant to be provided for public use. In that case, public use would become “as of right”. On the other hand, if the land was provided for public use, then such use is “by right”. For a Village Green to be registered, 20 years “as of right” use has to be proved. Of course, HWJ residents have been using the Valley from around 1915. Until the 1950’s it was in private ownership and during that period “as of right” use would have become established. However, for the purposes of current legislation that is too long ago! The land was bought by Newcastle and Gosforth Councils in the 1950’s, mainly as a site for depositing spoil from housing clearance. The tipping took place in 1962 and the material was covered with a thin layer of top soil. It was subsequently managed as “general purpose” land not as public open space. Yet, despite this, use by local residents continued. Our case is that between 1975 and 1995 the residents of HWJ used the Valley “as of right”. It wasn’t until the late 1990’s that grass cutting became regular, the surrounds were improved and waste-bins provided.
Recommended publications
  • Overview and Scrutiny Committee 23 February 2017 'Let's Talk Transport
    Overview and Scrutiny Committee 23 February 2017 ‘Let’s talk transport – Re-Newcastle’ – development programme update Graham Grant, Head of Transport Investment, Place Directorate 1. Summary 1.1 This report is to provide an update to the Overview and Scrutiny (O&S) Committee on the themes of work identified in the ‘Let’s Talk Transport – Re-Newcastle’ report of July 2014 and subsequent Cabinet reports including March and November 2016. 2. Introduction 2.1 In July 2014, a report to the Council Cabinet noted that our Local Plan recognises that an improved transport network is fundamentally important to the future economic growth and liveability of Newcastle. The paper outlined an approach to take forward the Council’s commitment to upgrade our transport system by helping people to move more freely around, across and within the city. 2.2 In line with the transparent and democratic processes of the Council, the work associated with progressing these recommendations are subject to regular review by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee. 3. North East Local Growth Deal schemes 3.1 Following recent announcements by government about Local Growth Deal funding the North East Local Enterprise Partnership (the LEP) are conducting a review of the existing Growth Deal programme. Newcastle City Council, along with all other partners in the North East Combined Authority area are taking part in this review. 3.2 Newcastle City Council originally secured funding for four transport schemes through the first round of the North East Local Growth Deal. The Full Business Case for Scotswood Bridgehead has been submitted and will be assessed against the North East Combined Authority’s assurance framework.
    [Show full text]
  • Local Election Results 2007
    Local Election Results 3rd May 2007 Tyne and Wear Andrew Teale Version 0.05 April 29, 2009 2 LOCAL ELECTION RESULTS 2007 Typeset by LATEX Compilation and design © Andrew Teale, 2007. The author grants permission to copy and distribute this work in any medium, provided this notice is preserved. This file (in several formats) is available for download from http://www.andrewteale.me.uk/ Please advise the author of any corrections which need to be made by email: [email protected] Chapter 4 Tyne and Wear 4.1 Gateshead Birtley Deckham Neil Weatherley Lab 1,213 Bernadette Oliphant Lab 1,150 Betty Gallon Lib 814 Daniel Carr LD 398 Andrea Gatiss C 203 Allan Davidson C 277 Kevin Scott BNP 265 Blaydon (2) Malcolm Brain Lab 1,338 Dunston and Teams Stephen Ronchetti Lab 1,047 Mark Gardner LD 764 Maureen Clelland Lab 940 Colin Ball LD 543 Michael Ruddy LD 357 Trevor Murray C 182 Andrew Swaddle BNP 252 Margaret Bell C 179 Bridges Bob Goldsworthy Lab 888 Dunston Hill and Whickham East Peter Andras LD 352 George Johnson BNP 213 Yvonne McNicol LD 1,603 Ada Callanan C 193 Gary Haley Lab 1,082 John Callanan C 171 Chopwell and Rowlands Gill Saira Munro BNP 165 Michael McNestry Lab 1,716 Raymond Callender LD 800 Maureen Moor C 269 Felling Kenneth Hutton BNP 171 Paul McNally Lab 1,149 David Lucas LD 316 Chowdene Keith McFarlane BNP 205 Steve Wraith C 189 Keith Wood Lab 1,523 Daniel Duggan C 578 Glenys Goodwill LD 425 Terrence Jopling BNP 231 High Fell Malcolm Graham Lab 1,100 Crawcrook and Greenside Ann McCarthy LD 250 Derek Anderson LD 1,598 Jim Batty UKIP 194 Helen Hughes Lab 1,084 June Murray C 157 Leonard Davidson C 151 Ronald Fairlamb BNP 151 48 4.1.
    [Show full text]
  • Newcastle and Gateshead Leisure Study
    Newcastle and Gateshead Leisure Study Newcastle City Council & Gateshead Council April 2010 Contents 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 4 1.1 Overview.............................................................................................................. 4 1.2 Objectives ............................................................................................................ 4 1.3 Definition of leisure .............................................................................................. 5 1.4 Report structure ................................................................................................... 5 2 National and Regional Policy Requirements................................................................. 6 2.2 Planning Policy Statement 4 ............................................................................... 6 2.3 Planning Policy Statement 12 ........................................................................... 10 2.4 The North East of England Plan: Regional Spatial Strategy to 2021 ................ 12 2.5 Community Strategy .......................................................................................... 14 3 The leisure sector in Newcastle and Gateshead ........................................................ 15 3.1 Background ....................................................................................................... 15 3.2 Leisure Market overview ..................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Newcastle City Council Election Results 1973-2012
    Newcastle City Council Election Results 1973-2012 Colin Rallings and Michael Thrasher The Elections Centre Plymouth University The information contained in this report has been obtained from a number of sources. Election results from the immediate post-reorganisation period were painstakingly collected by Alan Willis largely, although not exclusively, from local newspaper reports. From the mid- 1980s onwards the results have been obtained from each local authority by the Elections Centre. The data are stored in a database designed by Lawrence Ware and maintained by Brian Cheal and others at Plymouth University. Despite our best efforts some information remains elusive whilst we accept that some errors are likely to remain. Notice of any mistakes should be sent to [email protected]. The results sequence can be kept up to date by purchasing copies of the annual Local Elections Handbook, details of which can be obtained by contacting the email address above. Front cover: the graph shows the distribution of percentage vote shares over the period covered by the results. The lines reflect the colours traditionally used by the three main parties. The grey line is the share obtained by Independent candidates while the purple line groups together the vote shares for all other parties. Rear cover: the top graph shows the percentage share of council seats for the main parties as well as those won by Independents and other parties. The lines take account of any by- election changes (but not those resulting from elected councillors switching party allegiance) as well as the transfers of seats during the main round of local election.
    [Show full text]
  • Electoral Review of Newcastle Our Council
    Electoral review of Newcastle Our council: Fit for the future Evidence to support the Local Government Boundary Commission for England’s consideration of the appropriate number of councillors for Newcastle City Council Presented by Newcastle City Council’s Constitutional Committee 0 Contents Background: Electoral review of Newcastle 2 Section One: Our council size proposal 3 Section Two: About Newcastle 5 Section Three: Evidence relating to governance and decision making 12 Section Four: Evidence relating to scrutiny functions 33 Section Five: Evidence relating to the representational role of councillors 38 Section Six: Evidence relating to the future 50 Section Seven: Comparisons to similar authorities 55 Section Eight: Views of other interested stakeholders 57 Section Nine: Options considered 59 Section Ten: Conclusions 60 Appendix 1: Cabinet portfolios 63 Appendix 2: Details of North East Combined Authority and joint authorities / 66 committees Appendix 3: Schedules of appointments made by City Council 68 Appendix 4: Case studies provided by councillors 99 Appendix 5: Feedback received from other stakeholders 101 1 Background: Electoral review of Newcastle The Local Government Boundary Commission for England (the Commission) is undertaking an electoral review of Newcastle between November 2015 and September 2016. An electoral review examines a council’s electoral arrangements and aims to ensure, as far as possible, that the ratio of electors to councillors in each ward is the same. The review will cover: The total number of councillors to be elected to the council (council size); The number and boundaries of electoral areas (wards) for the purposes of the election of councillors; The number of councillors for any electoral area of a local authority; and The name of any electoral area.
    [Show full text]
  • Newcastle Ambulance Pickups
    Newcastle PCT Ambulance Call Outs by SOA Please note that due to boundary reviews not all SOAs are coterminous with wards and therefore only a proxy ward name has been supplied in the below table SOA Map SOA Callout Proxy Callout Number of Callouts code Location SOA Name Ward Code Proxy Ward Name 2009/10 1 E01008288 Newcastle upon Tyne 027A 00CJGD Benwell and Scotswood 2 2 E01008289 Newcastle upon Tyne 027B 00CJGD Benwell and Scotswood 5 3 E01008290 Newcastle upon Tyne 027C 00CJGD Benwell and Scotswood 13 4 E01008291 Newcastle upon Tyne 027D 00CJGL Elswick 21 5 E01008292 Newcastle upon Tyne 027E 00CJGD Benwell and Scotswood 1 6 E01008293 Newcastle upon Tyne 004A 00CJHF Woolsington 11 7 E01008294 Newcastle upon Tyne 001A 00CJGG Castle 2 8 E01008295 Newcastle upon Tyne 008A 00CJGP Kenton 6 9 E01008296 Newcastle upon Tyne 011A 00CJHF Woolsington 4 10 E01008297 Newcastle upon Tyne 011B 00CJGE Blakelaw 14 11 E01008298 Newcastle upon Tyne 011C 00CJHF Woolsington 11 12 E01008299 Newcastle upon Tyne 011D 00CJGE Blakelaw 13 13 E01008300 Newcastle upon Tyne 016A 00CJGE Blakelaw 6 14 E01008301 Newcastle upon Tyne 026A 00CJGF Byker 15 15 E01008302 Newcastle upon Tyne 026B 00CJGZ Walker 10 16 E01008303 Newcastle upon Tyne 018A 00CJGX South Heaton 33 17 E01008304 Newcastle upon Tyne 026C 00CJGX South Heaton 36 18 E01008305 Newcastle upon Tyne 026D 00CJGF Byker 28 19 E01008306 Newcastle upon Tyne 001B 00CJGG Castle 9 20 E01008307 Newcastle upon Tyne 001C 00CJGG Castle 3 21 E01008308 Newcastle upon Tyne 001D 00CJGG Castle 3 22 E01008309 Newcastle upon
    [Show full text]
  • Specialist Housing Delivery Plan
    SPECIALIST HOUSING DELIVERY PLAN 2017 - 2021 Newcastle Specialist Housing Delivery Plan 2017 - 2021 Contents Page Foreword 2 1. Vision 3 2. What is this plan about? 4 3. What is specialist & supported housing? 4 4. Why we need a specialist housing plan 4 5. How specialist / supported housing is funded 7 6. Legal duties and responsibilities 8 7. Links to other plans 9 8. Recent successes 10 9. How we will work 11 10. Consultation and review of this plan 11 Needs groups: 11. Older People 13 12. Adults with Mental Health conditions 31 13. Adults with learning disabilities and/or Autism 36 14. Adults with physical disabilities 42 15. Activities to help meet our Priorities 44 Appendices: Appendix One: Development Pipeline – specialist and level access housing Appendix Two: Terms of Reference 1 | P a g e Newcastle Specialist Housing Delivery Plan 2017 - 2021 Foreword Our needs are changing. We are living longer, which is a success story that we should celebrate, but sadly older people are likely to have at least two long-term conditions as dementia and frailty in later life is soaring. One in four people will experience a mental health condition at some point in their life, with one in six adults experiencing a mental health condition at any one time. Many more of us will have a mixture of needs to do with physical health, and perhaps difficulty in making decisions for ourselves. Sometimes needs can be complex and expensive to meet. On top of this, Adult social care services in England are facing unprecedented funding pressures, due to the combination of a growing and ageing population, increasingly complex care needs, reductions in funding to local government and increases in care costs.
    [Show full text]
  • Local Election Results 2008
    Local Election Results 1st May 2008 Tyne and Wear Andrew Teale Version 0.02 April 29, 2009 2 LOCAL ELECTION RESULTS 2008 Typeset by LATEX Compilation and design © Andrew Teale, 2009. The author grants permission to copy and distribute this work in any medium, provided this notice is preserved. This file (in several formats) is available for download from http://www.andrewteale.me.uk/ Please advise the author of any corrections which need to be made by email: [email protected] Chapter 7 Tyne and Wear 7.1 Gateshead Birtley Deckham Kathy King Lib 1,053 Brian Coates Lab 1,029 Tom Collins Lab 1,003 Lisa Bradley LD 456 Josephine Walker C 273 Allan Davidson C 349 Kevin Scott BNP 297 Blaydon Stephen Ronchetti Lab 1,211 Dunston and Teams David Osborne LD 869 David Bollands Lab 971 Paul Duggan C 272 Michael Ruddy LD 309 Kelly Mares BNP 257 Margaret Bell C 243 Bridges Paul Harper Ind 34 John Eagle Lab 840 Philip Allen LD 317 Val Bond C 232 Dunston Hill and Whickham East Keith McFarlane BNP 222 Peter Maughan LD 1,402 Jennifer Peace Lab 806 Chopwell and Rowlands Gill John Callanan C 351 Kevin Berry Ind 260 John Hamilton Lab 1,547 Raymond Callender LD 720 Lynda Duggan C 443 Felling Chowdene David Napier Lab 1,128 Dorothy Ruddy LD 287 John McElroy Lab 1,403 Trevor Murray C 219 Daniel Duggan C 593 Edward McFarlane BNP 210 Glenys Goodwill LD 354 Terrence Jopling BNP 243 Ind John Crozier 129 High Fell Jean Lee Lab 992 Crawcrook and Greenside Ann McCarthy LD 275 Noel Rippeth LD 1,405 Maureen Moor C 225 Helen Hughes Lab 948 Ronald Fairlamb BNP 221 Leonard Davidson C 264 Andrew Marshall Ind 104 60 7.1.
    [Show full text]
  • Initial Proposals for New Parliamentary Constituency Boundaries in the North East Contents
    Initial proposals for new Parliamentary constituency boundaries in the North East Contents Summary 3 1 What is the Boundary Commission for England? 5 2 Background to the 2018 Review 7 3 Initial proposals for the North East 11 4 How to have your say 17 Annex A: Initial proposals for constituencies, 21 including wards and electorates Glossary 28 Initial proposals for new Parliamentary constituency boundaries in the North East 1 Summary Who we are and what we do What is changing in the North East? The Boundary Commission for England is an independent and impartial The North East has been allocated 25 non‑departmental public body which is constituencies – a reduction of four from responsible for reviewing Parliamentary the current number. constituency boundaries in England. Our proposals leave three of the 29 The 2018 Review existing constituencies unchanged. More substantial change is required, however, We have the task of periodically reviewing in other parts of the region. the boundaries of all the Parliamentary constituencies in England. We are currently We are proposing one constituency within conducting a review on the basis of rules Tyne and Wear that crosses the River Tyne. set by Parliament in 2011. The rules tell We have also proposed one constituency us that we must make recommendations that crosses the River Tees. for new Parliamentary constituency boundaries in September 2018. They We are proposing one constituency also result in a significant reduction in that crosses the boundary between the number of constituencies in England Northumberland and Tyne and Wear, (from 533 to 501), and require that every which combines the town of Stannington constituency – apart from two specified with wards from the northern part of exceptions – must have an electorate that Newcastle.
    [Show full text]
  • Local Election Results 2008
    Local Election Results May 2008 Andrew Teale August 15, 2016 2 LOCAL ELECTION RESULTS 2008 Typeset by LATEX Compilation and design © Andrew Teale, 2012. Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.3 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. A copy of the license is included in the section entitled “GNU Free Documentation License”. This file, together with its LATEX source code, is available for download from http://www.andrewteale.me.uk/leap/ Please advise the author of any corrections which need to be made by email: [email protected] Contents Introduction and Abbreviations9 I Greater London Authority 11 1 Mayor of London 12 2 Greater London Assembly Constituency Results 13 3 Greater London Assembly List Results 16 II Metropolitan Boroughs 19 4 Greater Manchester 20 4.1 Bolton.................................. 20 4.2 Bury.................................... 21 4.3 Manchester............................... 23 4.4 Oldham................................. 25 4.5 Rochdale................................ 27 4.6 Salford................................. 28 4.7 Stockport................................ 29 4.8 Tameside................................. 31 4.9 Trafford................................. 32 4.10 Wigan.................................. 34 5 Merseyside 36 5.1 Knowsley................................ 36 5.2 Liverpool................................ 37 5.3 Sefton.................................. 39 5.4 St Helens................................. 41 5.5 Wirral.................................. 43 6 South Yorkshire 45 6.1 Barnsley................................ 45 6.2 Doncaster............................... 47 6.3 Rotherham............................... 48 6.4 Sheffield................................ 50 3 4 LOCAL ELECTION RESULTS 2008 7 Tyne and Wear 53 7.1 Gateshead............................... 53 7.2 Newcastle upon Tyne........................
    [Show full text]
  • Pharmaceutical Needs Assessment 2018-2021 1
    for approval Pharmaceutical Needs Assessment 2018-2021 November 2017 Newcastle Pharmaceutical needs assessment 2010-2011–Executive Summary 1 Table of Contents Executive summary ................................................................................................... 1 Newcastle PNA Key Recommendations.............................................................. 3 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 5 What is a pharmaceutical needs assessment? ........................................................ 5 1.1 Healthcare Landscape ....................................................................................... 5 1.2 Objectives .......................................................................................................... 5 1.3 Newcastle City Council Public Health Priorities ................................................. 5 1.4 Newcastle Gateshead CCG ............................................................................... 6 1.5 Community Pharmacy ........................................................................................ 6 1.6 National Community Pharmacy Representation ................................................ 7 1.7 Local Leadership ................................................................................................ 7 1.8 Utilisation of Community Pharmacy by Commissioners ..................................... 8 1.9 Pharmacy NHS Services: ..................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Newcastle Upon Tyne Local Authority
    Or Oral Health Profile: Newcastle upon Tyne local authority al h ealth Newcastle upon Tyne Published March 2021 Oral health of 5-year-old children p This profile describes the oral health of 5-year- rofile olds living in Newcastle upon Tyne. It uses data from the National Dental Epidemiology Programme 2019 survey of 5-year-old children1. The profile is designed to help local government and health services improve the oral health and wellbeing of children and tackle health inequalities. In Newcastle upon Tyne 523 5-year-olds (approximately 47.8% of those sampled) were examined at school by trained and calibrated examiners using the national standard method2. Figure 1: Prevalence of experience of dental decay and mean number of teeth with experience of dental decay in 5-year-olds in Newcastle upon Tyne, other local authorities in the North East and England. 2.0 Average filled teeth 45 1.8 Average missing (due to decay) teeth 40 Average decayed teeth 1.6 % with decay experience 35 1.4 30 1.2 25 1.0 20 0.8 15 0.6 Meannumber of teeth 0.4 10 0.2 5 0.0 0 Prevalence Prevalence of experience ofdecay dental (%) Darlington Hartlepool ENGLAND Gateshead Sunderland NORTH EAST Middlesbrough North Tyneside North South Tyneside South Northumberland County Durham County Stockton-on-Tees Area Tyne uponNewcastle Redcar Cleveland and 1 Oral Health Profile: Newcastle upon Tyne local authority Table 1: Experience of dental decay in 5-year-olds in Newcastle upon Tyne, other local authorities in the North East and England. Mean number of teeth Mean number of
    [Show full text]