Birmingham Electoral Ward Boundaries Submission January 2016
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
BIRMINGHAM ELECTORAL WARD BOUNDARIES SUBMISSION JANUARY 2016 On behalf of: Keith Hanson, Secretary, Birmingham Labour Party Josh Jones, City Council Labour Group Page 1 of 21 Introduction Response to the Draft Recommendations of the Local Government Boundary Commission for England The draft recommendations of the Local Government Boundary Commission for England for the north and west of the City reflected many of the proposals put forward by the Labour Group, Birmingham City Council in September 2015. The physical and community geography of the area is shaped by the historical boundary between Sutton Coldfield and the remainder of Birmingham and by the M6 motorway, railways and River Cole. These features constrain options on boundaries that meet the statutory criteria. Such features are less dominant in the south of the City. This may explain why the Boundary Commission’s draft recommendations across parts of South Birmingham do not have the same level of support from residents as they have in the north of the City, as community views are not as constrained by physical geographical features. Even so, generally, the proposals by the Boundary Commission for the south of the City can be supported by the Labour Party once the conflict over specific community concerns is resolved. Hence, this response by the Labour Party in Birmingham seeks to retain the Boundary Commission’s proposals for much of the city but with alternative ward arrangements in Balsall Heath, Moseley, Hall Green and Acocks Green – areas where local communities have expressed the greatest concerns about the draft recommendations from the Boundary Commission. A few, minor adjustments are suggested beyond these areas, together with a number of ward name changes that better reflect the local identities of the proposed wards. Consequently, this response to the Boundary Commission maintains a Council size of 101 members, with 51one member wards and 25 two-member wards. The tables on pages 3 - 21 provide ward-by-ward details of our response in the order presented in the Boundary Commission’s draft recommendations report. Maps are provided along with this response: Map A which compares our original response with the Boundary Commission’s initial proposals; Map B which indicates where we have renamed Boundary Commission proposed wards; Map C which indicates the area of South- East Birmingham where we are suggesting new ward arrangements; and Map D which brings together the initial Boundary Commission proposals and our final proposals for the city as a whole. Page 2 of 21 CITY CENTRE AND SURROUNDING AREA # Ward No of Projected Electorate Forecast Comments Cllrs Electorate per Cllr Electoral 2021 Variance in 2021 1 Aston 2 15,576 7,788 -3% No amendment proposed. The use of the A38M from the M6 is a more impenetrable boundary to the south-east of the ward than Lichfield Road proposed in our earlier submission. Aston Hall located within Aston Park and Aston Villa FC are within the proposed ward. All identify with the ward and add a community and place interest to the clear and identifiable boundaries of the ward. 2 Birchfield 1 7,688 7,688 -5% No amendment proposed. Our earlier submission combined this area with an adjoining Handsworth Ward in a two-member ward centred on Handsworth Park. The community identity commented on by the Boundary Commission for each of their proposed wards persuades us to accept these new ward arrangements as the wards comply with the statutory criteria. 3 Bordesley & 1 7,393 7,393 -8% No amendment proposed. Highgate The proposal put forward by the Boundary Commission is fully in line with the our view that the two communities of Bordesley &Highgate, neither with an electoral size that would justify a one-member ward, sit within a good and identifiable boundary. 4 Bordesley 1 7,470 7,470 -7% No amendment proposed. Green The proposal from the Boundary Commission reflects our own view on the appropriateness of this proposed ward. It is better to use a boundary at the south-east of the ward that proceeds along the back of houses in Page 3 of 21 Green Lane as proposed by the Boundary Commission, rather than along the middle of the road as in our own submission. 5 Edgbaston 2 15,989 7,994 -1% Minor amendment proposed. There has been some public comment on Edgbaston Cricket Ground not being in Edgbaston Ward, but it is not in Warwickshire either! More importantly, public matters/issues connected with the Ground affect the residents of the Balsall Heath and Moseley areas, so warding arrangements should reflect this situation. We are now suggesting that the area bound by Sir Harry’s Road, Pershore Road, Priory Road and Bristol Road is put into Edgbaston ward to reflect its relationship with that corner of Edgbaston Ward that is bounded by Priory Road, Pershore Road and Bristol Road, but also to bring the electoral size of the ward nearer to the average number of electors per councillor for the city. 6 Handsworth 1 7,851 7,851 -3% No amendment proposed. Our earlier submission combined this area with the adjoining Handsworth Ward in a two-member ward centred on either side of Handsworth Park. The community identity commented on by the Boundary Commission for each of their proposed wards persuades us to accept these new ward arrangements as the other statutory criteria are also satisfied. 7 Handsworth 2 15,755 7,877 -2% No amendment proposed. Wood The proposed Handsworth Wood ward reflects the identifiable community and clear boundaries recognised by our own submission. 8 Harborne 2 16,177 8,088 0% No amendment proposed. The Harborne ward proposed by the Boundary Commission reflects our own view that this ward comprises natural and recognised neighbourhoods within clear and identifiable boundaries. The use of the A456 (Hagley Road) as the northern boundary is a divide between the community to the south which looks to Harborne and the community to the north which relates to Bearwood and shopping facilities near to Five Page 4 of 21 Ways, and to Edgbaston Reservoir. 9 Holyhead 1 7,761 7,761 -4% No amendment proposed. The proposal from the Boundary Commission for Holyhead Ward reflects the identifiable community and clear boundaries recognised by our own submission. 10 Ladywood 2 15,389 7,695 -4% No amendment proposed. The Boundary Commission has recognised that a two-member ward proposal for the area to the west of and including much of the city centre represents the best balance between the statutory criteria, as was reflected in our own submission. The boundary to the rear of houses in Hagley Road is better than our own proposal to use a boundary along the middle of the road. 11 Lozells 1 7,903 7,903 -2% No amendment proposed. The characteristics of this ward, as proposed by the Boundary Commission, reflect the views expressed in our original submission. 12 Nechells 1 8,617 8,617 +7% No amendment proposed. As stated in our response to the Boundary Commission proposal for Aston Ward, the use of the A38M, from the M6, is a better boundary to the west than in our earlier submission. The proposed ward has clear and identifiable boundaries and a community identity. 13 Newtown 1 7,763 7,763 -4% No amendment proposed. The Boundary Commission proposal for this ward community reflects identifiable and good and clear boundaries, as with our original submission. We have not suggested another name for the ward as the residential area around New John Street West has for many years been known as Newtown and was a ward within the City until 1982 when it was merged with Aston. 14 Summerfield 2 15,903 7,951 -1% No amendment proposed. As the Commission has recognised, the community identities and boundaries proposed for this ward reflect evidence received by the Page 5 of 21 Commission, including in our own initial proposal that identified communities north of Hagley Road and out to the city boundary, relating to Bearwood in Sandwell MBC and with a proximity to Edgbaston Reservoir. 15 Winson Green 2 14,980 7,490 -7% No amendment proposed, other than name of ward. (Renamed The Boundary Commission recognise the community identities and clear Jewellery and identifiable boundaries of this proposed ward that reflect our own Quarter & submission for this ward. However, further consideration was invited on Soho) the name of the ward and this we have done, suggesting that the historical connection referred to in our original submission could be used to name the ward as ‘Jewellery Quarter and Soho’. Several hundred years ago, Matthew Boulton ensured the future of Birmingham’s jewellery industry – even now located in the south of the proposed ward in the Jewellery Quarter – with his home at Soho House, off Soho Road in the middle of the ward. Innovative manufacturing processes were introduced by Matthew Boulton and James Watt at the Soho Manufactory (now demolished) at Soho Road, Soho – next to his home. The Jewellery Quarter does not relate to the central Ladywood residential area to the west of Sand Pits and Soho Road or to the proposed Newtown Ward. Indeed, transport connections are primarily north-south along the western boundary, Dudley Road and Sand Pits, Metro as the central spine and the eastern boundary of Soho Road and Great Hampton Street/Constitution Hill EAST OF CITY CENTRE 16 Alum Rock 1 8,714 8,714 +8% No amendment proposed. Our earlier submission combined this ward with the adjoining Saltley Ward in a two-member ward between the railway lines to the south and Page 6 of 21 north. We accept that two one-member wards can be created within this envelope, using primarily the Alum Rock Road to divide the communities either side of this road.