Local Government Boundary Commission For Report No. 344 LOCAL GOVERN!-ISNT BOUNDARY COMMISSION F0.:; E.'GLAJID

CHAIHKAH

Sir Nicholas Morrison KCB

DEPUTY CHAIRMAN

Mr J M Rankin QC

MEMBERS

Lady Bowden

Hr J T Brockbank Mr R R Thornton CB DL

Mr D P Harrison Professor G E Cherry To the Secretary of State for the Home Department

PROPOSALS FOR THE FUTURE ELECTORAL ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH OF

1. We, the Local Government Boundary Commission for England, having carried out our initial review of the electoral arrangements for the metropolitan borough of Kirklees in accordance with the requirements of section 63-of, and

Schedule 9 to, the Local Government Act 1972, present our proposals for the future electoral arrangements for that borough.

2. In accordance with the procedure laid down in section 60(1) and (2) of the

1972 Act, notice was given on 27 August 1975 that we were to undertake this review. This was incorporated in a consultation letter addressed to the

Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council, copies of which were circulated to West County Council, parish councils, the Members of Parliament for the constituencies concerned and the headquarters of the main political, parties. Copies were also sent to the editors of local newspapers circulating in the area, and of the local government press. Notices inserted in the local press announced the start of the review and invited comments from members of the public1 and from interested bodies.

3- Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council were invited to prepare a draft scheme of representation for our consideration. In doing so, they were asked to observe the rules laid down in Schedule 11 to the Local Government Act 1972 and. the guidelines which we set out' in our Report No 6 about the proposed size of the council and the proposed number of councillors for each ward. They were asked also to take into account any views expressed: to them following their v consultation with local interests. We therefore asked that they should publish details of their provisional proposals about a month before they submitted their draft scheme to us, thus allowing an opportunity for local comment. 4. Section 7(3) of the Local Government Act 1972 requires that in metropolitan districts elections shall be by thirds. Section 6(2) Cb) of the Act requires that every metropolitan district shall be divided into wards each returning a number of councillors divisible by three.

5- Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council forwarded their draft scheme of representation to the Commission on 26 May 1976. They proposed to divide the area into 27 wards each returning 3 members to form a council of 81 . Following the elections in May 1976 this scheme was withdrawn and a revised scheme for

2*f 3-member wards was submitted to the Commission on 10 September 1976.

6. The revised draft scheme produced a generally even standard of representation.

Comments suggested that this had been achieved at the expense of breaking local ties and objections were received to the grouping of urban and rural areas in the same ward. A political party submitted two alternative schemes for a

V2-member and 8l-member council and alternative arrangements for certain areas were suggested in other comments. We studied the draft scheme, the alternative schemes and the alternative arrangements suggested for certain areas. We decided to base our draft proposals on the revised draft scheme submitted by

Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council subject to modifying it by incorporating alternative proposals for three wards put forward by a parish council. Some minor boundary realignments suggested to us by Ordnance Survey were adopted.

7. On 15 July 1977 we issued our draft proposals and these were sent to all who had received our consultation letter or had commented on the Council's draft scheme. Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council were asked to make these draft proposals, and the accompanying map which defined the proposed ward boundaries, available for inspection at their main offices. Representations on our draft proposals were invited from those to whom they were circulated and, by public notices, from other members of the public and interested bodies. We asked that comments should reach us by 9 September 1977. 8. We received forty two letters in response to the draft proposals.

Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council and County Council had no comment to make. Objections to the draft proposals, in whole or in part, were received from nineteen local branches of political parties and associations, one councillor, two civic societies, two parish councils, one trades-councils co-ordinating committee, and fifteen members of the public.

9. In view of these comments we decided that we needed further information to enable us to reach a conclusion* Therefore in accordance with section 65(2) of the 1972 Act and at our request, Mr V D Knox, DFC, was appointed an

Assistant Commissioner. He was asked to hold a local meeting and to report to us. Notice of the meeting was sent to all who had received our draft proposals or had commented on them, and was published locally.

10. The Assistant Commissioner held a meeting at the Town Hall, on 19 and 20 January 1978, having previously inspected the area. A copy of his report is attached at Schedule 1 to this report..

11.. In the light of the discussion at the-meeting and further subsequent inspection of certain areas the Assistant Commissioner recommended a pattern of

2^ J-member wards,, forming a council of 72 members, which differed in a number of ways' from our draft proposals..

12.. The Assistant Commissioner recommended that nine wards forming part of an alternative scheme submitted by a local political party, and supported by another, be adopted instead of our draft proposals for the areas concerned. He further recommended changes in the names of five wards.

1% We reviewed our draft proposals in the light of the comments which had been received and of the Assistant Commissioner's report. We noted that the main effect of the very detailed recommendations of the Assistant Commissioner was to take account of criticism made of our draft proposals in relation to the breaking of local ties. In some cases he had accepted what was suggested by most if not all the critics; in others he had reached his own conclusion after weighing the conflicting arguments, which he was as fairly evenly balanced. From the numerical point of view his recommendations offered a marginally better standard of representation than our draft proposals. We decided to adopt his recommendations as our final proposals.

14. Details of these final proposals are set out in Schedule 2 to this report and on the attached map. The changes recommended by the Assistant Commissioner were nearly all referred to by using polling districts and, at our request,

Ordnance Survey have drawn the map showing our final proposals taking account of the changes but not showing polling districts. This accords with our usual practice. Schedule Z gives the names of the wards and the number of councillors

to be returned by each. A detailed description of the boundaries of the proposed wards, as defined on the map, is set out in Schedule 3»

PUBLICATION

15., In accordance with Section 60(5>(b) of the Local Government Act 1972,

a copy of this report and a copy of the map are being sent to the Kirklees

Metropolitan Borough Council and will be available for inspection at the Council's main offices. Copies of this report (without map) are being sent to those who received the consultation letter and to those who made comments. L.S.

Signed:

NICHOLAS MORRISON (CHAIRMAN)

JOHN M RANKIN (DEPUTY CHAIRMAN)

PHYLLIS BOWDEN

TYRRELL BROCKBANK

G E CHERRY

D P HARRISON

R R THORNTON

L GRIMSHAW (Secretary)

15 March 1979 SCHEDULE 1

LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR ENGLAND

REVIEW OF ELECTORAL ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH OF KIRKLEES

REPORT OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (V. Douglas Knox D.F.C.)

TO: The Secretary, Local Government Boundary Commission for England, Room 123, 20 Albert Embankment, London. SE1 TTJ

1. Following ray appointment by the Secretary of State as Assistant Commissioner for the purpose of assisting the Commission Ts review of electoral arrangements for the Metropolitan Borough of Kirklees, I presided at a local meeting held in the Town Hall, Huddersfield on 19th and 20th January 1978 to hear representations

2. The meeting opened at 10.30 a.m. on 19th January and adjourned at 6.15 p.m. It was resumed at 10.00 a.m. on 20th January and concluded at approximately 5.00 p.m.-

3. Attendance

The following, persons attended the meeting on 19th January:-

NAME REPRESENTING

A. A. Mason Kirklees M.B. Council G. M. Carter Jane V, Carter H. H. Kellett Meltham Town Council E. Thomas (Mrs.) Kirfield Residents Association B. Caffell J. Caffell Shepley K. S. Moore Shepley D. Billington Village of Shepley Rev. N. Webb Village of Whitley S. R. Collins Village of Whitley M. Duncan Directorate of Administration, Kirklees M.B.C Alec Ramsden Yorkshire Post Newspaper - 2 -

Joan Kaye Shepley S. Chadwick Crosland Moor John 0. Moore Shepley David Eagley Huddersfield Examiner Newspaper John R. Glover Observer for West Yorkshire Metropolitan C.C. M. Hirst Spenborough Guardian Newspaper Charles Lee Shepley S. Thornton Ward IT S. Pollard . Kirklees Council T. P. Cliffe Leader, Kirklees M.B.C. T. McCarthy Directorate of Administration, Kirklees M.B.C. R. F . Paver Directorate of Administration, Kirklees M.B.C. John E. Miller Directorate of Technical Services, Kirklees M.B.C N. A. D. Hall Directorate of Technical Services, Kirklees M.B.C E. S . Dixon Chief Executive, Kirklees M.B.C. J. B. Hickling Mirfield Civic Society H. S. Hopkins Dalton Labour Party Frank L. Appleyard Shepley Ward A. Crowther Birkby Ward A. Ramsden Labour Party S. Dawson Huddersfield West Labour Party R. Hartley Huddersfield East Labour Party E. Garrett Huddersfield West Labour Party Jessie Smith Colne Valley Labour Party Henry Leaper Labour Party Ian Mercer Parish Council Clerk G. Earnshaw Kirkburton Parish Council Rev. C. H. Harris Shepley L. Allen Shepley F. Withers Shepley G. Rushforth Kirkburton P.C. and Grange Moore G. A. Cromach Shepley Willard Satmnba Wewsome H. C. G. Mathema Newsome B. Bailey Councillor Cliffe's Secretary A. Craven Secretary, Colne Valley Conservative Assn. - 3 -

N. Craven Secretary, Colne Valley Conservative Assn. K. Bates Huddersfield Conservative Association N. Hodgkinson Thornhill Ward F. Pickles Thornhill Labour Party D. Rhodes Shepley D. Cross Shepley H. Rhodes Shepley B. Moore Shepley D. G. Firth Shepley E. Mosley Shepley T. Megahy Kirklees Labour Party A. Belcher Colne Valley Labour Party H. Senior Liberal Group Kirklees M.B.C. Edward Dunford Colne Valley Division Liberal Association E. C. Walker Batley No. 12 Ward B. Shelden No. 13 Ward John H. Watson Batley and Morley Constituency Labour Party E. Moorhouse Huddersfield'E.G. Labour Party

It will be seen that 6? people attended on the first day and the following •25 attended on the second day:-

Edward Dunford Colne Valley Division Liberal Association Fred Pickles Thornhill Labour Party T. P. Cliffe Leader, Kirklees M.B.C. K. Bates Huddersfield Conservative Association S. Pollard Kirklees M.B.C. H. Hodgkinson Thornhill T. Megahy Kirklees Labour Party A. Belcher Colne Valley Labour Party David Bagley Huddersfield Examiner Newspaper S. Dawson Huddersfield West C.L.P. H. S. Hopkins Dalton Labour Party H. Senior Liberal Group, Kirklees M.B.C. Brian Eley Mirfield Ward Councillor Marguerite E. L. Wood Kirklees Ward 2U M. Duncan Kirklees M.B.C. E. S. Dixon Chief Executive, Kirklees M.B.C. T. McCarthy Kirklees M.B.C. R. F. Paver Kirklees M.B.C. N. A. D. Hall Kirklees M.B.C. R. Hartley Councillor, Kirklees M.B.C, and Huddersfield East Labour Party E. Moorhouse Huddersfield East Labour Party A. Crowther Birkby K. S. Moore . Shepley Jessie Smith Colne Valley Constituency Labour Party Leslie H. Parfitt Kirklees M.B.C. k. In addition to hearing evidence from those who attended and who wished to give verbal evidence or comment on the evidence of others, I also read in whole or in part, again so that comment might be made by those present, the written comments of Societies, Associations,"Parties, Councils, Committees, Groups or individuals who were not present or represented. 5. Mr. E. S. Dixon, Chief Executive, Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council, confirmed that the necessary notices regarding the holding of the meeting had been published.

BACKGROUND TO THE DRAFT PROPOSALS 6. The Commission's letter of 27th August 1975 initiated the electoral review in Kirklees and, inter alia, mentioned the need for county and district co-operation at an early stage if the advantages of compatibility were to be secured. Although there were no consultations at that stage, the West Yorkshire County Council drew up a scheme for its own Council for a Council size of 99 members with Kirklees having 27 Wards, 8l District Councillors, 18 County electoral divisions and 18 County Councillors. In April 1976 the then Labour-controlled Borough Council drew up and submitted to the Commission a 27 ward, 8l-member scheme. 7. Just after the May 1976 elections the metropolitan district councils in West Yorkshire held a meeting in Leeds to which the County Council and the Commission were invited, to discuss compatibility. The outcome was an alternative plan which would give the County 92 members, with Kirklees 2k Wards, 72 District Councillors, l6 County electoral divisions and 16 County Councillors. 8. The May 1976 district elections resulted in the Conservatives gaining control of Kirklees Council. In the light of the consultations on compatibility which took place thereafter, the Kirklees Council withdrew the 27 Ward scheme and on 10th September 1976 submitted their revised proposals for a 2k Ward scheme returning 72 members, which meant that the Council would remain the same size as at present. None of the 2k Wards in the new scheme was coterminous with an existing Ward. Parish and parish ward boundaries were respected in the successor parish areas of the Borough. Kirklees has not carried out a parish review. - 5 -

9. Following the submission of that scheme the Commission received and considered representations and objections which included:-

(a)- two alternative schemes submitted by the Kirklees Metropolitan District Labour Party, one "being the 27 Ward scheme approved by the Kirklees Council in April 1976 when the Labour Party was in control, and the other based on 2h Wards, having in mind that the Commissioner might well favour a scheme based on 2U Wards;

(b) objections to the disruption of local ties, and to the grouping of urban and rural areas in the same ward; and

(c) the Parish Council objected to the inclusion in the essentially rural Holme Valley North ward of an area from the former County Borough of Huddersfield, and suggestedalternative proposals which affected the proposed Holme Valley North, and Crosland wards.

10. The Council's draft scheme offered a generally even standard of representation with the proposed Birkby ward being the only ward falling outside their usual range of tolerance on current electoral figures. However, the entitlement of this ward was expected to improve by 19&1, the electorate increasing from 9,7^8 to 10,U99.

THE COMMISSION'S DRAFT PROPOSALS

11. The draft proposals were issued by the Commission on 15th July 1977. In the main the Commission adopted the draft scheme submitted by the Kirklees Council in September 197,6, but they varied this draft scheme - (a) by incorporating the alternative proposals for the Holme Valley North, Almondbury and Crosland wards put forward by the Holme Valley Parish Council; and (b) by the addition of three boundary realignments proposed by Ordnance Survey, none of which involved electorate. The effect of these proposals resulted in the following:-

No. of 1976 1981 Ward Cllrs. Electorate Entitlement Electorate Entitlement

Holme Valley North 3 9,992 2.65 10,792 2.86 Almondbury ' 3 11,137 2.95 11,2U9 3.00 Crosland 3 11,90** 3.15 12,083 3.23

Details of these alterations are as follows:-

Holme Valley North Ward would gain Brockholes polling district (Q) 520 from Almondbury and lose Berry Brow (C), part, 1231, Armitage Bridge (D), part, and Netherton (Q), part, ^5, to Crosland - a net loss of 1097 electors.

Almondbury Ward would lose Brockholes polling district (Q), 520, to Holme Valley North - a net loss of 520 electors.

Crosland Ward' would gain Berry Brow (C), part, 1231, Armitage Bridge CD) , part, 3^1, and Netherton (Q), part, ^5, from Holme Valley North - a net gain of l6l7 electors. - 6 -

12. The draft proposals of the Commission for Kirklees so far as the numerical analysis is concerned were as follows:- Varia- 6 tions 31 No. of 197 in . 19 Ward Cllrs. Electo- Entitle- Electo- Electo- Entitle- rate ment rate rate ment

Lindley 3 11,U2U 3.03 -U25 10,999 2.9^. Paddock 3 12,003 3.18 -162 ll,8Ui 3.16 Birkby 3 9,7^8 2.58 +151 10,U99 2.80 Cr os land 3 11.90U 3.15 +119 12.083 3.23 Holme" Valley North 3 9,992 2.65 +300 10,792 2.86 Huddersfield Centra1 3 11,5^0 3.06 -231 11,309 3.02 D eight on 3 12,00** 3.18 -505 11,501 3.01 D alt on 3 12.0U7 3.19 -1*88 11,559 3.01 Almondbury 3 11,137 2.95 +112 11,2U9 3.00 Golcar 3 10,3^ 2.7^ -215 10,129 2.70 Colne Valley West 3 10,516 2.78 -371 10,lU5 2.71 Holme Valley South 3 10,6U8 2.82 +85 10,733 2.81 Kirkburton 3 10,706 2.8U +385 11,091 2.96 Denby Dale 3 10,971 2.91 +622 11,593 3.10 Mirfield 3 12.280 3.25 -189 12,091 3.23 Liver sedge 3 10,60^ 2.81 +196 10,800 2.88 Cleckheaton 3 10,859 2.88 +371 11,230 3.00 Birstall 3 12.U31 3.29 -159 12,272 3.28 Heckmondwike 3 10 ,Tli* 2.8U -310 10.3M* 2.76 Batley North 3 12,099 3.20 ' -365 11,73U 3.73' Bat ley South 3 11.869 3.1U -Ui9 11,390 376U Dewsbury East 3 11,671 3.09 -3Ul 11,330 3.05 Dewsbury West 3 12,097 3.20 -6^2 11.U55 3.06 Dewsbury South 3 12,269 3.25 -819 11.U50 3.06 72 271,877 72.01 -2258 269,619 71.98 AV : 3,776 AV 13'. Comments were invited on the Commission's draft proposals. The Borough Council and the County Council had no comment to make. Comments were received objecting generally to the Commission's draft proposals and to the proposals for particular areas. 'In consequence of these comments, it was decided to convene the meeting.

1^. An outline of the general comments on the Commission's proposals are as follows : -

(i) Kirklees Metropolitan District Labour Party, supported by the Huddersfield West Constituency Labour Party, the Huddersfield East Constituency Labour Party, the Huddersfield West Constituency Labour Party, Lindley Branch, the Kirklees Trades Councils Co-ordinating- Committee and Mr. M.-McMurdo, object on the grounds (a) the variation in the size of the electorate is too large, (b) little regard seems to have been paid to the preservation of local communities, and (c) the proposed boundaries take no account of natural geographical boundaries. "^ The Kirklees M.D. Laboury Party put forward two alternative schemes based on 27 Wards (Scheme A) and 2k Wards (Scheme B) . These schemes were detailed giving (a) lists of proposed wards with polling districts, (b) summary of proposed ward electorates, and (c) description of proposed new Wards. The supporting bodies consider that the proposals submitted by the Kirklees District Labour Party achieve a greater equality in numbers between the wards and also give consideration to the feelings and - 7 -

wishes of local people. The Labour Party's 2k Ward scheme gave the following electorate for the wards they suggested:- Varia- tions '6 31 Ward No. of 19" in 19* Cllrs. Electo- Entitle- Electo- Electo- Entitle- rate ment rate rate ment ~~ * ' Thornhill 3 11,1*60 3.03 +39 11,499 3.05 ' Dewsbury East 3 11,871 3.14 -350 11,521 3.05 Dewsbury West 3 11,681* 3.09 -128 11,556 3.06 Mirfield 3 11,311 3.00 +100. 11, 4n 3.02 Dalton 3 11,854 3.14 -399 11,455 - 3.04 Almondbury 3 10,605 2.81 +244 10,849 2.88 Deighton 3 11,353 3.01 -290 11,063 2.93 Newsome 3 11,447 3.03 -192 11,255 2.98 ! Birkby 3 10,811 2.86 +600 ll,4n 3.02 | Lindley •^ 10,979 2.91 +121 11,100 2.94 j Paddock 3 11,587 3.07 -402 11,189 2.97 Cr os land •3 11,755 3.11 +60 11,815 3.13 Kirkburton 3 10,812 2.86 +326 11,138 2.95 1 Bat ley East o 11,817 3.13 -305 11,512 3.05 Batley West 3 12,158 3.22 -402 11,756 3.12 Bir stall •3 11,930 3.16 -180 U,750 3.11 Hightown 3 11,743 3.11 +77 11,820 3.13 dec kh eat on 3 11,368 3.01 +196 11,564 3.06 Heckmondwike 3 11,871 3.14 -401 11,470 3.04 Denby Dale 10,566 2.80 +620 11,186 2.96 Holme Valley North 3 9,992 2.65 +800 10,792 2.86 Holme Valley South 3 10,61+8 2.82 +333 10,986 2.91 Colne Valley East 3 11,139 2.95 -4oo 10,739 2.85 Colne Valley West 3 11,136 2.95 -350 10,786 2.86 72 271,877 72.00 -154 271,623 71.97 AV : 3,776 AV : 3,773

(ii) The Kirklees Metropolitan Liberal Group consider that many anomalies arise from the draft proposals, to some extent due to the fact that Kirklees in addition to being Metropolitan is also rural in character.

(iii) Councillor H. Senior of the Kirklees Council cites examples of inconsistencies in the proposed scheme where the use of main roads as ward "boundaries cut recognised communities in two, and where well established known communities are 'added to wards completely foreign to them. (iv) The Huddersfield Conservative Association whilst supporting the draft proposals suggest a number of minor adjustments to the boundary lines. (v) The Colne Valley Division Liberal Association support the Commission's proposal to divide the Borough into 2U wards, but object to certain proposed boundaries which they claim do not respect local ties and in some instances areas with little or no community of interest have been grouped together. They put forward alternative proposals for the western side of the Borough comprising 14 wards, retaining the - 8 -

existing polling districts intact and giving ward electorates ranging from 10,^00 to 11,700 approximately in the wards proposed Iheir scheme for these lU wards is as follows:-

1976 Number of ^s i ^ Councillors Electorate Entitlement Kirkburton 3 10,671 2.83 Deighton 3 11,36U 3.01 Dalt on 3 11,713 3.10 . Birkby and Fartown 3 11,089 2.91* Marsh and Paddock 3 10,621 2.81 Almondbury 3 10,1*08 2.76 Lockwood and Newsome 3 - 11.071 2.93 Crosland Moor 3 11,1*73 3.0U Lindley 3 11.008 2.92 Golcar 3 10,735 2.31* Colne Valley West 3 10,7^0 2.8U and Meltham 3 11,222 2.91 Holmfirth 3 11,131 2.95 Denby Dale 3 11,1*39 3.03

15. The remaining comments received by the Commission to its draft proposals related to the several wards. Grounds of objection included the following:-

(a) Local ties have been ignored for the sake of achieving equality of representation;

(b) The interests of rural communities would be subordinated to those of the larger urban areas in the ward proposed;

(c) Some communities, or parts thereof, which have no links with other communities have been linked together;

(d) Certain estates have been split unnecessarily.

Alternative proposals were suggested in several instances, (a) with a view to providing more logical boundaries, (b) in order to link communities with common interests, (c) by avoiding the mix of rural and urban areas in the same ward, the minimum of disruption and misunderstanding would arise and unequal representation for the inhabitants of the rural areas would not take place.

16. In support of various proposals, petitions from the inhabitants of Shepley (705) and Whitley Upper (22*0) were submitted objecting to their movement out of the Kirkburton Ward.

17. Alternative names for several wards were suggested by the Labour and Liberal parties and also by individuals.

18. I deal with the comments received by the Commission to their draft proposals and outlined above in more detail later in my report. The report is not in any way a verbatim note of every word that was said at the meeting but is, I hope, a fair summary of the principal points made by the various speakers, both initially and in reply, and also includes vievs expressed in the comments sent to the Commission. - 9 -

THE MEETING 19. The meeting was conducted as informally as possible. 20. After opening the meeting and outlining its purpose and the issues which appeared to arise, I pointed out that with regard to some proposed amendments e.g. as to names of wards, it might be possible to reach agreement thereon and'thus for them to be acceptable to all. With regard to County electoral arrangements and District wards I mentioned that whilst recognising that compatability was desirable it was not essential. 21. I drew attention to the large number of permutations which had been suggested for amending certain ward boundafres and reminded those present that their effect on adjoining areas would have to be considered in detail in order that the rules laid down in the Local Government Act 1972, Schedule 11, Para. 3 were met. These rules formed constraints and they had to be followed in our consideration of the amendments proposed. 22. Mr. E. S. Dixon, Chief Executive, Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council reviewed the background to the two schemes which had been submitted to the Commission by the Council - the 27 ward scheme when the Labour Party controlled the Council, and the 2U ward scheme when the Conservative Party took control in May 1976. The latter scheme divided the area into the same number of wards as existed at the present time. The average electorate per Councillor for 1976 was 3776 and this dropped slightly to 37^5 in the estimates for 1981. 23. The 2k ward scheme proposals complied with the rules set out in the Act. Kirklees had not carried out any Parish reviews and there were U Parishes within the District, viz. Meltham, Holme Valley, Denby Dale, and Kirkburton. With the exception of Meltham, the Parishes were warded.

2U. The Kirklees Council had no- comments on the Commission's draft proposals. 25. I observed that the Council's estimated total electorate for 1981 was 269,619 whilst the Labour Party's estimate was 271,623, only slightly less than the 1976 figure of 271,877. Mr. Dixon said that various formulae had been considered in connection with the prediction of electorate in 1981 and called Mr. J. E. Miller, M.Sc. the Council's Chief Planning Officer concerned with the prediction of ward electorates in connection with the Council's submission. The method used in predicting the total electorate was to take the 1973 ratio of electors to home population and applying that ratio to the 198l population estimate. As the 197^ based projections were not available, the 198l population estimate was derived by using the 1973 based natural increase to 198l and applying the net migration assumptions agreed for incorporation into the 197^ based projection. In predicting the 198l electorate for each ward, three factors had been considered: (i) the construction of new properties, (ii) demolition and clearance of existing properties, (iii)migration of electors within existing properties. 26. Councillor T. Megahy, for the Labour Party, said that they preferred the formula used by the Council's own officials when Kirklees Council produced a 27 ward scheme prior to May 1976. Citing as an example the - 10 -

Mirfield Ward the original figures for this ward were 10,195 in 1975 and 10,733 in 1981. He considered that these figures were incompatible with the present estimates of a decrease from 12,280 in 1976 to 12,091 in 1981 in a bigger ward. He and his Labour Party colleagues felt that the semi- scientific method of estimation more recently used by the Council was not as accurate as their method of using known factors in the various wards especially having regard to what had taken place in those wards in recent years and current building rates. He felt that there was an underestimate in the numbers in various individual wards. Mr. Dixon pointed out in support of the estimated electorate that the base figure for the later estimate for 1981 (that included in the Commission's draft proposals) had been supplied by the Office of Population Censuses and Surveys and this had not been used in the 1975 calculations vhen the 27 ward scheme had been drawn up. 27. Mr. Dixon said that in drawing up the Council's scheme, which formed the basis for the Commission's draft proposals, the constraints had been observed and pointed out the domino or ripple effect which results when moving electorate from Ward to Ward. 28. Councillor T. P. Cliffe, Leader of the Kirklees Council, said the scheme submitted by the Council and which had been incorporated in the Commission's draft proposals, with the exception of the amendment proposed by the Holme Valley Parish Council, was accepted, although they preferred their original scheme, had been drawn up by the Conservative members of the Council with officer advice. They had tried to retain communities as far as possible. Sometimes this was not possible owing to the constraints with regard to the size of the electorate in a particular ward and the principles recommended with regard to Boundary making and the preference for major roads. The A.62 road had been used as a boundary for three wards. Existing wards ranged from 1^,829 electors to 6,852 and change was therefore necessary. The existing wards had been used as starting points, but it had been necessary to move electors to unfamiliar wards and groupings, having 'regard to the fact that the same number of wards were being used. He would be agreeing later in the meeting to a slight amendment to the Dewsbury South and Denby Dale ward boundaries suggested by the Thornhill No. 1 Ward Conservative Association. Councillor Cliffe criticised both the Labour and Liberal proposals for not including in their alternative schemes any reference to a ward bearing the name Huddersfield. There had been a village of that name since .before the setting up of Huddersfield in 1868 by the amalgamation of ten areas and he felt that, not only on grounds of historical association, but also because there was still an identifiable Central Huddersfield area, albeit it was nearly all commercial, the name should be retained. 29. Councillor Megahy said that the Labour Party whilst still of the opinion that the 27 ward scheme which they had proposed when in power was a good one, realised that because of the relationship with the other Metropolitan authorities in West Yorkshire and with the County, they should restrict consideration of alternatives to the Commission's draft proposals to their 2k ward scheme. - 11 -

In putting forward their scheme the Labour Party had been conscious of the wholesale upheaval which had taken place during local government reorganisation in 1973 and had been concerned about the effect that a further wholesale reorganisation of wards may have on local democracy and participation in government. For this reason they had based their scheme on existing wards, consistent with the need to achieve the required distribution of electorates, and with the exception of a number of cases where anomalies in the existing set up demanded a change.

With regard to the Commission's draft proposals the Labour Party found these unacceptable on two counts. First, the variation in size of electorate is too wide. The difference between the smallest ward in 1981 of 10,129, and the largest of 12,272 represents a variation of 19% and in eight of the remaining wards the variation is more than 10%. (These figures are even worse in 1976 ranging from 9,1^8 to 12,1*31, although the particular wards of Birkby and Birstall respectively do fall within the tolerances in the 1981 estimated figures) . Secondly, little regard seems to have been paid to the preservation of local communities. In numerous instances local communities have been split between two wards and in other instances parts of communities, or whole small communities, have been detached from areas with which they have a long standing affinity and placed with areas with which they have no affinity and little, if any, communication. This was so in the proposed Colne Valley West, Denby Dale, Kirkburton, Dewsbury South, Batley North, Birstall, Cleckheaton, Liversedge, Heckmondwike and Mirfield Wards. Further, the draft proposals produced wards which ran counter to the lines of natural and road communications. In their alternative scheme they had used these lines of communications to better advantage. The Labour Party was strongly against a Huddersfield Central Ward and criticised the shape of the proposed Paddock and Birkby Wards. They did not wish any alteration to the existing Wards, and therefore they were of the opinion that the final scheme should be as near as possible to the existing wards. 30. Councillor H. Senior, Leader of the Liberal Group on Kirklees Council, also represented various Liberal associations in Kirklees. He stated that Mr. E. Dunford, Secretary of the Colne Valley Division Liberal Association, would also represent Liberal Party views. Councillor Senior supported a 2k ward scheme and spoke of the geographical nature of Kirklees with its valleys and in places independent communities. The Liberals felt that communities should not be broken up but this would be inevitable if one stuck rigidly to constructing wards of equal numbers. Kirklees is not a uniformly built-up, urban, Metropolitan type of area, but includes extensive areas of a rural nature in between townships and settlements, some with only a small number of people. Ward boundaries should consist of natural boundaries like rivers, streams and water courses, and in some places railway lines, rather than main roads which tend to divide communities . - 12 -

Kirklees consists of two major areas, well defined and in many ways separate entities. These are based on Dewsbury in the north consisting of the former County Borough of Dewsbury, the former Borough of Batley and Spenborough and the former Urban Districts of Heckmondwike and Mirfield. The other area consists of the former County Borough of Huddersfield and the former Urban Districts adjoining it, namely Denby Dale, Kirkburton, Holmfirth, Meltham Call of which are now Parish Councils) and Colne Valley, for all of which Huddersfield is the focal point. There is a natural division between these two major areas consisting of a rural belt and the Liberals do not believe it is appropriate to construct wards across it. In the opinion of the Liberals the northern area (the old Heavey Woollen area and Spen Valley) should be divided into ten wards and the area based on Huddersfield into lU wards. They supported Labour's 2k ward scheme for the northern area and were opposed to the Commission's draft proposals mainly on the grounds that they carve up established communities, in particular in Ravensthorpe. With regard to the other area based on Huddersfield, they considered that neither the draft proposals of the Commission nor those of the Labour Party are appropriate. They, therefore, put forward their own scheme which produces not only compact wards but the districts covered by them stand together. Their scheme is based on existing polling districts which have always been together and usually have gone well together, and which are well understood by electors. Councillor Senior then referred to various ward proposals but I shall include these in the wards when they are considered individually later in this report.

31. KIRKBURTON/ALMONDBURY/DENBY DALE WARDS Mr. D. Billington and Mr. K. S . Moore represented the villagers of Shepley, a resolution to that effect having been passed at a Village Meeting on 12th January 1978, together with a further resolution "That the people of Shepley strongly oppose the Boundaries Commission's proposals to include Shepley in the Almondbury Ward and therefore propose that they remain in the Kirkburton Ward". These resolutions were supported by the signatures of 1019 persons who live in Shepley and as the village's total electorate is 1713 this means that 59.5% were in favour of the propositions. This resolution, supported by the 1019 signatures, is in addition to the petition from 705 residents which was sent to the Commission prior to the draft proposals being formulated. Mr. Billington could find no benefit in the proposed amalgamation of Shepley and Almondbury apart from the attempt to bring the average electorate per ward to 11,300. Many disadvantages were obvious making the proposals unacceptable if people are to be more important than politics and if people and names are to count for more than numbers. Mr. Billington had lived in Almondbury for over twenty years and in Shepley for twelve years and, therefore, knew both areas intimately. There was nothing wrong with Almondbury or its population, but it is suburban and town orientated as compared to Shepley which is completely rural and village orientated. The interests of the two are very diverse. There is no - 13 - direct "bus conmunication and for a forty-five minute meeting in Almondbury it could take three hours to accomplish. There is, in effect, no means of •reasonable public transport between Shepley and Almondbury. Shepley is an old established village, with an excellent 20th Century community spirit and has 28 independent organisations. Mr. Billington had carried out a straw inquiry at Almondbury and of some fifty people questioned only seven knew of Shepley and only three could explain how to get there. Kirkburton ward is made up of other villages very similar to Shepley and where their problems and way of life are appreciated. There are no geographical connections between Shepley and Almondbury, indeed Shepley is in a completely separate valley. There is, however, historical ecclesiastical affinity with Kirkburton as well as other daily links . Despite the fact that there was a Kirkburton Parish Council there had been no consultation stemming from the Kirklees Council with regard to the matter of boundary reorganisation. Contact with the various departments of the Kirklees Council was already most difficult as some of the services were administered from as far away as Dewsbury and Batley. People did not know where to contact departments and therefore readily available contact with Councillors was essential. If moved to the Almondbury ward, Shepley would still be part of Kirkburton Parish and it would be a natural result for that Council to lose interest in their area. Under the proposals of the Commission, Shepley would be left virtually without representation. It was noted that the various political parties had for- electoral purposes suggested they go into the Kirkburton, Denby Dale, Holme Valley or Almondbury wards. On the other hand, the people of Shepley merely wanted fair representation and a fair deal for their village. 32. Mr. K. S. Moore of Shepley stated that he was proposing an alternative scheme but was not submitting definitive boundary plans of suggested wards as his proposals were based on non-divided polling stations of which the Commission would have details already. He criticised the Council^ scheme and the Commission's draft proposals for splitting many of the existing polling stations and putting the parts into different wards. He considered this to be contrary to the rules set out in the Local Government Act 1972. Mr. Moore was also critical of the fact that Kirklees Council in drawing up their schemes had not had direct consultation with the Kirkburton Parish Council. He considered that section 6 of the Local Government Act 1972 required the District Council to confer with Parish Councils in their area and that public notice of the preparation of a scheme and inviting comments was insufficient consultation. Mr. Moore was also critical of the number of Councillors suggested, viz 72, As Kirklees was part of West Yorkshire, were all wards in each of the other Districts of West Yorkshire to have similar electorates? With regard to the electorate for a town's central ward he considered that purely on account of its commercial aspect it was bound to have less electors than residential wards. His proposals took account of this and his proposals for Huddersfield Central Ward showed only 7,959 electors with representa- tion by two Councillors only. Mr. Moore felt that historic or ecclesiastic boundaries should be used as ward boundaries as these had been in existence in many cases for a long time and were true, accepted and easily identifiable lines. On the question of local ties one had to have regard to ecclesiastic deaneries and he produced a schedule which indicated the relationship of various churches (C of E) in the former Kirkburton U.D.C. area with the relevant deaneries. Mr. Moore considered the area of Shepley had better representation on the former Kirkburton U.D.C. than it could possibly have under the new proposals. It was obvious that outsiders were pushing Shepley either to Denby Dale or to Almondbury, but the population of Shepley wished'to remain in Kirkburton ward. Mr. Moore put forward his alternative scheme which took account of the natural geographic divisions of the respective villages which constituted such an important part of the southern area of Kirklees. His scheme covered only the I1* wards in the southern area of Kirklees based on the old County Borough of Huddersfield, together with the additional areas incorporated to the south. Because his proposals allocated only two Councillors to his Central Ward, the spare Councillor could represent his proposed Kirkburton ward, which would include Shepley, and Farnley Tyas with an electorate of 13,33^, or a further alternative of the whole of the Kirkburton Parish Council with an electorate of 15,102. If this were not possible he felt that it would be better to transfer the Kirfceaton part of the Kirkburton Parish to Dalton Ward rather than move Shepley to Almondbury, Mr. Di'xon commented briefly on Mr. Moore's alternative scheme and said that, as suggested, it would result in "islands" of polling districts in at least two wards, viz. Primrose Hill in Crosland Ward and Ashenhurst in Huddersfield Central Ward. 33. In connection with Mr. Billington's evidence, Councillor Megahy pointed out that under present legislation a Councillor need not reside either before or after election in the ward which he represents on the District Council, so that Almondbury Ward Councillors would not necessarily reside in the Almondbury area of the ward merely because that is where the majority of the electorate lived. Councillor Megahy also criticised the production of an alternative scheme by Mr. Moore at the meeting, as other interested persons and bodies, some of whom were not present at the meeting, had not had the opportunity of examining it carefully. In reply to Mr. Dunford, Mr. Billington stated that the incorporation of Shepley in Denby Dale or Holme Valley South was preferable to Almondbury. Mr. Rhodes, of Kirkburton Parish Council, supported Mr. Billington's view with regard to a possible incorporation in Denby Dale, but Councillor Moore. a Kirkburton Ward Councillor, said that when there was a Boundary inquiry in 196l the inclusion of Shepley in Holmfirth or Denby Dale had been strongly resisted. 31*. Mr. J. Moore of Shepley spoke in support of the evidence given by Mr. Billington and Mr. K. S. Moore especially having regard to the resolution of the 1019 Shepley residents. - 15 -

35. I read the written comments of Mr. P. Unwin of Shepley who objected to the transfer of Shepley to Almondbury Ward. Mr. Unvin put forward some of the points made by Mr. Billington and also felt that it would be more difficult for a Councillor to serve a rural and urban area where there were differing and district outlooks and attitudes to the various problems which arise. Further there would be comfusion in the minds of electors by different boundaries for parish and metropolitan borough council wards. Mr. A. Belcher, for the Labour Party, pointed out that the Local Government Act 1972 did not differentiate between urban and rural areas .

36. Mr. P. Grainger of Shepley was not present at the meeting so I read his written comments. Although he does not agree with Kirkburton Parish Council's view that the parish should constitute a ward by itself (it is itself an artificial unit), he felt that essentially rural areas should not be grouped with urban areas and suggested an alternative scheme for Almondbury, Dalton and Kirkburton wards, as follows:- Mo. of Electorate Entitlement Ward Councillors 19T6 Almondbury (- parish wards of Shepley and Thurstonland and 11,709 3.10 Farnley Tyas, + electors south approx. of Wakefield Road)

Dalton (+ parish ward of Kirkheaton, 11,677 3.09 - electors south of Wakefield Road) approx

Kirkburton (- parish ward of Kirkheaton, + parish wards of 10, 2.78 Shepley and Thurstonland and Farnley Tyas)

Mr. Grainger considers that his proposals provide a more logical boundary between Almondbury and Dalton by using the Wakefield Road and would link Kirkheaton with Dalton with which it has much in common.

The Labour Party would not object to this proposal, although they preferred their own scheme. The Liberals thought the variant feasible and Councillor Cliffe, on behalf of the Council, would have no basic objection.

37. Mr. M. Waddington of Kirkheaton, a Kirkburton Parish Councillor, was not present at the meeting so I referred to his written comments. ...It was not possible to verify the figures he quoted in his variation of wards. His scheme envisaged the inclusion of Shepley in Denby Dale Ward instead of Almondbury.since representatives of Denby Dale were more likely to understand the problems of Shepley than the more urban area of Almondbury and that by avoiding the mix of rural and urban areas, the minimum of disruption and misunderstanding would arise.

The numerical effect of Mr. Waddington's uroposals is as follows:- 1976 Ward No. of Councillors Electorate Entitlement

Denby Dale 12,681* 3.36 (+ Shepley)

Almondbury 2.50 (- Shepley) - 16 -

Although Mr. Waddington does not say so, it is possible he intends Thurstonland and Farnley Tyas to be transferred from Almondbury which would affect the Almondbury figures still further. 38. Councillor G. Earnshaw, Chairman, Kirkburton Parish Council, stated that his Parish Council had not been consulted by the Kirklees Council vith regard to its proposals for the Kirkburton Ward and he felt that the communities in his area had not been considered. Kirkburton wished to remain as it is, but if numbers must dictate then reluctantly the majority of the Council felt it must be the Kirkheaton Parish ward which would have to go. In saying this he felt that if different wards of the Parish went into several wards of the District it would mean the break up of the Parish Council as it is now. It would be a blow to community relations if Thurstonland and Farnley lyas and Shepley Parish wards were transferred to Almondbury District ward. This-would mean the amalgamation of 2,600 rural electors with 8,500 mainly urban electors. Councillor Earnshaw referred to the petitions from residents in the Whitley Upper and Shepley Parish wards requesting to remain in Kirkburton ward. In reply to Councillor Cliffe, Councillor Earnshaw agreed that the proposed electorate for Denby Dale without Whitley Upper, Whitley Lower and would be low, 10,050, and therefore consideration might have to be given to Whitley Lower and Briestfield being included in Denby Dale, although this would create an "island" of electors separate from the rest of the ward. In reply to Councillor F. Pickles, Thornhill Ward, Councillor Earnshaw agreed that neither Briestfield nor Whitley Lower were part of Kirkburton Parish Council. In reply to Mr. Dunford, Councillor Earnshaw stated that Shepley did not wish to go with Denby Dale even though communications between the two were good. Councillor Ramsden pointed out that Councillor Earnshaw 's later possible attachments would affect the Labour Party's proposals for the Ravensthorpe area. 39. Mr. Ian Mercer, Clerk to the Kirkburton Parish Council also gave evidence in support of the Parish Council's proposals, which vary the Commission's draft proposals as follows :- (a) Shepley, Thurstonland and From Almondbury to Kirkburton Farnley Tyas (b) Kirkburton From Kirkburton to Dalton (c) Whitley Upper and Briestfield From Denby Dale to Kirkburton (d) Whitley Lower From Denby Dale to Dewsbury South (e) Part of Dalton From Dalton to Almondbury Mr . Dixon supplied the numbers of electorate for these changed areas, including the estimates for 1981:- 1976 1981 (a) 2,713 661 188 2,970 - IT -

The wards proposed would have electorates as follows:- 1976 1981 Almondbury 11,693 (+ 3.2%) 11,52^ (+ 2.6%) Kirkburton 11,221 (- 0.9%) 11,725 (+ ^ .k%) Dalton 11,693 ( + 3.2%) 11,302 (+ 0.6%) Denby Dale - 10,050 (- 11.35?) 10,7^* (- 5.1%) Dewsbury South 12,^73 (+ 10.1%) 11,638 ( + 3.6%)

Although not specified by the Kirkburton Parish Council it is assumed from the figures quoted that the variation of the Dalton and Almondbury wards would mean the use of the Wakefield Road referred to by Mr. Grainger in his proposals (Para. 36 of this Report) as the boundary.

Mr. Mercer said that although Briestfield did not form part of Kirkburton Parish, as at present constituted, it is essentially part of Grange Moor and should be included with the Whitley Upper ward. Less than 100 electors were involved,

Uo. Councillor G. Rushforth of Grange Moor and a Kirkburton Parish Councillor referred to the petition from 220 residents in the Whitley Upper Parish ward requesting that this area remain within the Kirkburton Ward and objecting to the proposal that it should be included in Denby Dale ward. The signatories do not accept that the proposed change would improve local elected representa- tion or make for more efficient local government. He stated there were no ties, local or geographical, between Grange Moor and the Denby Dale area, but there were with Lepton and Kirkheaton. He did not think that Briestfield should be linked with Dewsbury South.

1*1. A letter was read from the Yorkshire Parish Councils Association, stating that in the-interests of the rural community involved, the Kirkburton Parish Council's recommendations should be given favourable consideration.

U2. Mr. F. Appleyard, of Shepley, did not give evidence, but his written comments on the draft proposals were considered in conjunction with the other proposals for this area. He objected to the use of the name Denby Dale, considering that Skelmanthorpe was more appropriate. He thought that the proposed Denby Dale ward should not include the Flockton and Whitley areas for, apart from the fact that there is a green belt between the areas, there is no direct route by either road, rail, canal or river. He further objected to the inclusion of Shepley with Almondbury. It had more in common with-Kirkburton or Denby Dale. He then put forward his proposals which would have the following effects on the Commission's proposals, with figures supplied by Mr. Dixon:-

(a) Shepley From Almondbury to Denby Dale (b) Flockton and Whitley Upper From Denby Dale to Kirkburton (c) Whitley and Briestfield From Denby Dale to Dewsbury South (d) Undetermined area From Kirkburton to Almondbury - 18 -

Electorates 1976 1981 Ca) 1,713 1,789 (b) i,U95 1,509 Cc) 299 276 (d) X Y

Proposed Wards 1976 198l

Almondbury 9,U2U + X 9,^51 + Y Denby Dale 10,890 (- 3.9%) 11,597 (+ 3 Kirkburton 12,215 - X 12,600 - Y Dewsbury South 12,568 (+ 10.9JO 11,726 (+ k

U3. In order to bring the Almondbury electorate up to within 10$ of the average,"X" will have to equal at least 770. The three polling districts of Thurstonland and Farnley Tyas have a 1976 electorate of 915 which would do - but Mr. Appleyard would probably object to that. Because Kirkburton is a Parish which is warded it is not possible to split the parish wards adjoining Almondbury ward.

M*. The Labour Party scheme for this part of the District, which is supported by the Colne Valley Constitutency Labour Party, the Clayton West and Scissett Labour Party, the Skelmanthorpe Branch Labour Party, the Denby Dale Parish Council, and Mr. L. Rowling of Clayton West, is for Shelley to be linked with Denby Dale, with which it has educational and geographical links and a bus connection. Whitley Upper and Flockton would form part of the Kirkburton ward whilst Whitley Lower and Briestfield would form part of Dewsbury South (Thornhill) as they have no connection with Denby Dale. If Shelley is not to be included, Flockton could. The 198l projection would mean that the electorate would be satisfactory as regards numbers. Shepley, as in the Commission's proposals, would form part of Almondbury ward.

1*5. The Liberal Party proposed that Shepley should "be included with Holme Vftlipy Smith fHoiTuf-irth) it could, alternatively, be included with Denby Dale or remain with Kirkburton. If, however, it remained with Kirkburton, without other alteration, the Kirkburtcn ward would be too large. They considered that notonly should Kirkheaton remain with Kirkburton ward, but it should also include the Briggate polling district in the Dalton ward with which it is linked ecclesiastically. The Liberals also favoured Whitley Upper with the Kirkburton ward rather than the Commission's proposals to place it in the Denby Dale ward.

The Liberal Party proposal to include Flockton and Shelley in Denby Dale is simply to lift the numbers in the Denby Dale ward. They are, however, strongly opposed to Whitley Lower and Briestfield being included with Denby Dale since these form part of Dewsbury.

^6, Councillor A. A. Mason, Kirkburton Ward Councillor, stated that the people of Shelley would not wish to go into Denby Dale ward. - 19 -

. KIRKBURTON/DEWSBURY SOUTH WARDS

Uy. Councillor F. Pickles, Thornhill, on "behalf of the Kirklees No. 1 (Thornhill Ward) Labour Party, pointed out that in the Commission's proposals the villages of Whitley (20U) and Briestfield (95) were taken out of Thornhill (Dewsbury South) and put in Denby Dale, presumably to make up numbers. These villages were linked to Dewsbury educationally and communication-wise and there was no bus service to Denby Dale. The ward should be named Thornhill on account of its historical association with that name, U8. Mrs. N. Hodgkinson on behalf of the Thornhill No. 1 Ward Conservative Association agreed with Councillor Pickles re Whitley Lower and Briestfield with regard to their identification with Dewsbury and forming part of the Dewsbury South ward. The Ward Conservatives also considered that the River Calder should form the Ward boundary on the North-Western side rather than Huddersfield Road which split the Ravensthorpe community in two. U9. Councillor Cliffe said that the Kirklees Council would accept that Briestfield and Whitley Lower should be part of Dewsbury South. He also agreed that this ward might be renamed Thornhill. 50. Councillor Pickles queried the number of electors in 198l in the Commission's proposals for the Dewsbury South ward. The ward in Labour's original scheme showed an increase of 277 whilst the present proposals of the Commission showed a decrease of 8l9 for a larger ward. Their figures take known developments into account. There were no ties between Ravensthorpe and Dewsbury South, and it should not be included therein, even in part. 51. Councillor Senior, for the Liberal Party, said they were generally in agreement with the Labour Party scheme for the North-Eastern wards of the District and with the name of Thornhill for Dewsbury South. 52. Councillor A. Ramsden, Dewsbury Labour Party, said that in Labour's proposals for Thornhill (Dewsbury South) it had an electorate of 11,^60. As a result of known developments this number could well rise to 12,000. The Commission's proposals split the community of Ravensthorpe and they had no connection with Thornhill ward, 53. Councillor Megahy stated that the written comments made by the Dewsbury Constituency Labour Party were not being proceeded with. 5^. The written comment of the Dewsbury Civic Society was read. They objected to Whitley and Briestfield becoming part of Denby Dale ward; parts ,of Ravensthorpe becoming part of Thornhill ward; and parts of Dewsbury Moor becoming part of Heckmondwike.

DEWSBURY EAST/BATLEY SOUTH WARDS

55. Councillor C. C. Walker of Dewsbury supported his written comment that he objected to the Commission's proposals for Batley South and Dewsbury East wards on account of the boundary splitting of the area known as Hanging Heaton. This area had been splitin the past but not the community which inhabited the old part thereof. He was in agreement with the Labour Party scheme for a Batley East ward, instead of a Batley South, and this ward would consist of the present Kirklees ward 12, totalling 8,837, together - 20 - with Bennett Lane polling district (DV), part, 1,200 electors, All Saints polling district (DF), part, 263 electors, and the B.I polling district from existing Kirklees Ward No. 1^, 1,517 electors, giving a total for this ward of ll,8lT. This electorate is not dissimilar to the Commission's proposal for Batley South of 11,869. 56. Mr. J. S. Watson, Batley and Morley Constituency Labour Party, spoke in support of the written comments on the Commission's draft proposals. He was concerned with the existing 12, 13 and 1^ wards of the Kirklees Council. In their proposals for this area they had endeavoured to retain existing communities. In ward 12 the Commission's proposed boundary went through the middle of Old Hanging Heaton. In ward 13 the proposed boundary goes up Healey Lane and splits the Healey area, whilst in ward 1^ the district of Birstall is split in two - one side is in Birstall ward and the other in Batley North. The people of Batley have already been disturbed by Local Government reorganisation, and it is difficult to see why it is now necessary to split so many existing polling districts. In the Commission's draft proposals there are 91 parts of polling districts, including 9 for the area of Batley alone. The Labour Party's alternative scheme, however, contains only IT parts of polling districts and only U for the Batley area. 57. Mrs. Hodgkinson, representing Thornhill No. 1 Conservative Association, was concerned about the boundary of Batley South ward and Dewsbury East ward splitting the old area of Hanging Heaton. She considered that all Hanging Heaton should be in Dewsbury East ward and that it should not split the new estate as the Labour Party scheme did.

BIRSTALL/CLECKHEATON/HECKMOHDWIKE/LIVERSEDGE WARDS 58. Mr. R. Stone's written comments were read. He is in favour of Birstall remaining within a single ward in view of its community and historical associations, and also that the name of the ward should remain, Birstall. He proposed that the Birstall ward should include all the Birstall ward of the former Batley Municipal Borough, together with polling districts BE, BF and the Smithies Moor area of BG, of the former North ward of Batley M.B., and those parts of Gomersall from which Birstall is most easily accessible. The remaining parts of Gomersal and Birkenshaw should be included in the proposed Liversedge, Heckmondwike"and Cleckheaton wards where they more logically belong, and which are below average size in the Commission's draft proposals. Mr. Stone did not provide a map illustrating his proposals for the Birstall ward but from his description of the areas involved (expressed in terms of polling districts) it would seem that they closely resemble the proposals made by the Labour Party. It does not seem possible to vary the Commission's draft proposals by incorporating Mr. Stone's suggestions without alterations to several neighbouring wards, viz Cleckheaton, Heckmondwike, Batley North, Batley South, Dewsbury East and Dewsbury West. His proposed alterations would require a comprehensive scheme. 59. Mr. Watson, Batley and Morley Constituency Labour Party, considered that Gomersal was properly aligned with Cleckheaton and Heckmondwike, as in the Labour Party proposals, rather than with Birstall, as in the Commission's proposals, and with which there was little affinity. - 21 -

60. The Cleckheaton, Liversedge and Heckmondwike, Gomersal and Birkenshaw Branches of the Labour Party were not represented. Their written comments were read. These included the comment that the linking of Birstall with Birkenshaw and Gomersal as proposed by the Commission was inadvisable since this new vard vould have no established framework or commonality and as such vould be detrimental to these communities' involvement in local government. 61. Councillor Megahy supported the Branches Y observation regarding the proposed linking up of Gomersal and Birstall and added that Gomersal should be with Cleckheaton and Heckmondwike with which they had always been associated. He stated that the information in the Branches' written comment regarding Fyenthall and Ashbourne estates was inaccurate and should be disregarded. 62. The letter from the No. lU Ward-Members Branch Labour Party was read. They object to the Birstall community being split in two and claimed there was no affinity between Birstall and Tong (Birkenshaw). 63. A written comment from Mr. C. Ball was read. He objected to the proposed changes in the Spenborough area for they completely disregarded historic, natural and identifiable boundaries and if implemented he considered they would be detrimental to the community. He suggested no alternative scheme for the area, 6U. Councillor S. Thornton had submitted a written plea for the use of the name Gomersal and not Birstall as the appropriate ward name. He forwarded a letter from the Brighouse and Spenborough Constituency Conservative Association in support of his plea and also a Report of a Survey prepared .by the Planning Division, Directorate of Architecture, Planning and Development, Kirklees Council, in connection with a draft Conservation Area for Gomersal. This latter document included historical evidence supporting his plea. One of the points made "by the Conservative Association was that as part of Birstall is outside the ward of that name in the Commission's proposals and the whole of Gomersal lies within it, inevitable confusion would be caused by the use of the name Birstall. 65. Both.the Labour and Liberal Parties' spokesmen said they were in favour of the use of the name Birstall rather than Gomersall and Councillor Cliffe for the Council had no comment. 66. Councillor Senior spoke on behalf of the Spenborough Liberal Association, who had submitted a written comment which was read to the Meeting, and confirmed that the Liberals did not like the Commission's draft proposals which were based on the Conservative controlled Council's scheme. They preferred, if there had to be still further change, the Labour Party's 2U Ward scheme for the Northern part of Kirklees. > 67. Councillor Me^ahy referred to the Labour Party's proposal for the naming of the ward "Hightown", rather than "Liversedge" as in the Commission's proposals, on account of their scheme including the Liversedge electorate in the Heckmondwike Ward, and Hightown was consequently the logical name for the ward, being based on the Hightown area. He also pointed out that their scheme took the area known as Scholes into the suggested Hightown ward rather than Cleckheaton as proposed. - 22 -

MIRFIELD/HECKMONDWIKE/DEWSBURY WEST WARDS 68, Councillor Megahy for the Mirfield Labour Party said they appreciated they would have to shed, regrettably, some of the present electorate of the Mirfield ward if the scheme was to be based purely on equality of electorate per 2k wards, and their suggestions were "based on this. Also, they had regard to the expected 198l figures. Councillor Megahy repeated the views of his Party with regard to a probable increase of electorate as recorded in Paragraph 26 of this report. His proposals would result in some 2,000 voters going into the Dewsbury West ward, whilst the Commission's proposals would result in approximately 1,^00 voters going into Heckmondwike ward. He stated that there was a natural green belt between Mirfield and Heckmondwike and there was no through road link. Communications are with Dewsbury, not Heckmondwike. • By transferring part of the electorate to Dewsbury West this part would be joined up with Ravensthorpe with which it has natural links already. The Mirfield Labour Party were not averse to the area North-West of the A.62 road being added to the Liversedge ward in the Commission's proposals, or in Hightown in their own-scheme. The electorate involved was 65 in 1976 and 60 in 1981. The Kirklees Council had set up five Area Care schemes. Under this, Mirfield is linked with Dewsbury, whilst Heckmondwike is linked with Batley in another area. Variations as proposed by the Commission would cause great confusion in the minds of the electorate affected and would also have- the effect of causing the Heckmondwike Councillors to attend two Area Care meetings. 69. The Labour Party proposals would result in the following changes to the Commission's proposals:-

„ m Electorate ^2E 22. 1976" 1951 (a) Parts of Northorpe Heckmondwike Mirfield 796 733

(b) Parts of Eastthorpe Mirfield Dewsbury . Q,Q . ggg and Northorpe West * ' The resultant wards would then have the following electorates, amending the Commission's proposals:- 1976 1981 Mirfield 11,2^6 11,138 Dewsbury West 13,927 13,1^1 Heckmondwike 9,91& 9,6ll Incorporating in the Labour scheme the amendment of transferring the electorate North-West of the A.62 road from Mirfield to Hightown would result as follows:-

1976 1981 0 Mirfield 11.2U6 11,138 Hightown 11,787 11,791 - 23 -

TO.- Councillor Cliffe stated that the Council's Area Care Scheme had been drawn up on the existing wards and could "be varied if required. Councillor Cliffe called Councillor Mrs. M. Wood, as representative for the Mirfield ward, who said that the Council's proposals, which had "been adopted "by the Commission, had used the boundary of the old Mirfield Urban District Council as the ward boundary and that alterations had been kept to a minimum. With regard to Councillor Megahy's forecast of an increase in the electorate by 1981 Councillor Wood said there was now resistance to high density development in Mirfield and she felt the Council's later estimates should be followed. Councillor Wood was of the opinion that the links between Mirfield and Ravensthorpe were not as strong as previously, and that whilst there were good shopping facilities in Mirfield, should anyone require large items for the house they may be attracted to Leeds, Bradford or Huddersfield, but not necessarily to Dewsbury. She was also of the opinion that parents of some schoolchildren wished to send their children to schools in Heckmondwike rather than Dewsbury. Councillor Megahy pointed out that this was because there were still selective schools in Heckmondwike but not in Devsbury. Further, the school catchment areas had been chosen as reflecting community boundaries. With regard to communications Councillor Wood felt it was not too difficult to travel either to Heckmondwike or Huddersfield via the A.62. 71. Councillor Cliffe called Councillor B. Eley, ward Councillor for Mirfield, who lived in Mirfield and who had also lived in Ravensthorpe. He fully supported the Commission's draft proposals for the area as a whole on account of geographical and community interests. 72. Councillor Senior for the Dewsbury Liberals said that they would have preferred Mirfield Ward to have remained as it is now, but if alterations are necessary then the parts of Northorpe 1 and Northorpe 2 polling districts should be added to Dewsbury West and not Heckmondwike as in the Commission's proposals. This would affect the wards as follows:- 1976 Electorate 1981 Electorate Heckmondwike 9,676 9,387 Dewsbury West' 13,3l8 13,OU8 73. The written comment of Mr. J. Hutchinson of Mirfield was also considered He objects to the community known as Lower Northorpe being split between Mirfield and Heckmondwike wards. That part in the Heckmondwike ward has little in common with Keckmondwike and the rest of that ward from which it is separated by a green belt, nor is there a direct road link or bus link. Lower Northorpe looks to Mirfield for some things and to Ravensthorpe for others. Mr. Hutchinson considers that Pinching Dyke which has been used as a boundary of the old Mirfield U.D.C. should be used as the boundary between Lower Northorpe and Heckmondwike. The effect on the electorates would "be as follows:- Northorpe 1 and 2 Polling Districts (part) From Heckmondwike to Mirfield 1976 1981 1,038 957 Heckmondwike 9,676 9,387 Mirfield 13,318 13,0^8

Mr. Hutchinson's further alternative scheme is the same as enunciated by the Dewsbury Liberals in Paragraph 72 of this Report. 7^. The Mirfield Civic Society also made written comment and this was read at the Hearing. They considered that the proposals broke up existing communities, particularly in their relationship to Mirfield. They suggested, (a) the retention of the present ward boundaries which are geographically sound and related to the town map (Development Plan). Should this lead to an unbalanced electoral representation then they suggest (b) the linking of Ravensthorpe with Mirfield.

Without more detailed definition it was impossible to know the exact proposals of the Society, but it was obvious to those at the meeting that they could not be viewed in isolation.

COLNE VALLEY WEST/GQLCAR/PADDOCK WARDS 75. Councillor Senior and the Colne Valley Division Liberal Association did not agree with the Commission's proposals with regard to Linthwaite, which was included as to part in Colne Valley West ward and as to part in Golcar ward. This was the result of taking the ward boundary as the Manchester Road (Linthwaite) instead of the River Colne which should be used and so keep the community of Linthwaite together. They further suggested that the area of polling district Slaithwaite 5, electorate 171, should go into Golcar ward as it was part of the Golcar ecclesiastical parish and has stronger association with Golcar than Slaithwaite. Linthwaite Zl polling district was part of the old Huddersfield constituency, was in Milnsbridge Kuddersfield, and was not linked with Colne Valley. The Liberals therefore considered this area should be linked with Crosland rather than with Golcar ward as in the Commission's proposals and as agreed by the Labour Party scheme. 76. Councillor Mrs. J. Smith considered that as there was a Colne Valley West ward in the proposals there should be a Colne Valley East ward also, and this name should be used, as proposed by the Labour Party, instead of the name Golcar. 77. Mr. Belcher, for the Labour Party, did not agree with the Liberals that polling district Slaithwaite 5 should go into Golcar ward. It should remain in Colne Valley West ward as proposed by the Commission. He did suggest, however, that Longwood Gate polling district (1,^52 electors) should be in Golcar ward, and this was agreed by the Liberals, but Councillor Cliffe, for the Council, did not agree and said it should go into Paddock ward as proposed by the Commission. 78. The Liberals considered that Paddock ward should be re-drawn - in shape it was like a boomerang - but Councillor Cliffe said it had been in existence since 1973 and there had been no objections. Councillor Megahy, for the Labour Party, said this ward was all tied up with the principle of a Huddersfield Central ward.

HUDDERSFIELD CENTRAL WARD

79. Councillor Cliffe, for the Council, said they considered that a Huddersfield Central ward was essential. Originally there had been a village called Huddersfield circumscribed by roads just as there was now a central area, or core, of the administrative area of Kirklees, and this too was circumscribed by roads. It was still an identifiable area, with its Churches and a YMCA residential centre. There had always been Huddersfield named wards and the name should be retained.

80. Councillor Megahy called Mr. E. Moorhouse, a member of the Huddersfield East Labour Party. He outlined the history of Huddersfield, how the central wards had changed over the years and that whilst the ten areas which had formed Huddersfield in 1868 had provided a communal life and the community spirit still existed in the other areas, the.long standing community in the Huddersfield Central area had been split and indeed the proposed boundaries of the Commission split them. The children who lived in the area would have no school in its boundary - they would have to go to one of the 17 primary schools and 5 comprehensive schools in the adjoining areas. With regard to the Churches and the cultural areas, the people who attend are not usually associated with the area. He felt that the ward proposed by the Commission was contrary to the criteria for wards. Community spirit where it exists should be maintained - the Fartown community would be split by the proposals. In the Labour Party proposals the whole of this area would be in their Newsome ward. Primrose Hill which is included in the Commission's proposals for a Central Ward has no connection therewith and should be included in their Newsorae ward. He supported the Labour Party scheme covering the Central area, the numbers in the various suggested wards being more equal than in the Commission's scheme.

81. Councillor R. Hartley also spoke in support of the Labour Party proposals and against a Huddersfield Central ward. He considered the Commission's proposal were hybrid with some parts of the ward up to two miles from the Central Area. The history of Huddersfield has shown a lessening of the need for a Central Ward and particularly since 1938. Lindley, Paddock and Birkby wards come very close to the centre and, if Huddersfield Central ward is taken out, the Labour Party proposals should be followed. His party was also concerned with the split in the existing voluntary services entailed in the splitting of no less than U5 polling districts of the old Huddersfield C.B. in the Commission's draft proposals as compared with only two splits in the Labour Party's alternative scheme. He considered that Newsome was an area with community interests and was not really a part of Huddersfield Central.

82. Mr. Dunford, for the Liberals, said there was no longer a cohesive community right in the centre of Huddersfield, The two central wards in the old County Borough of Huddersfield did not represent communities at all latterly and had become anachronisms. People living in the outlying areas of the proposed Central Ward would still consider themselves members of the adjoining, communities , rather than of a central community. One could discount the YMCA which only had eight electors on the current Voters List. - 26 -

They considered it was unnecessary to construct a ward purely to retain the name of Huddersfield. The areas covered by Polling Districts Primrose Hill, Lockwood, Newsome, Berry Brow and Armitage Bridge, which had been included in Huddersfield Central ward should form part of their proposed ward Lockwood and Newsome,

83. Councillor Cliffe said that in drawing up the Central Ward they had to have regard to electoral numbers, and consequently had brought in some of the outlying areas, but existing Ward 7 on which it was based consisted of those round the town centre, viz. the old Huddersfield North Central, Huddersfield South Central and Newsome wards.

8U. Mr. K. S. Moore, Estate Agent with premises in Huddersfield, thought that the commercial centre should be represented by a Ward Councillor so that that Councillor might be lobbied in connection with Central Area problems Councillor Megahy considered that Central Area problems would be dealt with by the appropriate Committee Members from wherever they came.

85. Mr. K. Bates, Agent for the Huddersfield Conservative Association, considered that as the names Colne Valley, Batley, Mirfield and Dewsbury had been retained so should the name Huddersfield. Huddersfield is recognised for a particular type of cloth.

CROSLAND WARD

86. Councillor Megahy called Mr. S. Dawson, an ex-Councillor for the Lockwood ward, who had submitted a written comment himself and who also represented the Lockwood and Crosland Moor Ward Labour Party Committee, which had also submitted a written comment. Lockwood was at one time a complete township and still retained some feeling as regards this. The 1930 slum clearance programme had caused a transference of the population from central Huddersfield, and as a result community interests had been set up .in the areas to which they moved, to the detriment of the central area of Huddersfield. The Commission's proposals sought to bring them back into the central area and the old Lockwood area'was to be incorporated into Huddersfield Central. Lockwood P.I. Polling Station area was to be split as to 1,663 electors in the Central Ward and as to 510 in Crosland ward. This area has an affinity with Crosland, has voted with them since 1973 and the whole of this area, 2,173 electorate, should be in the proposed Crosland ward as in the Labour Party scheme. The Labour Party also considered that Berry Brow and Armitage Bridge had little to do with Crosland and should be in Newsome ward as suggested in their scheme. The effect of these two suggestions on the Commission's proposals would be as follows:- Electorate From From 1976 1981 (a) Lockwood P.(l) part Central Crosland 1,663 1,52U (b) Armitage Bridge and Crosland Central 1,882 1,786 Berry Brow The amended wards would be as follows:- Huddersfield Central 11,759 11,571 Crosland 11,685 12,500 87. A written comment by Mr. S. Chadwick, Crosland Moor, was read. He objected to the Commission's proposals on two grounds:-

(a) The ward should be called Crosland Moor and not Crosland, and (b) The proposals for the ward of Crosland included the areas Taylor Kill and Newsome with the areas, of Crosland Moor with which they had nothing in common, and were a long distance apart.

88. The Liberals had included the Crosland Moor side of Milnsbridge and also areas of the former Lockwood ward which adjoin Crosland Moor, and the districts of Thornton Lodge and Rushcliffe, which they considered to be the most logical place for them.

89. With regard to the name of the proposed Crosland ward and Mr. Chadwick's objection, Councillor Cliffe considered the ward was now wider than Crosland Moor and should retain the name Crosland, Councillor Megahy said Labour had no strong feelings on the name, whilst Mr. Dunford said the Liberals were in favour of Crosland Moor and their scheme had incorporated this name. 90. In connection with the Mount Pleasant area, Councillor Cliffe agreed with the Labour Party proposals that the whole of this electoral area, 0, should be included in one ward, viz. the Central ward, as opposed to the Labour scheme which included it in their Newsome ward. This would reduce the numbers in Crosland ward by 833, but this would be even more significant in 1981 owing to possible development.

ALMONDBURY/DALTON WARDS 91. Mr. Dunford said that in the Almondbury ward the Liberals thought Ashenhurst and all of Storths should be included, rather than Brockholes, part of Berry Brow and Shepley as proposed by the Commission, giving an electorate of about 10,700. In the Dalton ward they suggested all of Moldgreen, as it was nearly impossible to say which was Dalton and which was Moldgreen. They would exclude Briggate from Dalton ward and link it with Kirkburton owing to historical and ecclesiastical associations. This would give an electorate for Kirkburton of 10,700 approximately, and for Dalton 11,700 approximately. 92. In connection with their proposed Lockwood and Newsome ward they suggest retaining the old parts of Lockwood ward plus Primrose Hill from the old South Central ward. This would give an electorate of 11,071 in 1976.

HOLME VALLEY NORTH/HOLME VALLEY SOUTH WARDS 93. The Liberals had included Shepley with Holme Valley South (named Holmfirth by them) and consequently had suggested that Netherthong should remain with their Honley and Meltham ward. They had no objection to Netherthong being included in Holme Valley South ward if Shepley went elsewhere. 9**. Councillor Megahy, for the Labour Party, agreed the areas of Holme Valley North and Holme Valley South as proposed by the Commission. - 28 -

DEIGHTON WARD

95. Dealing with the wards between Liversedge and Colne Valley Vest, Mr. Dunford, for the Liberals, said there were no existing "wards which could be retained. In the case of Deighton ward they had added the Cowcliffe ward, including Fixby, only to bring the numbers up to 11,300. Councillor Hartley pointed out that to reach Cowcliffe from Deighton it would be necessary to cross Birkby ward. Councillor L. K. Parfitt, Kirklees Council, pointed out that the Liberal proposal to include Cowcliffe in Deighton ward would mean that the community and ecclesiastical parish would be split between two wards and, further, the Commission's proposals sensibly used the Bradford Road, a dual carriageway road, as ward boundaries as this divided the community already. The Liberals' proposals spread across this major road. Mr. Dunford admitted there would be difficulties in including Cowcliffe with Deighton.

BIRKBY/PADDOCK/LINDLEY

96. Mr. Dunford said that Birkby and Fartown had always been linked together especially as it is difficult to say where one ends and the other begins. They had also added the polling districts of Kirkgate, Town Hall and Northgate from the central area to give an electorate for this ward of 11,089. 97. Marsh and Paddock had a history of being two former County Borough wards and the Liberals had added Hollin Carr to give an electorate of 10,600 approx. 98. In the Lindley ward the Liberals had included the whole of Salendine Nook polling district instead of splitting it as in the Commission's proposals. Part however could be included in their Marsh and Paddock Ward. 99. Mr. Dunford said that the Liberals had included Outlane, which was divided by the M.62 motorway, in their Golcar ward rather than partly with Paddock and partly with Lindley as in the Commission's proposals. Councillor Parfitt on the other hand thought that it should not go with Golcar. Councillor Parfitt also considered that, owing to the main road pattern in the area, it was better that part of the Marsh area should go into the Lindley ward and part into the Paddock ward with a small part into the Birkby ward, rather than as the Liberals proposed the whole to go into a Marsh and Paddock ward. 100. With regard to the names of the wards, Mr. Dunford for the Liberals said they preferred Honley and Meltham to Holme Valley North as Meltham was not in Holme Valley. The Labour Party, on the other hand, wished to "marry" Honley and Meltham Parish Councils so agreed with the name Holme Valley North for the ward name. Mr. Dunford stated that other joint names for ward names had been used because the areas mentioned in the titles were practically equal or associated with one another. Councillor Cliffe noted that the Liberals used Lockwood and Newsome for 'one of their wards but he agreed with Mr. Dawson that there was a natural affinity between Lockwood and Crosland. Mr. Dunford, in answer to Councillor Cliffe, said the Liberals felt it desirable to maintain the name Holmfirth as a ward name, but that it was not essential to maintain the name of Huddersfield. - 29 -

INSPECTION

101. I acquainted myself with the area "before the meeting "by touring round the several wards and making myself familiar with the points which had been raised in the written comments. In view of the further evidence given at the meeting I returned to the area of the Kirklees Council on another occasion to look at further districts which had "been the subject of disagreement at the meeting. At the conclusion of these inspections I felt I was sufficiently knowledgeable of the area to make any necessary recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS 102. It was apparent from the mere reading of the alternative schemes, which had been submitted to the Commission, that if "the ratio of the number of local government electors to the number of Councillors to be elected shall be , as nearly as may be, the same in every ward of the district", as laid down in the Local Government Act 1972, Schedule 11, para. 3(2)(a), then by moving one or more electoral polling district or districts from one ward to another ward it would have a ripple effect which would have to be followed through the other wards . This effect has become even more apparent when one has to take into account a possible combination of proposals for the same ward. Even the desirability of avoiding the breaking of local ties is subordinated to this. There is nothing in the Act or the rules about not including different communities, or even par i shes , having no ties with each other in one ward, or about keeping all wards of one parish in the same district ward; on the contrary, rule 3(2) (b) in Schedule 11 of the 1972 Act which reads, "(b) in a district every ward of a parish ...... having a parish council ...... shall lie wholly within a single ward of the district", must have in contemplation that different parish wards may be in different district wards. Nor is there anything about rural areas not being joined with urban areas even though' the urban area electorate outweighs the rural electorate. Nor even that road communication between two parts of a ward is indirect or that there is no bus service between the two parts, or that one part of a ward is separate from the other by a green belt . 103. There are indeed two areas of discretion. First the Commission are only required to adhere to the rules, "so far as reasonably practical." Secondly, the ratio has only to be the same, "as nearly as may be". In my opinion these two areas of discretion do not permit the Commission, and consequently myself, to subordinate the same ratio rule to factors of the kind mentioned in the preceding paragraph, which are common factors over much of England and not peculiar to the Kirklees area. If Parliament had wished the Commission to have regard to such factors as a general rule, it would have said so, as it has done in relation to breaking local ties, though, as I have said, even this is subordinated to the same ratio rule. This is not to say that all factors should not be examined in each individual case. They should be, and I have considered all the arguments put to me in relation to their own particular facts, but this general background must affect the weight that is given to factors such as I have described and shows that the same ratio rule cannot be disregarded. There are in fact limits to which one can go. - 30 -

105. Before leaving the general background I should refer to the arguments put before me on the subject of estimating the 198l electorate as described in paragraphs 25 and 26 and referred to by various speakers in paragraphs 5, 52, 68 and TO. Estimating population, and consequently electorates, is at the best of times a rather difficult and uncertain art and, with a difficult economic background such as we have recently experienced, more than ever so. In a district ward it is made more difficult by the fact that an unexpected change of planning policy, or a substantial planning appeal success, or the degree of activity of a large builder, can produce substantial changes . In my opinion the Officers of the Council have obviously taken a good deal of trouble to try to arrive at as good estimates as reasonably possible, using later base figures than those used for the Council's former 27 ward scheme, which were followed by the Labour Party in the main in their estimates, and in my opinion the methods the Councils officials used were as likely to give as reliable predictions as any other reasonable method. They may therefore be relied on by the Commission. 106. There was only one suggestion, and that was by Mr. K. S, Moore in presenting his alternative scheme for the central area of Huddersfield, referred to in paragraph 32, that the number of Councillors for some wards might not be the same. This, of course, is not possible, for Section 6(2)(b) of the Local Government Act 1972 states that, "For the purposes of the election of Councillors every metropolitan district shall be divided into wards, each returning a number of councillors which is divisible by three." 107. In connection with the evidence given by Councillor G. Earnshaw, Chairman, and Mr. Ian Mercer, Clerk, Kirkburton Parish Council (paragraphs 38 and 39) relating to the Kirkheaton parish ward of the Kirkburton Parish Council being linked with Dalton if numbers of electorate were to be paramount in a decision, I received subsequent to the meeting a letter signed by the four Parish Councillors for Kirkheaton, one of whom is Mr. M. Waddington whose comment to the Commission is referred to at paragraph 37 above, stating that they wished to object in the strongest possible terms to any such suggestion, especially as the suggestion had been made in order that Shepley might be included in a Kirkburton district ward. In fairness to Councillor Earnshaw and Mr. Mercer they did point out in giving evidence that it was not the unanimous wish of the Kirkburton Parish Council that Kirkheaton might be linked with Dalton. Nor do I consider that such a combination would pre-empt the whole future of a community and its associations. The future of parish boundaries and parish councils will involve consideration of much wider criteria in the interests, to use the words of section ^7 of the 1972 Act, of effective and convenient local government. I desire to make it quite clear that no recommendation which I make in this report on district electoral wards should be taken as pre-empting any later decisions on parish boundaries and councils. These must be judged on their ovn merits in accordance with the criteria laid down for them. 108. To a certain extent consideration of the alternative schemes was made easier by the Labour Party's acceptance of a 2U ward scheme to fit in with the proposals for a 92 member West Yorkshire County Council, for which there would be l6 County electoral divisions in the ration of 1 : li to the number of wards in Kirklees . - 31 -

109. The Labour Party proposals had merit in that to a certain extent the wards they produced vere "based on the existing wards, although this was not always possible as the present electorate ranges from 6,852 for Ward No. 19 to 1^,829 for Ward No. 23. The average ward electorate is 11,328 and the Labour Party alternative scheme varies from 9,992 for Holme Valley North to 12,158 for Batley West. The Commission's draft proposals, which incorporate alterations to the Holme Valley North, Crosland and Almondbury wards of the Council's scheme, range from 9,7^8 for Birkby to 12,U31 for Birstall ward. All these figures are for 1976. It is, however, expected that the Birkby ward would improve by 198l by having an electorate of 10,^99. The "boundaries of some of their proposed wards are conditioned seemingly "by the major road. A.62, which runs through Kirklees, whereas a nearby river might have been used just as well without a community being severed.

The Liberals 'proposals in the main covered the former County Borough of Huddersfield and the former Urban Districts of Denby Dale, Kirkburton, Holmfirth, Meltham and Colne Valley, although they made suggestions for the remaining areas of Kirklees many of which were similar to those proposed by the Labour Party.

110. In order to achieve its draft proposals the Commission have had to split many existing electoral polling districts resulting in 95 parts in various wards, whereas the Labour scheme only results in l8 parts and for their lU ward proposals the Liberals do not split any.

111. The pattern of the wards in the former County Borough of Huddersfield area depends almost entirely on whether there is a need for a Central ward. I listened most carefully to all the arguments put forward by Councillor Cliffe and his supporters on the one hand, and by Councillor Megahy and his supporters and by Councillor Senior and Mr. Dunford on the other hand, and have given much thought to this issue before coming to a conclusion. Despite a feeling of regret at the use no longer of the_name Huddersfield as a ward name, I am inclined to the view, partly by the fact that there are few residents left in the mainly commercial area and partly by the fact that those who do remain do not form a community as such, that it is now an anachronism to retain a Central Ward. I do not accept Mr. Moore's argument that commercial interests should be represented by a Councillor. He was not talking about the electorate in the commercial zone. The electorate living in the commercial area should be linked with wards which spread further afield. I shall deal with the warding of this area when I deal with the particular wards.

112. Some suggestions put forward appeared on the face of them to be very attractive and especially when the wards involved fell within the required numerical constraint, but when one looked at the next wards in the jigsaw, the suggestions were then found to be unacceptable as they seriously affected the remaining wards and their possible combinations .

113. I shall now deal with the wards, some jointly, some severally.

Kirkburton/Almondbury/Dalton/Denby Dale/Dewsbury South

This area caused the largest number of alternatives to be put forward and it appeared that few seemed to be satisfied with the draft proposals. This was mainly due to the road pattern in the area, also the geographical pattern, - 32 -

but most of all to the linking of rural communities with urban communities . The residents of Shepley had not only raised a 705 name petition, but 1019 persons had also signed a resolution that they did not wish to be linked with Almondbury. 220 residents of the Whitley Upper parish ward had also forwarded a petition that they wished to remain in Kirkburton ward and not join the Denby Dale ward. No doubt other parts of the area would have raised petitions or attended the meeting if they had thought the draft proposals might be altered. Indeed these views were expressed by the Parish Councillors of Kirkheaton in their letter sent after the meeting. 11U. I take into account all that was said and written and come to the following conclusions:- (1) The alternative scheme put forward by Mr. K. S. Moore cannot be adopted for the reason set out in paragraph 106 above. (2) The suggestion of Mr. P. Grainger that the Wakefield Road should form the boundary between Almondbury ward and Dalton ward found a fair amount of agreement between the major parties, if indeed the ward boundaries were to be altered. I agree with this suggestion and shall recommend accordingly. (3) Having regard to the placement of Whitley Lower, Briestfield, Whitley Upper and Flockton, I felt I could not accept the other suggestions put forward by Mr. Grainger, and mentioned in paragraph 36, in isolation. (U) Mr. Waddington in paragraph 37 was concerned that Shepley should not be • with Almondbury. His suggestion was that it should be with Denby Dale whose representatives would understand rural problems better. He did not suggest that Shepley should be in Kirkburton ward. If he had, this would have meant another Kirkburton parish ward - possible Kirkheaton where he lives and represents on the Parish Council - leaving the fold. Mr. Waddington also did not mention whether Thurstonland and Farnley Tyas, another rural area, should be taken out of Almondbury. His positive suggestion re Shepley would result in an overloaded Denby Dale ward and an underloaded Almondbury, and therefore I cannot accept his suggestion in isolation. (5) I accept the arguments put forward by Councillor Earnshaw, Mr. Mercer, Councillor Rushforth, Mr. Appleyard, Mr. Rowling, the Denby Dale Parish Council, the Labour Party and the Liberal Party that Whitley Upper should not be in Denby Dale ward but should be with Kirkburton ward, and I shall recommend accordingly. (6) Despite the comments of Councillor Mason, I accept the proposals of the Labour Party and its branches, the Denby Dale Parish Council, Mr. Rowling and the Liberal Party, that Shelley should be linked with Denby Dale through its educational and geographical links and bus communication. I shall recommend accordingly. (7) I accept the proposals of the Labour Party and its branches, the Denby Dale Parish Council, Mr. Rowling and Mr. Appleyard that as there is little connection between Flockton and Denby Dale, Flockton should be in Kirkburton ward. I shall so recommend. The Liberals had only placed Flockton in Denby Dale ward on account of numbers. - 33 -

(8) I accept the views put forward regarding Whitley Lower and Briestfield by the Labour Party and its Thornhill ward branch, the Thornhill No. 1 ward Conservative Association and Councillor Cliffe on behalf of Kirklees Council that as they-were closely linked with Dewsbury they should be included in Dewsbury South ward. I shall recommend accordingly. (9) I accept the arguments put forward by Mr. Billington and Mr. Moore, on behalf of the residents of Shepley, supported by Mr. Unwin and Mr. Grainger, that Shepley, along with Thurstonland and Farnley Tyas, should be included in the.Kirkburton ward rather than the Almondbury ward. I shall so recommend. (10) Mainly because of numbers, but also because of its links with the adjoining area of Dalton, and its more urban atmosphere, and also because the Kirkburton Parish Council itself felt that, if any part of its area was to be separated from it, it should be the Kirkheaton ward, I consider that Kirkheaton should form part of the Dalton ward. I shall so recommend. (11) At the meeting there was no support for Mr. Appleyard's suggestion that the Denby Dale ward should be called Skelmanthorpe. I shall" recommend that no change in name be made. (12) I do not consider the alternative scheme for the 1^ southern wards put up by Mr. K. S. Moore to be a practical one. In two instances . the polling districts were separated from the wards to which they belonged. (13) I do not consider the alternative scheme put forward by Mr. Appleyard, for the Almondbury, Denby Dale, Kirkburton and Dewsbury South wards, to be a practical one. There are too many unknown factors.

115. Kirkburton/Devsbury South Cl) There was unanimity amongst those present that the ward proposed to be named Dewsbury South should be renamed Thornhill through its historical associations with that name. I shall recommend accordingly. (2) .1 have already referred to Whitley Lower and Briestfield becoming part of Dewsbury South ward instead of Denby Dale ward. See paragraph 11M8) of this report. (3) I accept the view of Councillor Pickles, supported by Mrs. Hodgkinson, Councillor Ramsden and the Devsbury Civic Society that the part of ' Ravensthorpe included in the Commission's draft proposals for Dewsbury South had little or no connection with Dewsbury South area, and should be excluded therefrom. The ward boundary in the Ravensthorpe area should be the River Calder as appeared in the Labour Party scheme and supported by Mrs. Hodgkinson on behalf of the Conservatives of Thornhill ward, and by the Liberals. I shall recommend accordingly. Although both Councillor Pickles and Councillor Ramsden queried the 198l electorate figures for Devsbury South vard, for the reasons given in paragraph 105 above, I am satisfied that the Council's more recent estimates might be followed.

(5) In connection with the comment of Devsbury- Civic Society that parts of Devsbury Moor vere to become part of Heckmondwike vard, in the absence of a representative I could find no support for this view at the meeting, which seemed to be incorrect, or otherwise of little merit. I cannot therefore recommend any change in the boundaries on this account. If the recommendations are followed however part of Dewsbury Moor North Polling District will be outside Dewsbury West ward.

116. Cleckheaton/Birstall/Liversedge/Heckmondvike/ Batley North/Batley South/Dewsbury East/Dewsbury West

When one examines the Commission's draft proposals it is obvious that from the Dalton vard to the point where it leaves the Kirklees area near its northernmost tip, that the primary road A.62 Leeds Road, has been used for boundary purposes between Deighton and Dalton wards, between Liversedge and Heckmondvike wards and betveen Birstall and Batley North vards . This in itself has resulted in some communities being split, particularly Birstall, and some areas which have natural links with others, e.g. Gomersal with Cleckheaton and Heckmondwike being thrown together with other communities they do not and have not normally linked up with.

These points were put forward forcibly at the meeting and are also contained in the written comment on the draft proposals, particularly from Mr. Stone, who was not at the meeting nor did he provide a map with his written comment,

The Labour Party, whose scheme was supported by the Liberals, put forward an alternative scheme for the northern area of Kirklees and this was not based on the A.62 Leeds Road. It has the advantage of keeping communities together and at the same time gives electoral equality in the various groupings. As it does not seem possible to vary the Commission's draft proposals for this area without making electoral inequalities, I am of the opinion that the Labour Party scheme is preferable, and I shall recommend accordingly.

117. Arising out of the recommendation in paragraph 116 it will be seen that, owing to the redrawing of the Liversedge boundary with Heckmondwike, it is advisable to rename that ward, and I therefore agree it would be more appropriate that it should be called Hightown after the area of that name in the centre of the resulting ward, and I shall so recommend.

118. As the boundaries of the wards covering the Batley area are also being moved it would be more appropriate that Batley North ward should become Batley West and Batley South become Batley East, and I shall so recommend.

119. Concern was expressed by Councillor Walker, Mr. Watson and Mrs. Hodgkinson that the old established area of Hanging Heaton was split by the Commission's draft proposals. Councillor Walker and Mr. Watson thought it should go into Labour's Batley East ward, whilst Mrs. Hodgkinson thought it should be Dewsbury East ward, Mrs. Hodgkinson also thought that all the new estate should go into the Dewsbury East ward. If it did it will cause a larger electorate in that ward as compared with Batley South, and therefore I accept the "boundary as in the Labour Party's scheme which goes through the new estate.

120. Mirfield/Heckmondwike/Dewsbury West

Although Councillor Megahy queried the figures of the electorate for 198l in the Commission's draft proposals for Mirfield, for the reasons given in paragraph 105 above, I am satisfied that the Council's more recent estimates might be followed. Councillor Mrs. M. Wood, one of the representatives for the Mirfield ward on the Kirklees Council, also felt, from a local point of view and having regard to possible development in the area, that the Council's estimates were correct.

It was accepted by all that Mirfield was as it is now would have to contract, and it therefore depended on whether parts of the Eastthorpe, Northorpe 1 and Northorpe 2 polling districts went into the Heckmondwike or Dewsbury West wards. I inspected this area closely and listened to the arguments at the hearing, and the written comments of Mr. Hutchinson. I am satisfied that there is more affinity for the areas concerned with Dewsbury than there is with Heckmondwike from which it is cut off by a green belt and through lack of good communication. I shall recommend therefore that the scheme of the Labour Party for this area be followed.

In connection with the North-West boundary of the ward, I consider that the A.62 Leeds Road is a more appropriate boundary than that suggested by the Labour party in their scheme, and I shall recommend that this road be used as the boundary and the 65 electors affected by the change be placed in the Liversedge (Hightown) ward. The Labour Party agreed with this at the meeting. It is of course the boundary in the Commission's draft proposals.

The Mirfield Civic Society suggested a link-up between Ravensthorpe and Mirfield, but this is not feasible, in isolation, as it would produce an unacceptable electorate.

121, Huddersfield Central/Paddock/Deighton/Dalton/Crosland

Having stated at paragraph 111 that I do not consider there is need for a Huddersfield Central ward, it now requires the polling districts, contained in that ward in the Commission's draft proposals to be allocated to the adjoining wards and for the boundaries to be redrawn. Both the Labour and Liberal parties' schemes produce a new ward covering the Southern part of the Central ward, but they differ as to the allocation of the polling districts. Both put Salford, Newsome, Berry Brow, Armitage Bridge, Primrose Hill in their new ward, called Newsome by Labour and Lockwood and Newsome by the Liberals; with the Liberals adding Lockwood and Netherton to the ward, whilst Labour added Rashcliffe, Town Hall, Ashenhurst, the whole of Mount Pleasant, the whole of Manchester Road and Lower houses. Labour took Beaumont Street (part), Northgate and Kirkgate into Deighton ward, New North Road (part) into Paddock ward, Thornton Lodge (part), Lockwood (part), Crosland Moor (part) into Crosland ward, Storths (part into Almondbury and Moldgreen (part) into Dalton ward. The Liberals added Beaumont Street (part), Northgate, Kirkgate, Town Hall to their proposed Birkby and Fartown ward, - 36 -

New North Road (part) and Manchester Road (part) to their proposed Marsh and Paddock ward, and Rashcliffe, Thornton Lodge (part), Mount Pleasant (part) and Crosland Moor (part) to Crosland, Ashenhurst and Storths (part) to Almondbury and Moldgreen (part) to Dalton.

The Liberals had linked Lockvood with their nev ward of Lockvood and Newsome, although Mr. Dunford did agree that there was more affinity between Lockwood and Crosland. As the Labour Party had arranged this marriage in their scheme, I am in favour so far as their two wards, Newsome and Crosland are concerned, with the exception of Manchester Road polling district to which I shall refer later.

The Commission, before issuing their draft proposals, had accepted the suggestions of the Holme Valley Parish Council as set out in paragraph 11 of this report. As a result of this, Holme Valley North ward gained Brockholes polling district from Almondbury ward. Included in their scheme was Berry Brow (part), Armitage Bridge (part) and Netherton (part), which they suggested should go into Crosland ward. Having seen the area and heard the arguments that they have little to do with Crosland, I am of the opinion that all of Berry Brow and Armitage should be with the Wewsome ward, whilst the Netherton (part) should be linked with the rest of Netherton polling district in Crosland ward. I shall so recommend.

122. With regard to Mr. Chadwick's comment, referred to at paragraph 87 above, he is mistaken as to the Commission's proposals for Taylor Hill area and Newsome. They were not included in the Crosland ward as Mr. Chadwick infers, but in the Huddersfield Central ward. They will now form part of the Newsome ward if my recommendations are accepted.

123. With regard to the name of the ward, Mr. Chadwick is quite vehement in his written comment that it should be Crosland Moor and not Crosland. In this he is supported by the Liberals who use this name in their alternative scheme. The Labour Party had no strong feelings, but the Council felt that as the ward was now wider than when it had been termed Crosland Moor the name Crosland was more appropriate. If the Council's scheme was being recommended I should have agreed that Crosland was the better name. However, the Labour Party scheme which I am recommending is very similar, with the exception of Mount Pleasant polling district which is linked with Newsome ward, to Kirklees Ward No. 11 and, therefore, I see no reason why it should not bear the name Crosland Moor, and I shall so recommend.

12U. As Lockwood polling district is linked with Crosland in my recommended warding and not Newsome, the Liberals' suggestion that there should be a ward called Lockwood and Newsome falls.

125. Almondbury/D alt on

I have already referred to the suggested boundary between these wards as being the Wakefield Road (see paragraph llU(2) above). This reduces the electorate by some 3,150 approximately, and it is then possible to link Kirkheaton parish ward with Dalton. The Liberals considered there was a link between Briggate and Kirkheaton, although they would have put Briggate with Kirkburton. The Liberals would also have put the whole of Moldgreen into the Dalton ward, whilst both the draft proposals and the Labour scheme put part of Moldgreen in Dalton with the draft proposals putting the balance - 37 -

in Huddersfield Central and the Labour scheme the balance in Almondbury , I incline to the view that the balance should be with Almondbury, especially as I recommend no Huddersfield Central ward. The whole of the polling district of Storths as suggested in both Labour and Liberal schemes should also be included in Almondbury and as 3,150 approx. electorate is to be added from South of the Wakefield Road, the polling district of Lowerhouses rightly belongs to Newsome ward as in the Labour Party's scheme.

126. Holme Valley North/Holme Valley South

There was general agreement with regard to these wards. The Liberals preferred Holmfirth as the name of the ward rather than Holme Valley South and Honley and Meltham instead of Holme Valley South. These views found no support from anyone else, and accordingly I see no reason to vary the names of the wards in the draft proposals.

127. Colne Valley West/Golcar/Paddock/Lindley The Liberals were strongly opposed to the village of Linthwaite being bisected by the ward proposals. This can be overcome quite easily by using the River Colne as the ward boundary instead of the Manchester Road (Linthwaite) A. 62, and I so recommend. The Liberals proposed further that polling district Slaithwaite 5 should go into Golcar ward as it has stronger ties with Golcar than Slaithwatie. The Labour party disagreed. I am inclined to accept the vie^ of the Liberals and shall so recommend.

128. Both the Commission's draft proposals and the Labour party scheme placed Linthwaite Zl and Cowlersley polling districts in Golcar, whereas the Liberals thought they should be linked with Crosland ward. I find no overwhelming reason to move these polling districts. With regard to Longwood Gate polling district, both the Labour and Liberal parties considered it should be "in Golcar ward rather than in Paddock ward, and I agree with them and so recommend.

129. Councillor Mrs. Smith considered that Golcar ward should be named Colne Valley East in view of the fact there was a Colne Valley West ward. This suggestion found no support from the others present. I do not consider there is any justification in varying the name from Golcar.

130. The polling district of Outlane creates great difficulty as it is out on a limb being separated by the Motorway M.62. The draft proposals link it partly with Paddock and partly with Lindley, the Labour scheme all with Lindley and the Liberals all with Golcar. I consider it will be best served and represented if it is linked with Lindley ward, and I shall so recommend.

131. The Marsh area also caused disagreement between the parties. The draft proposals, supported by Councillor Parfitt, put part in Lindley, part in Paddock and part in Birkby, whilst the Liberals and the Labour Party favoured them in one ward Marsh and Paddock and Paddock respectively, I see no overwhelming reason for it to be split, and I shall so recommend.

132. Both the draft proposals and the Labour Party scheme place ' Cowcliffe in Birkby ward. The Liberals in order to bring their numbers up to 11,300 had placed Cowcliffe in Deighton ward. It was pointed out that in order to reach Covcliffe from Deighton it would "be necessary to cross Birkby ward. This throws doubts on the Liberals' suggestions for that area, and I favour Cowcliffe remaining with Birkby ward.

133, I referred to Manchester Road polling district in paragraph 121 above. Part of this polling district was included in Huddersfield Central ward and part in Paddock ward. In view of my recommendations regarding Huddersfield Central ward I now recommend that the whole of this polling district "be placed in Paddock ward.

13^. The Liberals proposed Marsh and Paddock and Birkby and Fartown as names for wards, but this found no support, and I am not inclined to recommend a variation to the suggested names of Paddock and Birkby vards, .respectively.

135. The Kuddersfield Conservation Association suggested, in their written statement, the elimination of certain zig-zags in some of the ward boundaries. As I am not recommending the same boundaries as in the draft proposals, some will be eliminated thereby. If, however, my proposals are not accepted, or indeed where the zig-aags do remain, I agree that they should be eliminated if possible by slight adjustment of line particularly as few electorate are Involved,

136. I am satisfied that if my recommendations are followed wards more equitable than those contained in the Commission '^ ilrsft proposals will result.

?.£C OMMEHD ATI QNS

137. I recommend accordingly:-

(l) The warding of Kirklees, with the polling districts, be as follows :-

1976 ^ 1981 Polling District ^ Sleet o- Entitle- '< 31ec£o^.. Sntitle- rate ment' rate ment '

1. CL5CK52ATOM WARD

Birkenshav North (3) 1,391 Birkenshaw South (BF) 1,822 Drub CO 165 Cleckheaton Sast (G) -1,^77 Cleckheaton West (H) part 1,588 East Bierley (M) 1,690 Gomersal (N) part 1,715 Hunsworth (W) 787 Moorend (AD) 26l Oakenshaw ( AP ). 11,368 3.01 11,813 3.15 - 39 -

1976 1981 Polling District Electo- Entitle- Electo- Snfitle- rate ment rate ment

2. 3IRSTALL WARD

Batley (BA) 1.U62 ft (BB) 1,953 n (BC) U88 11 (BD) 1,973 tt (BE) 570 I! " (BF) 1,875 If (BG) 2,926 tt v(BH Dm) 68uu3 j 11,930 3.16 11,527 3.08

3. HIGHTOWN WARD

Hartshead <0) 550 Hightown (P) U,279 Cleckheaton West (G) part 1,500 __ • Scholes North (AL)" 2,270 ..• '"' Scholes South l.AM) 628 Roberttown r/ArC) 1,^96 Spen and Littletown WestLBG) 999 Battyeford 1 (MA) part 29 Battyeford 2 (MB) part 36_ 11,787 3.12 11,791 3.15

U. HECKMQNDWIKE WARD

Millbridge (AC) 1,227 Norristhorpe (AE) 2,1*71 Heckmondvike North (BA) 2,555 ' Heckmondvike West (BB) 1,267 Spen & Littletown East (AS) 2,06U Corner sal (N-) part 2,287_ 11,871 3.11* 11,998 3.20

5. BATLEY WEST WARD

Batley (BJ) 2,1^9 rt (BK) 1,U1*2 it (BL) 2,015 it (BM) 1,620 Heckmondvike East (BC) 1,607 Heckmondwike South (BD) 1,631 St. Marks (DA) oart 500 Dewsbury Moor North (DJ) p'art 895 Dewshury Moor South TDK) part" H

i-r,873 3.H 11,239 3.00 - UO -

1976 1981 Polling Dlsitrlet Electo- Entitle- Electo- Entitie- rate rnent rate ment

6. BATLEY EAST WAED Batley (Bl) 1,517 (BN) lit* (BO) U69 (BP) 1.U5U (BQ) 767 (BR) 1,1*82 Soothill (BS) 680 " (BT) 2,397 Hanging Heaton (BU) 729 Soothill (BV) 725 Bennett Lane (DV) part 1,200 All Saints (DF) part 263 11,817 3.13 10,956 2.93

\ 7. MIRFIELD WARD

Battyeford 1 (MA) part 2,8Ho Battyeford 2 (MB) part 1,736 Eastthorpe (MC) part 2,2^7 Hopton 1 (MD) 1,088 Hopton 2 (ME) 675 Northorpe 1 (MF) part •2,66p 11,2U6 2.97 11,133 2,97

DEWSBURY WEST WARP

St. Marks (DA)part 661 Westborough (DC)" 918 Crow Nest (DH) 753 Westtovn (DI) Ul8 Dewsbury Moor Worth (DJ) part 500 Dews bury Moor South (DK)- part 1117 Pilgrim (DL) 850 Scout Hill (DM) 1,081 Ravensthorpe North (DN) l,U6l Ravensthorpe South (DO) Ul8 Ravensthorpe East (DP) 718 Ravensthorpe West _. (DQ) ' 1,002 Eastthorpe ' (MC) part h$k Northorpe 1 (MF) part 953 Northorpe 2 (MG) 625 11,969 3.17 11, 457 3.06 - hi -

1976 198l Polling District Electo- Entitle- Electo- Entitle- rate iaent rate ment

9. DEWSBURY EAST WARD

Bat ley Carr (DD) 563 Springfield (DE) 523 All Saints (DF) part 1,017 Earlsheaton (DR) 1,026 Chickenley North (DS) 98? Chickenley South (DT) 1,793 Shaw Cross (DU) 1,771 Bennett Lane (DV) part 581 Bank Top (DW) 1,305 Heat on Lodge (DX) 922 Moorlands (DB) 1,

10. THORHHILL WARD

Saville Town (TA) 2,625 Thornhill Lees (TB) 1,223 Lees Moor (TC) 1,691 Combs (TD) 729 Valley Road (TE) 1,132 Thornhill Edge (TF) 1,850 Overthorpe (TG) 1,911 Whitley (TH) 20^ Briestfield (Tl) 95 3.03 10,8U2 2.90

11. COLNE VALLEY WEST WARD

Linthwaite 1 (F) 181; Linthwaite 2 (G) 980 Linthwaite 3 (H) 775 Linthwaite U (I) 120 Scanunondon (L) 133 Slaithwaite 1 • (M) 729 Slaithwaite 2 (N) 028 Slaithwaite 3 (0) 399 Slaithwaite U (P) 112 Marsden 1 (K) Mars den 2 (KA) 837 10JUO 2.8U • 10,351 2.76 - U2 -

1976 1981 Polling District Slecto- Entitle- Electo- Zntitle- rate ment rate meat

12. HOLME VALLEY SOUTH WARD

Cartvorth 1 (R) 301 Cartvorth 2 (S) 179 Hep-worth (T) 562 Austenley (U) 33^ Holme (V) 216 Nev Mill (A3) 1>07 Holmfirth North Central!AC) 777 Holmfirth South Central(AE) T39 Scholes 1 (AD) SUJi Scholes 2 (DA) 152 ttetherthong (AA) 1,230 Upperthong (AF) 1,311 Wooldale (AG) 2,QU6 10,6^8 a.32 10,733 2.37

13. HQLM£ VALLSY ^lORTH WA?tD

Brockholes (Q) 520 Honley Central (W) 1,^U Honley East (X) 885 Honley South (l) 760 Eonley West (2) I,l3l Meltham (AS) 5,202 9,992 2.65 10,122 2.70

. DEN3Y DAL2 VAfiD

Clayton West (AH) Denby & Cumberworth (Al) 570. Denby & Cimbervorth (AK) 290 Denby & Cumberworth (AL) U75 Denby 4 Cumberworth (AM) 1,525 Denby & Cumbervcrth (AN) 292 Emley 1 (AO) 9^9 (AP) 208 (AQ) 83^ (AH) 2,5^8 (BK) • 1.389 10,566 2.30 11,170 2.98 1976 1961 Polling District Electo- Entitle- Elected Entitle- rate merit rate ment

15. GOLCAR WARD

Golcar 1 (A) 1,657 Golcar 2 (3) 1,579 Golcar 3 CO 355 Golcar U CD) 225 Golcar 5 (E) 237 Golcar 6 (CA) 1,1*62 Slaithvaite 5 (PA) 171 Longwood Gate (R) Linthvaite Czi) 1,318 Cowl ersley (Z2) Nettleton Hill (S2) 65 Station (X) 696 Golcar East (y) 1,61*0 11,600 3.07 11.50U 3.07

16. CRQSLAND MOOR WARD

Thornton Lodge (H) 1.U61 Marsden Road (l) 1,331 Crosland Moor (J) 2,012 Crosland Kill . (K) 961 Lockwood (Pi) 2,173 Dryclough C?2) 1,912 Netherton (Q) 1,905 11,755 3.11 12,350 3.30

17. NEWSOME WARD

Salford (A) 855 Newsome (B) 2,928 Berry Brow (0 1,281* Armitage Bridge (D) 651 Rashcliffe (AZ) 577 Primrose Hill (BA) 1,275 Town Hall CAX) 289 Lowerhouses CAGI) 1,501* Ashenhurst (AG2) Mount Pleasant (0) 1,158 11,125 2.95 10.877 2.90 1976 1981 oiling District gleeto~ Entitle- Electo- Sntitle- rate nent rate merit

8. ALMCTOBURY WARD

Almonobury (AD) 2,092 Ferns ide (AE) 2,618 Fenay Bridge (AT) 1,09^ Storths (AH) 1,581 Moldgreen (AV) part 1,281* Waterloo (AL) part 995 Green side (AX1) part 1,U86 11,150 2.95 10,751 2.87

9. KISK3URTON WAHD

?locicfcon (32) 373 Kir&burton (3F) 1,782 Kigbburton (3G) 797 Leptou 1 (31) 1,222 Lepton 2 (3J) 2,686 Thurstonland & Parsley Tyas (3B) 28U Thurstonland & Farnley Tyas (3C) U8i Thur steal and & Farnley Tyas (3D) 150 Shepley (3L) 1,713 Whit ley Upper (3M) 622 10,510 2.31 10,959 2.93

WARD

Undley <.M) 2,158 Birdaencliffe ($) 1,535 Quarmby (la) 3,126 Salendine Nook (T) 2,899 Outlane (si ) 1,196 ' 2.89 11.1U7 2.98

PADDOCK WAHD

Marsh (U) 2,85^ Nev North Road (V) 1,39^ Greenhead (w) l,26l Paddock (AA) 2,195 Hollizr Carr (AB) 1,570 Royds Sfell (AC) 1,025 Manchester Road (AY) 322 Eeinvood (L2) 1,29Q 11,911 3.16 ll,t*6i 3.06 1976 1981 Polling District Elect o- Entitle Electo- Entitle- rate ment rate ment

22. BIRKBY WARD

Wheathouse Road (E). 2,81*2 Halifax Old Road (F) 2,357 Cowcliffe (G) 2,117 Hillhouse (AR) 1,683 Woodhous e (AT) 1,812 10,811 2.86 10,627 2.8U

23. DEIGHTON WARD

Sheepridge (AM) 1,600 Brackenhall (AN) 1,922 Deighton (AO) 2,3kk Bradley (AP) 3,381 Beaumont Street (AQ) . 515 Leeds Road North (AS) 1,096 Northgate (AU) 31 ^ Kir kg ate (AW) 181 11,353 3.01 11,683 3.12

2k. DALTON WARD

Rawthorpe (Al) 1,361 D alt on (AJ1) 1,621 Briggate (AJ2) 732 Greens ide (AKL) part 309 Standiforth ' (AK2) 2,UlU Waterloo. (AL) part l,2t*0 Moldgreen (AV) part 1,003 Kirkheaton (BH) 2,830 11,510 3.05 11,582 3.09

TOTAL 271,877 71.98 269,619. 71.99

NOTE: In compiling the above Table I have used for the 198l electorate the predictions of the Kirklees Council's officials using the same method referred to in paragraph 25 above.

(2) The ward boundary betveen Almondbury and Dalton wards be the Wakefield Road (3) Whitley Upper and Flockton polling districts be in Kirkburton ward instead of in Denby Dale ward. (U) Shelley polling district be in Denby Dale ward instead of Kirkburton ward.

(5) Kirkheaton polling district be in Dalton ward instead of Kirkburton ward.

(6) Shepley and Thurstonland and Farnley Tyas polling districts be in Kirkburton ward instead of Almondbury ward.

(?) Dewsbury South ward be named Thornhill Ward.

(8) Whitley Lower and Briestfield polling districts be in Thornhill ward instead of Denby Dale ward. •

(9) No change be made in the name of Denby Dale ward.

(10) The boundary between Dewsbury West ward and Thornhill ward in the Ravensthorpe area be the River Calder instead of the main Mirfield to Dewsbury road.

(11) The alternative scheme put forward by the Labour Party, supported by the Liberals, for the following wards, viz, Cleckheaton, Birstall, Liversedge, Heckmondwike, Batley North, Batley South, Dewsbury West, Dewsbury East and Mirfield be adopted instead of the draft proposals of the Commission for those wards.

(12) Liversedge ward be named Hightown ward.

(13) Batley North ward be named Batley West.

(lU) Batley South ward be named Batley East.

(15) No change be made in the name of Birstall ward.

(16) The North-West boundary of Mirfield ward be the A.62 road, as in the Commission's draft proposals rather than as in the Labour party's "~ alternative scheme.

(l?) Huddersfield Central ward be not proceeded with and the polling districts forming that ward in the Commission's draft proposals be as recommended in the Table at Recommendation (l) above.

(18) A new ward named Newsome be formed between Almondbury and Crosland wards consisting of the polling districts set out in the Table at Recommendation (l) above.

(19) Crosland ward be named Crosland Moor ward.

(20) The parts of the Berry Brow and Armitage polling districts which were incorporated into the Crosland._ward in the Commission's draft proposals at the suggestion of the Holme Valley Parish Council be transferred into Newsome ward.

(21) The names of the wards Holme Valley North and Holme Valley South be not changed.

(22) The boundary between Colne Valley West and Golcar wards at Linthwaite be the River Colne instead of the A.62 Manchester Road. - hi -

(23) The name of Golcar ward "be not changed. (2U) The names of Paddock and Birk"by vards "be not changed. (25) The location of polling districts not referred to above "be as set out in the Table at Recommendation (l) above.

My recommendations will involve considerable amendment to the precise description of the boundaries, but I have not attempted to do this myself preferring to leave this to the Ordnance Survey Office which has much more detailed maps.

138. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I record my grateful thanks to all who attended the hearing for their assistance in supplying information, plans and opinions, to the Officers of the Council who made all the necessary arrangements for the hearing, and for the cogent and pleasant way in which the evidence was given.

V. DOUGLAS KNOX

April 1978. LOCAL &OV£Ri4i=ZNT BOUNDARY COMilSSION FOR EIIOLAND

Review of Electoral Arrangements - Kirklees

Local Meeting; held in the Reception Room, TOTTTI Hall, Huddersfield

Thursday, 19th January, "1973

Assistant Commissioner - Mr. V, D. Knox

ATTENDANCE SKEET

Name Address Repre sehtin_g

c n S cat .,

77 (4 (-'V-'

V

4-f .

a ;7 LOCAL GOVERN1ENT BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR ENGLAND Review of Electoral Arrangements - Kirlcleea

Local Meeting held in the Reception Room. Town Hall. Huddersfield

Thursday, 19th January, 1978 Assistant Commissioner - Mr. V. D. Knox

ATTENDANCE SHEET . •

Name Address Representing

(Z- . /r /- /(--A/c, A-

r-

Ai^kX —L' i.fc^-«-' *- X

4 3 cvi^ k ,

^/\o . p4 -, I'

- K I' KflU o LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR ENGLAND

of Electoral Arrangements - Kirlclees

Local Meeting held in the Reception Room, Town Hall, Huddersfield

Thursday. 19th January, 1978

Assistant Commissioner - Mr. V. D. Knox

ATTENDANCE SHEET

Name Address Representing

l. fe

I

- C A

S /V'U /<•

L rt-i-*, 1%L, w-s LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR ENGLAND Review of Electoral Arrangements - Kirklees

Local Meeting held in the Reception Room, Town Hall, Huddersfield Thursday, 19th January, 1973 Assistant Commissioner - lir. V, D. Knox

ATTENDANCE SHEET

Name Address Representing

7f ^v^u or

i^- / r * f -3<

-y c.. ^^ We \i ^

•^ / 3S

/0 fLsjS# y I/ - 1 rj. rsvl*-*fa\~r 4i />/ n ^ LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY COiailSSION FOR ENGLAND

Revie?/ of Electoral Arrangements - Kirklees

Local Meeting held in the Reception Room, Town Hall, Huddersfield "rft-iit.sy ^LCTT TflwwAfjj Thursday,. Vfttk-Jamiary, 1978

Assistant Comniisaioner - Mr. V. D. Knox

ATTENDANCE SHEET

Name Address Representing

" j

,1 6c ^ A "57

TP/v \ ,L—r t^ c. V&£S>. .WL*

. c

Vn - ^A. 'LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR ENGLAND Review of Electoral Arrangements - Kirklees Local Meeting held in the Reception Room, Town Hall, Hudder afield , 19th Jonuasy; 1978 Assistant Commissioner - Mr. V« D. Knox

ATTENDANCE SHEET

Name Address Representing

R . v - *•* . VIM.

X*j "TU O-W- ~S. So^ - 0 - 0

T

C- ^ SCHEDULE 2

METROPOLITAN BOROUGH OF KIRKL3ES NAMES OF PROPOSED 7/ARDS AND NUMBERS OF COUNCILLORS

NAME 0? WARS NO. OF COUNCILLORS Almondbury 3 Batley East 3 Batley West 3 Birkby 3 Birstall 3 Cleckheaton 3 Colne Valley '.Vest 3 Crosland Moor 3 Dalton 3 Deigfrton 3 Denby Bale 3 Dewsbury East 3 Dewsbury West 3 Golcar 3 Heckmondwike 3 . . Hightown 3 Holme Valley North 3 Holme Valley South 3 Kirkburton 3 Lindley 3 Mirfield 3 Newsome* 3 Paddock 3 Thornhill 3 'JIjij 3

BOHOUGH OF KIRKLEES - DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WARD BOUNDARIES

Note: Where the boundary is described as following a road, railway, river, canal or similar feature it should be deemed to follow the centre line of the feature unless otherwise stated.

COLNE VALLEY WEST WARD

Commencing at the point where the northwestern boundary of Holme Valley CP meets the southwestern boundary of the Borough, thence generally northwest- Tft v wards along said southwestern boundary and continuing generally northeast- wards and southeastwards along the northwestern boundary of the Borough to the easternmost corner of Parcel No 93391 as shown on OS 1:2500 Microfilm

(B) SE 0616, date of microfilming 197*S thence due southwest from said corner to New Hey Road, thence northeastwards along said road to Rochdale

Road, thence southeastwards along said road to a point opposite the north- western boundary of Parcel No 082^, as shown on OS 1:2500 Microfilm (B)

SE 0716, date of microfilming 197^> thence southwestwards to and along said northwestern boundary and southeastwards along the southwestern boundary of said parcel to its southernmost point, thence southeastwards in a straight line from said point to the westernmost corner of Parcel No 2200, thence southeastwards along the southwestern boundary of said Parcel to the north- western boundary of Parcel No 2600, as shown on OS 1:2500 Microfilm SE 0715

*(A_*) date of microfilming 196*t, thence northeastwards along said north- western boundary and southeastwards along the northeastern boundary of said

Parcel to "the footpath leading northeastwards to the road known as Causeway, thence northeastwards along said footpath to said road, thence southwards along said road to the stream known as Crimble Clough, thence generally eastwards and southwards along said stream to its culvert adjacent to the southern end of Brook Terrace, thence due west from said culvert to Clough

Road, thence southeastwards along said road to Radcliffe Road, thence east- wards along said road to the part of James Street opposite No 108 Radcliffe

Road, thence southwards and southeastwards along said street to the

Slaithwaite to Huddersfield railway, thence northeastwards along said railway 2 to a point due north of the northwesternmost corner of the Weir in the River

Colne adjacent to Linthwaite Laboratories, thence due south to said north- western corner and continuing southwards along the western boundary of the weir to the centre of the River Colne, thence generally northwestwards along said river to the point where it is crossed by the Calder and Hebble Navigation, Huddersfield Broad Canal, thence due south from said point to

Manchester Road (Linthwaite), thence southwestwards along said road to a point opposite the northern end of the footpath leading from Yew Tree Lane to the unnamed road to the west of the property known as Folly, thence south- westwards and southeastwards along said path to said unnamed road, thence southeastwards along said unnamed road to Cowlersley Lane, thence southwest- wards along said lane to the unnamed road leading to the rear's of No's 139 to 169 Cowlersley Lane, thence southeastwards and southwestwards along said unnamed road to a point in line with the northeastern boundary of the unnamed property to the southeast of No 159 Cowlersley Lane,'thence-southeastwards to" and along said northeastern boundary to the southeastern boundary of said unnamed property, thence southwestwards along said southeastern boundary and the southeastern boundaries of the unnamed properties and enclosures to the southeast of No's 161 to 169 Cowlersley Lane, thence northwestwards along the southwestern boundary of the southernmost enclosure to its northwesternmost point, thence southwestwards in a straight line from said point to the western- most corner of No 1 Hazel Grove, thence generally southwestwards along the southeastern boundaries of No's 1 to 39 Hazel Grove to the southwestern boundary of the last mentioned property, thence northwestwards along said southwestern boundary to Cowlersley Lane, thence southwestwards along said lane to Ladybower Avenue, thence southeastwards along said avenue to a point opposite the northeastern boundary of No 2 Ladybower Avenue, thence south- westwards to and along said boundary and southeastwards along the south- western boundary of said property to the northwestern boundary of No *f Ladybower Avenue, thence southwestwards along said boundary to the south- western boundary of said property, thence southeastwards along said boundary and the southwestern boundaries of No's 6 to 12 Ladybower Avenue and continuing southeastwards along the northeastern boundary of Parcel No 5^73» as shown on OS 1:2500 SIM (B) Microfilm SE 101^,date of microfilming May

1978, and the northeastern boundary of Parcel No 606*t and in prolongation thereof crossing Church Lane, to Heath Road, thence southwestwards along said road to the footpath that leads southwards and southeastwards from

Heath Road to Blackmoorfoot Road, thence southwards and southeastwards along

said footpath to the northwestern boundary of Meltham CP, thence generally southwestwards along said CP boundary and southeastwards along the south- western boundary of said CP to the northwestern boundary of Holme Valley

CP, thence southwestwards along said CP boundary to the point of commencement,

LIKDLEY WARD

Commencing at the point where the northeastern boundary of Colne Valley West

Ward meets the northwestern boundary of the Borough, thence generally north-

eastwards along said northwestern boundary to Bryan Lane, thence southwards

along said lane to Grimescar Road, thence southeastwards along said road to a point opposite the western boundary of Parcel No *f313i as shown on OS

1:3500 SIM (B) Microfilm SE 1219, date of microfilming 1978, thence southwards

along said western boundary and southeastwards along the southern boundary of

said parcel to the western1 boundary of Parcel No 3800, thence southwestwards

along said western boundary to its westernmost point, thence due southwest

from said point to the unnamed stream, flowing southeastwards-from Lower

Burn Farm, thence southeastwards along said stream to the unnamed stream

which flows from Burn Road to Grimescar Foot, thence southeastwards and north-

eastwards along said stream to the' path which leads eastwards to .the property known as Reap Hirst, thence eastwards along said path to the unnamed road

which leads southwards to Reap Hirst Road, thence southwards along said

unnamed road to Reap Hirst Road, thence generally southwards along said road

to Birkby Hall Road, thence southeastwards along said road to Bryan Road,

thence southwestwards along said road to Halifax Road, thence northwestwards

along said road to Thornhill Road, thence southwestwards and southwards along said road to New Hey Road,thence northwestwards along said road to if Reinwood Road, thence southwestwards along said road to Willwood Avenue, thence northwestwards along said avenue to Burfitts Road, thence southwest- wards and northwestwards along said road to Oakes Road South, thence south- westwards along said road to Haughs Road, thence northwestwards and south- wards along said road to Haughs Lane, thence westwards and southwestwards along said lane to Longwood Edge Road, thence northwestwards along said road to Gilead Road, thence southeastwards along said road to the footpath leading from said road to Lamb Hall Road, thence westwards along said foot- path, crossing Lamb Hall Road to the footpath leading from said road to

Leys Farm, thence westwards, southwards and southwestwards along said foot- path and continuing westwards through Leys Farm farmyard to the south- eastern boundary of Parcel No 6851 as shown on OS 1:2500 Microfilm (B)

SE 0917) date of microfilming 1975» thence southwestwards along said south- eastern boundary and continuing westwards and northwards along the southern and southwestern boundaries of said parcel to the southern boundary of

Parcel No 36511 thence westwards and northwestwards along said southern boundary, also being the northern boundary of Parcel No Vj27, to the western- most point of the last mentioned parcel, thence westwards from said point, in a straight line, to the southernmost point of Parcel No 3536, being on the southern boundary of said parcel, thence northwestwards along said southern boundary to the southeastern boundary of Parcel No 3036, thence southwestwards and westwards along the southeastern and southern boundaries of said Parcel and the southern boundary of Parcel No 2135 to its westernmost point, thence southwestwards, in a straight line, from said point to the eastern end of the northwestern boundary of Parcel No 102^, thence southwestwards along said northwestern boundary and the northwestern boundary of Parcel No 0^22 to the footpath leading westwards to Whin Gate, thence westwards along said path to the path leading to New Lane, thence southwards and southeastwards along said path to said lane,thence westwards along said lane to Hall Lane, thence south- westwards along said lane to Round Ings Road, thence eastwards and south- ' wards along said road to a point opposite the northern boundary of Parcel No ^857, as shown on OS SUSI 1:2500 Microfilm SE 0816, date of microfilming 5 July 1976, thence southwestwards along said northern boundary, the northern boundaries of Parcel. No's 3952, 3244, 2050, 0949, 0040 and continuing west- wards along the northern boundary of Parcel No 0040 as shown on OS 1:2500

Microfilm (B) SE 0?16, date of microfilming 19?4, to the western boundary of said parcel, thence southwards along said western boundary to the southern boundary of Parcel No 5&34, thence westwards along said southern boundary and the southern boundary of Parcel No 2330 and in prolongation thereof to

Rochdale Road, thence northwestwards along said road to the northeastern boundary of Colne Valley West Ward, thence northwestwards, southwestwards and northwestwards along said northeastern boundary to the point of commencement.

BIRKBY WARD

Commencing at the point where the northeastern boundary of Lindley Ward meets the northwestern boundary of the Borough, thence generally northeast- wards along said borough boundary to Bradford Road, thence southeastwards, southwards and southwestwards along said road to a point opposite Ash Brow

Road, thence eastwards to and southeastwards, northeastwards and eastwards along said road to Sheepridge Road, thence northeastwards along said road to

Chestnut Street, thence eastwards and northeastwards along said street to the unnamed road leading from Chestnut Street to Fieldhouse Lane, thence southwards and southeastwards along said unnamed road to Fieldhouse Lane and continuing southeastwards along said lane to the Calder and Hebble Navigation

Huddersfield Broad Canal, thence southwestwards and southwards along said canal to Bridge No 11, thence northwestwards along said bridge and the unnamed road leading to Rod Doles Road to the Dewsbury to Huddersfield rail- way, thence southwestwards along said railway to Hillhouse Lane, thence north- westwards along said lane and continuing northwestwards along Willow Lane

East, crossing Bradford Road to Willow Lane, thence northwestwards and south- westwards' along said lane to St John's Road, thence southeastwards along said road to St John's Crescent, thence southwestwards along said crescent to the path leading from said crescent to Blacker Road, thence northwest- 6 wards along said path to said road, thence southwestwards along said road to Murray Road, thence northwestwards along said road to the southern boundary of No 16 Murray Road, thence eastwards along said southern boundary and northwards along the eastern boundary of said property to the stream known as Clayton Dike, thence generally westwards along said stream to the path leading from Edgerton Road to George Avenue, thence northwards along said path, crossing George Avenue, to the path leading from said avenue to

Birkby Hall Road, thence generally northwestwards and northwards along said path to said road, thence northwestwards along said road to the northeastern boundary of Lindley Ward, thence generally northwards and northwestwards along said northeastern boundary to the point of commencement.

DEIGHTON WARD

Commencing at the point where the northeastern boundary of Birkby Ward meets the northwestern boundary of the Borough, thence northeastwards and southeast- wards along said northwestern boundary to the western boundary of Kirkburton

CP, thence southwards along said western boundary to the northern boundary of

Dalton Bank Plantation, thence westwards along said northern boundary and in prolongation thereof to the River Colne thence generally southwestwards, westwards and southwestwards along said river to a point opposite the south- western boundary of Parcel No 0012 as shown on OS 1:2500 Plan SE 1^-1517, edition of 1960, thence southeastward to and along said southwestern boundary and the southwestern boundary of Parcel No 0001 and its prolongation south- eastwards to Bradley Mills Road, thence northeastwards along said road to the road known as Kilner Bank, thence southwestwards and southwards along said road to the path leading from said road southwards along the eastern boundary of the Scrap Yard, thence southwards along said path and its continuation as a road to Wakefield Road, thence northwestwards along said road to the round- about junction with the road known as Queensgate, thence southwestwards along said road to a point opposite the unnamed road leading to the rear of the 7 property of Nos 22 and 23 Princess Alexandra Walk, thence westwards to and

along said road to the eastern boundary of the said property, thence north-

wards along said eastern boundary and westwards along the northern boundary

of said property to the path known as Princess Alexandra Walk, thence south-

wards and northwestwards along said path to Ramsden Street, thence northwest-

wards along said street and High Street to the northern part of Market Street,

thence southwestwards along said street to a point in line with the pedestrian

precinct known as Macaulay Street, thence northwestwards to and along said precinct to the pedestrian precinct known as Upperhead Row, thence northwards

along said precinct and its continuation as a road to Henry Street, thence

northeastwards along said street to the road known as Westgate, thence east-

wards along said road to John William Street, thence northwestwards along

said street to Viaduct Street, thence northeastwards along said street to

Fitzwilliam Street, thence southwestwards along said street to St John's Road,

thence northwards and northwestwards along said road to the southern boundary

of Birkby Ward, thence northeastwards and eastwards along said southern

boundary to and northeastwards and generally northwards along the eastern and

northeastern boundaries of said ward to the point of commencement.

PADDOCK WARD

Commencing at the point where the southern boundary of Birkby Ward meets the

southwestern boundary of Deighton Ward, thence generally southwards along

said southwestern boundary and continuing southwards along Upperhead Row,

crossing Market Street, to the road known as Castlegate, thence southeastwards

along said road to the road known as Chapel Hill thence southwestwards along

said road to the disused Calder & Hebble Navigation, Huddersfield Narrow

Canal, thence northwestwards along said disused canal to a point opposite

the western boundary of the Engineering Works, thence southwards, crossing

the Towing Path, to and along said western boundary to the River Colne, thence westwards along said river to the Huddersfield to Holmfirth railway 8

at Paddock Viaduct, thence southwestwards along said railway to Manchester

Road, thence westwards and southwestwards along said road to a point opposite

the western boundary of No ^90 Manchester Road, thence northwestwards to

and northwards along said boundary to its northernmost point, thence north-

eastwards from said point, in a straight line, to the westernmost point of

the northwestern boundary of the enclosure to the west of No 4?^ Manchester

Road, thence due north from said point to the River Colne, thence northeast-

wards along said river to a point due south of the junction of Johnny Moore's

Hill Road and Clough Lane, thence due north to said junction and northwestwards

and northwards along said lane to the Huddersfield to Slaithwaite railway,

thence westwards along said railway to Bankhouse Bridge (Foot), thence north-

wards along said bridge and the footpath leading from said bridge to the

road known as Lower Gate, thence westwards along said road to Cross Firs'

Street-, thence northwestwards along said street to Longwood Road, thence

eastwards along said road to Harp Road, thence northwestwards along said

road and Quarmby Road to the southern boundary of Lindley Ward, thence

generally eastwards along said southern boundary and generally northeastwards

along the southeastern boundary of said ward to the southern boundary of

Birkby Ward, thence generally southeastwards along said southern boundary

to the point of commencement.

GOLCAR WARD

Commencing at the point where the southern boundary of Lindley Ward meets the

southwestern boundary of Paddock Ward, thence generally southeastwards along

said southwestern boundary to Manchester Road, thence southwestwards along

said road to Park Road West, thence eastwards along said road to a point

opposite the northeastern boundary of Parcel No 1665) as shown on OS 1:2500

Plan SE 12-1?15i edition of 1961, thence southeastwards to and along said

northeastern boundary to the southeastern boundary of said parcel, thence southwestwards along said southeastern boundary and the southern boundary of parcel no 0058 to the western boundary of said parcel as shown on OS 1:2500

Plan SE 10-1115i edition of 1962, thence northwestwards along said western boundary to the southern boundary of parcel no 9^59) thence southwestwards and westwards along said southern boundary to its westernmost point, thence due west from said point to Deep Lane, thence southwestwards along said lane to a point being the prolongation northeastwards of the northwestern boundary of Parcel No 2^00, thence southwestwards along said prolongation and northwestern boundary, and continuing along said northwestern boundary on OS 1:2500 Plan SE 10-111*f, edition of 1963, and OS 1:2500 Microfilm

SIM(B)"SE 1014, date of microfilming 1977 to the northeastern boundary of parcel no 777^ on the last mentioned microfilm,thence southeastwards along said northeastern boundary and southwestwards along the southeastern boundary of said parcel to Church lane, thence southwestwards along said lane to the northwestern boundary of Colne Valley West Ward, thence generally northwards southwestwards and northwestwards along said northwestern boundary to the southern boundary of Lindley Ward, thence generally northeastwards and south- eastwards along said southern boundary to the point of commencement.

CROSLAND MOOR WARD

Commencing at the point where the northeastern boundary of Colne Valley West- ward meets the southeastern boundary of Golcar Ward, thence northeastwards along said southeastern boundary and the southern boundary of Paddock Ward to Manchester Road, at its junction with St Thomas' Road, thence southwest- wards along Manchester Road to Springdale Avenue, thence southeastwards along said avenue to Rashcliffe Hill Road, thence southeastwards along said road and Yews Hill Road to North Street, thence southwards along said street to

Swan Lane, thence southeastwards along said, lane to Meltham Road, thence southwestwards along said road to Bridge Street, thence southeastwards along said street to the River Holme, thence southwestwards and southwards along 10 said river to a point opposite the northern boundary of the Mill, thence westwards to and along said northern boundary to the western boundary of said mill, thence southwards, westwards, southwestwards and southeastwards along said western boundary to a point due north of the track running southwards along the eastern side of the Tennis Courts and Bowling Green in Woodfield Park (Recreation Ground), thence southwards to and along said track to and westwards along the southern boundary of the Bowling Green and in prolongation thereof to the eastern boundary of the enclosure to the south of No 179 Woodfield Road, thence northwards along said eastern boundary to the southern boundary of said property, thence westwards along said southern boundary to Woodfield Road, thence southeastwards along said road and southwards and southwestwards along its continuation as Meltham Road to the unnamed road leading eastwards through Old Spring Wood, thence east- wards along said road to the path leading from said unnamed road to Bourn

View Road, thence southeastwards along said path to said road, thence north- eastwards along said road and its continuation northeastwards as unnamed road to the unnamed road running southeastwards along the western boundary of

Old Spring Wood, thence southeastwards along said road to Hawkroyd Bank Road, thence southeastwards along said road to the northern boundary of Holme

Valley CP, thence southwestwards and northwestwards along said northern boundary and continuing northwestwards, southwestwards and northwestwards along the northeastern boundary of Meltham CP to the northeastern boundary of Colne Valley West Ward, thence northeastwards and northwards along said northeastern boundary to the point of commencement.

NEWSCME WARD

Commencing at the point where the eastern boundary of Crosland Moor Ward meets the southern boundary of Paddock Ward, thence eastwards along said. 11 southern boundary and generally northwards along the eastern boundary of said ward to the southern boundary of Deighton Ward, thence generally south- eastwards along said southern boundary to King's Mill Lane, thence southwards along said lane to Maple Street, thence southeastwards along said street to a point opposite the western boundary of the Electricity Sub Station, thence southwards to and along said western boundary to the north-western boundary of Longley Park Golf Course, thence southwestwards along said northwestern boundary and generally southeastwards along the southwestern boundary of said golf course to the unnamed road leading from Wood Lane to Longley

Special School, thence northwards along said unnamed road to the footpath leading to the road known as Dog Kennel Bank, thence northeastwards, east- wards and northeastwards along said footpath to said road, thence southeast- wards and southwards along said road to a point opposite the northwestern boundary of Nos 28 to k2 Broadgate, thence eastwards and eastwards and northeastwards along said northwestern boundary to the northeastern boundary of said property, thence southeastwards along said northeastern boundary to the road known as Broadgate, thence southwestwards and southeastwards along said road to Longley Road, thence northeastwards along said road to a point opposite the accessway between Nos 4? and ^9 Longley Road, thence southeast- wards along said accessway to a point opposite the southeastern boundary of

No ^7 Longley Road, thence northeastwards to and along said southeastern boundary and the eastern boundary of No ^5 Longley Road to the southwestern boundary of No ^3 Longley Road,thence southeastwards along said southwestern boundary to and northwestwards along the southeastern boundary of said property and the-south-eastern boundaries of Nos *f1 to 13 Longley Road to the southwestern boundary of the enclosure to the rear of No 11 Longley Road, thence southeastwards along said southwestern boundary and in prolongation thereof to the footpath leading from Longley Road to the southern end of

Foxglove Road, thence southeastwards along said footpath to the eastern boundary of Penny Spring Wood, thence southeastwards along said eastern boundary to and southwards along the eastern boundary of Parcel No 0910 12 as shown on OS 1:2500 Microfilm (AA) SE 1615, date of microfilming 1961, to the northern boundary of parcel no 1100, thence southwestwards along said northern boundary and continuing along said northern boundary on OS 1:2500

Microfilm (AA) SE 1614, date of microfilming 19&1, to the western boundary of said parcel, thence southwards along said western boundary and the western boundaries of Parcel Nos 1?00 and 1082 to Kaye Lane, thence west- wards along said lane to Ashes Lane, thence southwestwards along said lane to a point opposite the southern boundary of Parcel No 866*f, as shown on

OS 1:2500 Microfilm (A_*) SE 1*f13, date of microfilming 1963, thence southeastwards to and along said southern boundary to the unnamed road leading northeastwards and southeastwards from Castle Houses, thence south- eastwards and northeastwards along said unnamed road to the northeastern boundary of Parcel no 05^8 as shown on OS 1:2500 Microfilm (A '*) SE 1513, date of microfilming 1963, thence southeastwards along said northeastern boundary to and southwestwards along the southeastern, boundary of said parcel to the northwestern boundary of Kirkburton CP, thence southwestwards along said northwestern boundary and the northern boundary of Holme Valley

CP to the eastern boundary of Crosland Moor Ward, thence generally north- wards along said eastern boundary to the point of commencement.

AIMONDBITRY WARD

Commencing at the point where the eastern boundary of Newsome Ward meets the southern boundary of Deighton Ward, thence eastwards along said southern boundary and continuing eastwards, northeastwards and eastwards along

Wakefield Road to the northwestern boundary of Kirkburn CP, thence south- eastwards and southwestwards along said northwestern boundary to the eastern boundary of Newsome Ward, thence generally northeastwards and northwestwards along said eastern boundary to the point of commencement. 13

MISFIELD WARD

Commencing on the northern boundary of Kirkburton CP, at a point where

Nun Brook flows into the River Calder, thence northwestwards to and along

said brook to Leeds Road, thence northeastwards along said road and Huddersfield

Road to a point opposite the southwestern boundary of the Garage, No 269,

Huddersfield Road, thence southeastwards to and along said southwestern

boundary to its southernmost point, thence southeastwards in a straight line

from said point to the northernmost point of the western boundary of Parcel

No 1215, as shown on OS 1:2500 Plan SE 2022, edition of 1958, thence from

said point, southwards along said western boundary to the southwestern

boundary of said parcel, thence southeastwards along said southwestern

boundary and the southwestern boundaries of Parcel Nos 1909 and 2703 and

continuing southeastwards along the southwestern boundary of Parcel No 2800,

as shown on OS 1:2500 plan SE 20-2121, edition of 1971, and in prolongation

thereof to the stream known as Finching Dike, thence northeastwards along

said stream to the footpath leading southwards to Crossley lane, thence

southwards along said footpath to said lane, thence southwards along said

lane to the path leading southwestwards from the east of No 206 Crossley

Lane, to Wellhouse Lane, thence southwestwards along said path to Wellhouse

Lane, thence northwestwards along said lane to Jenny Lane, thence southwest-

wards along said lane to Greenside Road, thence southeastwards along said

road and Dunbottle Lane to Camm Lane thence southwestwards along said lane

to the road known as Towngate, thence southeastwards along said road to

Crowlees Road, thence southwestwards along said road to Parker Lane, thence

southeastwards along said lane to Huddersfield Road, thence eastwards along

said road to Steanard Lane, thence southeastwards along said lane to the

River Calder, thence northeastwards, southeastwards and northeastwards

along said river to a point due northwest of the northwesternmost.point of

Parcel No 37^9, as shown on OS 1:2500 Microfilm (A) SE 2219, date of micro- filming'1967, thence due southeastwards to said point, being on the western boundary of said parcel, thence generally southwards and southeastwards along said western boundary and the western boundaries of parcel nos ^33^j ^319 and M+07 to the road known as Long Causeway, thence southwards along said road and its continuation as a footpath to Back Lane, thence southwestwards along said lane to Scopsley Lane, thence southwards along said lane to a point opposite the northwestern boundary of'Parcel No 9600, as shown on

OS 1:3500 microfilm (A *) SE 2118, date of microfilming 1961, _thence west- wards to and southwestwards along said northwestern boundary and southwards along the western boundary of said parcel to the southeastern boundary of

Parcel No ?800, thence southwestwards along said southeastern boundary, continuing onto OS 1:2500 Microfilm (_A_*) SE 211?, date of microfilming 1961, to the northeastern boundary of Parcel No 7286 , thence northwestwards along said northeastern boundary to the northwestern boundary of said parcel, thence southwestwards along said northwestern boundary and the northwestern boundary of Parcel No 6581 to the northeastern boundary of Parcel No 5771, thence

southeastwards along said northeastern boundary and southwestwards along the southeastern boundary of said parcel to the eastern boundary of parcel No 4667T thence southwards along said eastern boundary to and southwards, eastwards and southwestwards along the eastern and southeastern boundaries of Parcel No

5055 to the northeastern boundary of Kirkburton CP, thence generally northwest- wards, northeastwards and northwestwards along said CP boundary to the point of commencement.

KEGHTOWN WARD

Commencing at the point where the northeastern boundary of Kirkburton CP meets the northwestern boundary of the Borough, thence generally northwest- wards, northeastwards and eastwards along said northwestern boundary to the eastern boundary of Parcel No 83^6, as shown on OS 1:2500 Plan SE 1626, 15 edition of 1957 j thence southwards along said eastern boundary to Whitehall

Road, thence eastwards and northeastwards along said road to the Bradford to Dewsbury railway, thence southeastwards along said railway to Whitechapel

Road, thence southwestwards along said road to Turnsteads Avenue, thence southeastwards along said avenue to Whitcliffe Road, thence eastwards along said road to the Bradford to Dewsbury railway, thence southwards along said railway to the road known as Westgate, thence eastwards along said road, the road known as Parkside and eastwards and northeastwards along St Peg Lane and the road known as Spen Bank to Gomersal Lane, thence generally eastwards along said lane to the unnamed road that leads southwards from said lane past Mount Pleasant and the properties known as Walsh Houses, thence south- westwards, southeastwards and southwestwards along'said road and continuing southwestwards along the footpath leading to New Street to the northwestern boundary of Royds Park, thence southwestwards, southeastwards and southwest- wards along said northwestern boundary to Bradford Road, thence southeastwards along said road to Primrose Lane, thence southwestwards along said lane to the Bradford to Dewsbury railway, thence southeastwards along said railway to Huddersfield Road, thence southwestwards, southwards and southwestwards along said road to the northwestern boundary of Mir.field. Ward, thence south- westwards and southeastwards along said northwestern boundary to the northern boundary of Kirkburton CP, thence southwestwards along said northern boundary to the point of commencement.

CLECKHEATON WARD

Commencing at the point where the northern boundary of Hightown Ward meets the northwestern boundary of the Borough, thence generally northeastwards along said northwestern boundary and southeastwards along the northeastern boundary of the Borough to Warrens Lane, thence southwestwards along said lane to the point at which it becomes a path, thence northwestwards along the southwestern extremity of said lane to and south westwards along the 16 line of field boundaries leading southwestwards from said lane to the stream known as Oakwell Beck, thence southwestwards along said field boundaries to said stream, thence generally southeastward^ along said stream to its culvert to the north of the M62 Motorway, thence southeastwards in a straight line from said culvert to the culvert of Oakwell Beck on the southern side of the dismantled railway, thence southwestwards along Oakwell Beck to

Nutter Lane, thence westwards along said lane to a point due north of the northernmost point of the western boundary of The Scotland (PH), thence due south from said point to said western boundary, thence southwards along said western boundary and continuing southwards along the line of field boundaries leading southwards from said western boundary towards Church Beck to NG Reference point SE 21216 26286, thence southwards in a straight line from said reference point to the line of field boundaries leading southwards from NG Reference point SE 2122^26115, thence southwards along said field boundaries to the northern boundary of No 75 Church Lane, thence eastwards along said northern boundary and southwards along the eastern boundary of said property to Church Lane, thence westwards along said lane to Oxford Road, thence northwestwards along said road to Spen Lane, thence northwestwards and southwestwards along said lane to the northeastern boundary of Hightown

Ward, thence generally westwards and northwestwards along said northeastern boundary and westwards along the northern boundary of said ward to the point of commencement.

BIRSTALL WAED

Commencing at the point where the eastern boundary of Cleckheaton Ward meets the northeastern boundary of the Borough, thence generally southeastwards along said northeastern boundary to the northwestern boundary of Nos 2 to 16

Timothy Lane, thence southwestwards along said northwestern boundary and southwards.along the western boundary of said properties to Timothy Lane, 17

thence southwestwards along said lane to the road known as Batley Field Hill,

thence south-eastwards and southwestwards along said road to Bradford Road,

thence southeastwards and southwards along said road to Hick Lane, thence

northwestwards along said lane and Commercial Street to Market Square, thence

southwards through said square and continuing southwards along Cambridge Street

to Wellington Street, thence westwards along said street to Mayman lane, thence

northwards along said lane to Cemetery Road, thence northwestwards and north-

eastwards along said road to Cross Bank Road, thence northwestwards along

said road to Carlinghow Lane, thence westwards and northwestwards along said

lane and continuing northwestwards along White Lee Road to Leeds Old Road, i thence southwestwards along said road to a point opposite the southwestern

boundary of No 39 Leeds Old Road, thence northwestwards to and along said

- southwestern boundary to the northwestern boundary of said property, thence

northeastwards along said northwestern boundary, the northwestern boundaries

of White Lee Social Club and No 250 White Lee Road and the southeastern

boundaries of Nos 7 to 1 Houldsworth Avenue to White Lee Road, thence north-

westwards along said road to Leeds Road, thence southwestwards along said road

to a point opposite the southern boundary of the track leading to White Lea

Colliery (disused), thence westwards to and southwestwards along said southern

boundary and'the southern boundary of said Colliery to the northeastern

boundary of Parcel No 730? as shown on OS 1:2500 Plan SE 2125, edition of

1956, thence northwestwards along said northeastern boundary to the eastern

boundary of Parcel No 6520, thence northwards and northeastwards along said

eastern boundary and continuing northeastwards along the southeastern

boundary of Parcel No 7^36" to the northeastern boundary of said parcel, thence

• northwestwards along said northeastern boundary the northeastern boundary of

parcel No 6W? and the northern boundary of said parcel to a point on said

northern boundary being at NG Ref point SE 2158725527, thence westwards from said

point in a straight line to the eastern boundary of Parcel No 565^1 thence

southwards along said eastern boundary and northwestwards along the south-

western boundary of said parcel to the southeastern boundary of Parcel No 18 thence southwestwards along said southeastern boundary and northwestwards along the southwestern boundary of said parcel to the southeastern boundary of No 26 Craven Lane, thence northeastwards along said southeastern boundary and the southeastern boundaries of Nos 28 to 56 Craven Lane to the northeastern boundary of the last mentioned property, thence northwestwards along said northeastern boundary, crossing Craven Lane in a straight line to the unnamed road leading to Nos 37 to 51 Craven Lane, thence northwestwards along said unnamed road to a point in line with the northern boundary of No 4 3 Craven Lane, thence, northwestwards to and along said northern boundary to the southeastern boundary of No 1 Craven

Drive, thence northeastwards along said southeastern boundary and northwest- j wards along the northeastern boundary of said property to Craven Drive, thence northwards along said drive to the southeastern boundary of Cleckheaton Ward, thence eastwards along said southeastern boundary and generally northeastwards along the eastern boundary of said ward to the point of commencement.

BAILEY EAST WARD

Commencing at the point where the southeastern boundary of Birstall Ward meets the northeastern boundary of the Borough, thence generally southeastwards and southwestwards along said northeastern boundary to the northeastern boundary of Parcel No 4113 as shown on OS 1:2500 SUSI microfilm SE 2723, date of micro- filming, May 1973* thence northwestwards along said northeastern boundary, crossing the track, to the western boundary of parcel No 5^+0, thence north- westwards along said western boundary and the southwestern boundary of Parcel

No 5^62 to the northern boundary of Parcel No OV$6, thence westwards along said northern boundary on to OS 1:2500 SUSI Microfilm SE 2623, date of micro- filming, May 1973 to the northeastern boundary of Parcel No 795^) thence northwestwards along said northeastern boundary and continuing northwestwards and generally westwards along the northern boundary of Parcel No 7265, thence westwards in a straight line from the western end of said boundary, crossing Leeds Road, to the southern boundary of No 901 Leeds Road, thence northwest- 19 wards along said southern boundary to the eastern boundary of Parcel No 608^, thence southwards along said eastern boundary and westwards along the southern boundary of said parcel to the northern boundary of Parcel No 5068, thence westwards along said northern boundary and southwards along the western boundary of said parcel, crossing Sykes Lane, and continuing southwards along the western 'boundary of Parcel No ¥*53 to Grange Road, thence westwards along said road to a point opposite the eastern boundary of Parcel No 20^1, thence southwards to and along said eastern boundary and westwards along the southern boundary of said parcel and the southern boundary of Parcel No 0061 to its westernmost point, thence southwestwards from said point in a straight line, crossing the disused Railway, to the southeastern boundary of parcel no 0025, thence southwestwards along said southeastern boundary, and continuing on

OS 1:2500'Microfilm (B) SE 2523 date of microfilming 1966, to High Street, thence southeastwards along said street to a point opposite the northern boundary of No 156 High Street, thence southwestwards to and along said northern boundary to the southwestern boundary of said property, thence southeastwards along said southwestern boundary and the southwestern boundaries, of Nos 15S to 166 High Street to the footpath leading southwestwards to Glenlow

Road, thence southwestwards along said footpath to Glenlow Road, thence south- eastwards along said road to Guernsey Road, thence southwestwards along said road to the road known as Croftlands, thence southeastwards along said road to Leeds Road, thence southwestwards along said' road to Caulms Wood Road, thence northwestwards along said road to Crackenedge Lane, thence northwards and northeastwards along said lane to a point opposite the northern boundary of No 236 Crackenedge Lane, thence due west from said point to the stream known as Batley Carr Beck, thence southwestwards along said stream to a point due east of the culvert of Batley Carr Dyke in Albion Mill, thence due west to said culvert, thence northwestwards along said dyke, crossing Bradford

Road, to David Lane, thence southwestwards along said lane to a point opposite the northeastern boundary of Batley Carr. Working Men's Club, thence northwestwards to and-along said northeastern boundary to its northernmost point, thence 20 northwestwards in a straight line from said point to the southwestern extremity of the unnamed road to the southeast of Nos 13 to 23 Town Street, thence north- westwards along said southwestern extremity and the southwestern boundary of the garages and enclosure to the southeast of No 23 Town Street and in prolongation

thereof" to the path to the south of said property, thence southwestwards and northwestwards along said path to Town Street, thence southwestwards along said street to Upper Road, thence westwards along said road to Halifax Road thence northwestwards along said road to Track Road, thence northwards along

said road and continuing northwards and northeastwards along Dark Lane to the

southern boundary of Birstall Ward, thence generally northeastwards and south-

eastwards along said southern boundary and northwestwards and northeastwards

along the southeastern boundary of said Ward to the point of commencement.

BATLEY WEST WARD

Commencing at the point where the southern boundary of Birstall Ward meets

the western boundary of Batley East Ward, thence southwards along said western .

boundary and Halifax Road to Healds Road, thence westwards along said road,

crossing Staincliffe Road, to Knowles Hill Road, thence southwestwards along said road to the footpath to the south of No 200 Heckmondwike Road, thence * southwestwards along said footpath to said road, thence southwards along said

road to Garr Lane, thence southwestwards and westwards along said lane to the

Spen River, thence generally northwards and northwestwards along said river

to the Bradford to Dewsbury railway, thence southeastwards along said railway

to Station Lane, thence northeastwards along said lane to Market Street,

thence northwestwards along said street to Market Place, thence eastwards

through said Place and along High Street to a point opposite the western

boundary of the Car Park, thence northwestwards along said western boundary

and the eastern boundaries of the Telephone Exchange and Albion Court to

Cemetery Road, thence northeastwards along said road to Brighton Street, 21 thence northwestwards along said street to Battye Street, thence northwards along said street and Upper Battye Street to the point where the western boundary of Heckmondwike Cemetery meets the northern boundary of No 14 Oxford

Street,, thence eastwards to and northwards along said western boundary and northeastwards and northwestwards along the northwestern boundary of said cemetery to Dale Lane, thence northeastwards along said lane to the western boundary of No J>6 Dale Lane, thence southeastwards to and along said western boundary and its continuation southeastwards as a field boundary to NG Reference point SE 220322^2251 thence eastwards in a straight line from said point to the westernmost point of the southern boundaries of Nos 27 to 1 Fairfield

Road, thence northeastwards along said southern boundaries to Hollinbank Lane, thence northwards along said lane to the road known as White Lee Side, thence northwestwards along said road to its junction with Leeside Road, thence northwards to the western boundary of No 10 Leeside Road, thence northwest- wards along said western boundary and the western boundary of No 13 Leefield

Hoad to a point opposite the southern boundary of No ^ Leefield Road, thence southwestwards to and along said southern boundary to the southwestern boundary of said property thence northwestwards along said southwestern boundary and the southwestern boundary of No'. 2 Leefield Road to its western- ' most point, thence due north from said point to Leeds Old Road, being on the southern boundary of Birstall Ward, thence southeastwards and generally southwards along" said southern boundary to the point of commencement.

X

HECKMONDWIKE WARD

Commencing at the point where the southwestern boundary of Birstall Ward meets the western boundary of Batley West Ward thence generally southwestwards and southeastwards along said western boundary and continuing southeastwards along Spen River to the stream known as Finching Dike, thence generally westwards along said stream to the northeastern boundary of Mirfield Ward, 22 thence southwestwards and northwestwards along said northeastern boundary

to the eastern boundary of Hightown Ward, thence generally northeastwards

•and northwestwards along said eastern boundary to the southeastern boundary of Cleckheaton Ward, thence northeastwards along said southeastern boundary and southeastwards along the southwestern boundary of Birstall Ward to the point of commencement.

DEWSBTJRY WEST WARD

Commencing at the point where the eastern boundary of Mirfield Ward meets the

southern boundary of Heckmondwike Ward, thence eastwards along said southern boundary and northeastwards along the southern boundary of Batley West Ward

to Halifax Road, thence southeastwards along said road to Oxford Road, thence

southwestwards along said road to a point opposite the northeastern boundary

of No 2 Oxford Road, thence northwestwards to and along said northeastern

boundary to a point opposite the southern boundary of No 3 West Park Street,

thence southwestwards to and along said southern boundary to the northeastern

boundary of No 3a West Park Street, thence southeastwards along said north-

eastern boundary to the southern boundary of said property, thence southwest-

wards along said southern boundary and the southern boundary of No 5 West Park

Street to its westernmost point, thence southwestwards in a straight line from

said point to the southern boundary of Nos 7 and 9 West Park Street, thence

southwestwards along said southern boundary, and the southern boundaries of

Nos 11 to 41 West Park Street and the property known as Firdene to James Street,

thence southeastwards along said street to Oxford Road, thence southwestwards

along said road to Stockhill Street, thence southeastwards along said street

to the eastern boundary of No 68 Stockhill Street, thence southwards

along said eastern boundary and westwards along the southern boundary of said

property, and continuing westwards along the southern boundaries of Nos 62 to

58 Stockhill Street to the western boundary of the last mentioned property, - 23 thence northwards along said western boundary to the southern boundary of No 56

Stockhill Street, thence southwestwards along said southern boundary and the southern boundaries of Nos 5^ to ^6 Stockhill Street, thence southwestwards in a straight line, crossing Mitre Road, to the footpath to the north of St John's CE School, thence westwards along said footpath to Boothroyd Lane, thence southeastwards and northeastwards along said lane and northeastwards along Moorlands Road to the accessway from said road to Lacey Street, thence southeastwards along said accessway to said street, thence southeastwards and southwards along said street to Boothroyd Lane, thence southeastwards along said lane to the road known as Webster Hill, thence northeastwards along said road to the Mirfield to Leeds railway, thence northeastwards along said railway to the road known as Wesley Place, thence southwards along said road to Wellington Road, thence southwestwards along said road to the road known as Webster Hill, thence southeastwards along said road to Mill Street West, thence southwards along said street to the River Calder, thence generally southwards, northwestwards and southwestwards along said river to the eastern boundary of Mirfield Ward, thence generally northwestwards and northwards along said eastern boundary to the point of commencement.

DEWSBURY EAST WARD

Commencing at the point where the eastern boundary of Batley West Ward meets the southern boundary of Batley East Ward, thence generally southeastwards, northeastwards and southeastwards along said southern boundary to the eastern boundary of the Borough, thence generally southwestwards and southwards along said eastern boundary to the River Calder, thence generally northwestwards along said river to the eastern boundary of Dewsbury West Ward, thence generally northwestwards, northeastwards and northwestwards along said eastern boundary and the eastern boundary of Batley West Ward to the point of commencement. 2k

THORNHILL WARD

Commencing at the point where the south eastern boundary of Mirfield Ward meets the southern boundary of Dewsbury West Ward, thence generally north- eastwards and northwards along said southern boundary to the southern boundary of Dewsbury East Ward, thence generally southeastwards along said southern boundary to the eastern boundary of the Borough, thence generally southeastwards, northwestwards and southwestwards, along said eastern boundary and continuing southwestwards and northwards along the northern boundary of

Kirkburton CP to the eastern boundary of Mirfield Ward, thence generally northwards along said eastern boundary to the point of commencement,

DALTON WAED

The Kirkheaton Ward of the former Kirkburton UD

and.that area bounded by a line commencing at the point where the northern

boundary of Almondbury Ward meets the southeastern boundary of Deighton Ward,

thence generally northeastwards along said southeastern boundary to the western boundary of Kirkburton CP, thence southwards along said western boundary to- the.,nor.tixern boundary of Almondbury Ward,., thence- westwards along s_aid northern boundary to the point of commencement.

DENBY DALE WARD

The Parish of Denby Dale and the Shelley Ward of the former Kirkburton UD,

HOME VALLEY NORTH WARD

•The parish of Meltham. • 25 •

and the Honley Central, Honley East, H0nl'ey South, Honley West and Thurstonland

Wards of the former Holmfirth UD.

HOIKE VALLEY SOUTH WARD

Comprises the remainder of the former Holmfirth UD. c KIRKHffiTON WARD

Comprises the remainder of the former Kirkburton UD.