Local Government Boundary Commission Electoral Review of County Council 2015

Submission by Councillor Edward Heron ( Division) June 2015

Councillor Edward Heron

Introduction & Background

The Boundary Committee for England undertook a review of Hampshire County Council in 2002 and published its final report in July 2004. This report recommended a number of changes to the Fordingbridge Division, which prior to the review was deemed to be 26% over represented.

Following publication of the draft recommendations (January 2004) District Council objected to the proposals for the Fordingbridge division on the grounds that it would create ‘a very large division in geographic terms that will make effective representation by a single member very difficult’. It added that the division contains 14 parishes it would be ‘impossible for a single member to [attend parish meetings] with any degree of regularity’. Parish Council, which was proposed to be split with one polling district (Copythorne North) being in the Fordingbridge Division and the other (Copythorne South) in the Lyndhurst Division commented ‘there is no affinity between Copythorne and Fordingbridge’ and that it ‘is already warded for district purposes and a further division into two county units would be inappropriate’.

The final report (July 2004) upheld the draft recommendations and confirmed the constituent district wards of the Fordingbridge division as ‘Parishes of & Copythorne of the Bramshaw, Copythorne North & ward; Downlands & Forest ward; Fordingbridge ward; Forest North West ward.’

Current Position

I was first elected to represent the Fordingbridge division in 2009 and re-elected in 2013. Prior to this the division was represented by my mother (Councillor Kathy Heron) who was first elected in 2001 prior to the 2002 review, the conclusions of which were implemented at the 2005 quadrennial elections.

The division currently encompasses thirteen parishes and one town namely:

Bramshaw Parish Parish Copythorne Parish (Copythorne North polling area only) Parish Ellingham, & Parish Fordingbridge Town Godshill Parish Hale Parish Hyde Parish Martin Parish Parish Parish Parish Parish

As observed by the District Council in its submission in 2004, the Fordingbridge division is ‘a very large division in geographic terms’ and includes what could be considered three relatively disparate areas, although some parishes could be considered to contain characteristics of more than one area. Five parishes (Breamore, Damerham, Martin, Rockbourne & Whitsbury) are wholly or partly within the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and form the majority of the District Downlands & Forest ward. Damerham, Martin, Rockbourne & Whitsbury may be considered to form a wider Downlands community.

Eight parishes (Bramshaw, Breamore, Copythorne, Ellingham, Harbridge & Ibsley, Fordingbridge, Godshill, Hale & Hyde) are wholly or partly within the New Forest National Park. The majority of these parishes may be considered to have strong social and cultural links to the open New Forest.

Fordingbridge parish as an historical market town exhibits strong individual characteristics and acts as a focal point and key shopping area for a number of the surrounding communities within the Fordingbridge division. Along with to the north and to the south, the town is a key identifier for parishes, hamlets and communities within the Downlands area and the wider northern Avon Valley within Hampshire.

The current electorate of the Fordingbridge division (July 2015 register) is 11,484.

Whilst the Fordingbridge division is geographically dispersed, highway communications are generally good with the A338 providing connection along the Avon Valley and the B3078 linking Fordingbridge with Godshill and Bramshaw. The A31 to the south of Ellingham, Harbridge & Ibsley and Bramshaw Parishes provides a relatively clear southern boundary to the division with the noticeable exception of Copythorne, of which the majority of the Copythorne North polling area lies to the south of the A31. The A354 to the north and A36 also provide useful demarcations between the division and the authority areas of Council and Test Valley Borough Council.

LGBCE Guidance & Projected Electorate

LGBCE guidance recognises that ‘the Commission accepts that mathematically exact electoral equality across a local authority is unlikely to be achieved’ and goes on to highlight the requirements of the 2009 Local Democracy, Economic Development & Construction Act which requires the Commission to have regard to:

 the need to secure equality of representation  the need to reflect the identities and interests of local communities  the need to secure effective and convenient local government

The guidance further advises that the LGBCE will ‘where those strands may be in conflict with one another, seek to strike what in our judgement is the right balance, having regard to the evidence’.

Based on the evidence submitted by Hampshire County Council and published on the LGBCE website to assist this consultation the current electorate of the Fordingbridge division is 11,417 based on the December 2014 electoral register. This represents an over representation of 12.71% from the average electorate of 13,080/per councillor based on the 2014 registers.

The current electoral register (July 2015) records the electorate of the Fordingbridge division at 11,484. This represents an over representation of 12.2% from the average electorate on 13,080/per councillor.

Based on the forecast provided by Hampshire County Council the electorate for the Fordingbridge division, as currently constituted, is estimated to be 11,300 in 2021 representing a variance of -18% from the forecast average electorate per councillor of 13,846. Conclusion & Recommendation

The comments made by Council to the previous review undertaken in 2002-2004 were largely correct in that representing such a geographically large and dispersed division does present significant challenges. I seek to regularly attend Parish (and the Town) council meetings, usually attending over 75% of meetings. Some parishes regularly meet on the same date, for example Bramshaw, Copythorne and Ellingham, Harbridge & Ibsley parish councils coincide most months. I seek to address this by alternating my attendance between the two geographically close Bramshaw and Copythorne parishes one month and Ellingham, Harbridge and Ibsley parish the next. This is not ideal as I am unable to be in attendance for the entirety of either Bramshaw or Copythorne parish councils meetings and if I miss any of their meetings it may be three months between my attendances.

Whilst the current situation is manageable, although far from ideal, I do not think that the addition of any further parishes within the Fordingbridge division would be sustainable.

It is recognised that the current ‘over representation’ of the Fordingbridge division does not meet the first of the three requirements of the 2009 Act, namely ‘the need to secure equality of representation’ however when balanced against the other two requirements, at present it fulfils the overall objectives.

When considered against the electorate forecasts in 2021, the increase in the ‘over representation’ from 12.7% to 18% may tip the balance when assessed against the three criteria and necessitate some change to the division area.

Utilising the same forecast in 2021 the neighbouring Lyndhurst division would, on its current boundaries, be 7% ‘over represented’.

It is submitted that the Copythorne South polling area of the Lyndhurst division should be included within the Fordingbridge division.

This would, based on the forecasts, reduce the projected ‘over representation’ of the Fordingbridge division from 18% to 9% in 2021. This would have the additional benefit of addressing the concerns expressed by Copythorne Parish Council in their representations during the 2002-2004 review regarding the splitting of their parish between two county divisions.

This proposal would not significantly increase the workload for the elected representative of the Fordingbridge division as it would not require the attendance at additional parish council meetings.