DOCSLIB.ORG

Oldham Council Liberal Democrat Group Council Size Submission for the Electoral Review of Oldham Metropolitan Borough in 2020

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Oldham Council Liberal Democrat Group Council Size Submission for the Electoral Review of Oldham Metropolitan Borough in 2020 Oldham Council Liberal Democrat Group Council size submission for the electoral review of Oldham Metropolitan Borough in 2020 1. The need for change 2. Reductions in workload 3. The impact of modern methods 4. Benefits of a reduction in councillors 5. Impact on the electoral cycle 6. Impact on council services Page 1 of 4 1. The need for change Oldham Borough has had 60 councillors since it was created in its present form in 1985. That was doubtless a fair assessment of effort required then. But that was a long time ago. In every job function of the council but this, numbers have been drastically reduced by automation, slimmed-down administration, centralisation, and budget cuts. The public and our workforce note with resentment that the councillors have refused to ‘share the pain’ of cuts. The Liberal Democrat group has been advocating a reduction to 40 councillors (42 if our ward resizing proposal is accepted) for a number of years, but it has been rejected, partly on the grounds that it would need to involve the Electoral Commission. With the Electoral Commission reassessing Oldham at present, we believe it could and should happen now. 2. Reductions in workload The council has fewer functions and its budget has roughly halved in recent years. Its erstwhile biggest responsibility – schools and colleges – is mainly funded and controlled by central government. Housing is now under independent housing associations. Policing, transport, Fire and Rescue and strategic planning are sub-regional functions. There are roles on boards, but little involvement of rank and file councillors beyond governorships of individual schools. Democratic leadership of the council has moved from committees to the cabinet. Expertise and policy making reside with a small group who are paid like managers. The ordinary councillor is a non-specialist who does not make policy unless through their party structure. Committees are fewer than in the past. Only regulatory committees are little changed. Overview and scrutiny committees – the ‘voice of the ordinary councillor’– have more than halved in number and meet less often. Local forums – names and functions have varied but the community leadership role was similar – are all but abolished. Some councillors now have no committees at all save the full council meeting which itself meets less often. Much bread-and-butter casework has moved online and to self-service. Many members of the public find it more convenient to report the pothole, faulty street light or missed bin collection online than to involve a councillor. Most councillors still do surgeries but fewer constituents attend them nowadays. Councillors can pool the job and/or do fewer, so most spend less time dedicated to them. Page 2 of 4 3. The impact of modern methods There is not only less work to do, but the tools to do it have changed hugely. In 1985, councillors did not have computers, mobile phones, internet or, in many cases, their own car. The same work took far longer. The main difference now is that contact with the public is more easily managed. Modern methods of communication – eg email, websites, mobile phones and voicemail – predominate and make receipt and resolution of most casework far easier and quicker. There is much greater flexibility to manage work around other commitments and family life. Research can mainly be done online, at any time. A few wards have increased caseloads owing to growth in population, but that should be smoothed out in the review of wards. The caseload commitment depends very much on the councillor anyway. The best regularly seek out issues, opinions and emerging problems and opportunities pro- actively. Communication such as newsletters (paper and electronic), surveys, websites and doorstep visits can far outweigh reactive contacts. Others do what comes their way. It was ever thus, but it does show that many councillors do not find the basic caseload at all unmanageable. 4. Benefits of a reduction in councillors Given all these factors, the Liberal Democrats consider that two councillors per ward can definitely cope with the modern caseload and the duties in the Civic Centre. There is an annual budget saving of hundreds of thousands of pounds from allowances, accommodation, equipment etc. There would also be a big saving from fewer elections. The borough’s residents and our staff would see it as a very fair and positive move. 5. Impact on the electoral cycle Under present rules, the only option in a two-councillor model would be to have all-up elections every four years. In our view, this is a major downside, in that it would make the council far less responsive to residents. It would also mean the major issues of the borough were properly debated with the public once in four years instead of three years in four. The alternative of fewer three-member wards does not work within established townships, which have benefits in local loyalty and involvement. We therefore ask the Electoral Commission to consider pursuing a rule change. Specifically, two- member wards with elections for one councillor every two years. Contacts from other councils indicate that it would find a widespread welcome way beyond Oldham. Page 3 of 4 6. Impact on council services This would be negligible. With 21 wards, with two councillors in each, the representational ability of the council will not be reduced. The average councillor will have just under 6,000 constituents. As the number of council officers will not be reduced, the reduction in councillors will not affect how the council is administered and run. Council meetings would benefit. Many councillors do not get the opportunity to speak at full council due to a packed agenda, and rules and standing orders make it virtually impossible for those of smaller parties or no party to get a speaking slot in the time allocated. This has a significantly negative impact on the representative power of councillors from smaller parties and the opposition. The ability of council officers and councillors to find and complete casework in their communities will not be reduced. The members will simply have a slightly increased casework load, but this is balanced by fewer demands in other areas The officer support structure can be the same and the reduction in councillors will not impact that. Our proposals have no impact on cabinet size, committee size or officer structure. 42 Councillors are enough to vote and make the necessary decisions at full council meetings. For further information please contact: Councillor Howard Sykes MBE Leader of the Opposition on Oldham Council Leader of the Liberal Democrat Group Oldham Council. Member for Shaw Ward. Member for East Ward Shaw & Crompton Parish Council. Office: Room 338, Level 3, Civic Centre, West Street, Oldham OL1 1UL. T: 0161 770 4016 E: [email protected] Page 4 of 4 Oldham Council Liberal Democrat Group Ward sizing submission for the electoral review of Oldham Metropolitan Borough in 2020 1. Introduction to Oldham Council 2. Guiding principles the review 3. Population figures compared 4. Proposal for a new ward 5. Impact on the council Page 1 of 5 1. Introduction to Oldham Council The borough of Oldham was created in 1974, following the Local Government Act of 1972. It brought together the seven former council areas of Oldham, Failsworth, Chadderton, Crompton, Royton, Lees and Saddleworth. These vary a great deal in size and character, but all retain distinctive district centres and strong identities. The council took its present form in 1985, when it became a unitary authority, on separating from Greater Manchester County Council. It serves as the sole executive, deliberative and legislative body responsible for local policy, setting council tax, and allocating budget in the district. Oldham Metropolitan Borough has 20 electoral wards with a total of 60 councillors, three per electoral ward. It also has two parish councils. The parish councils are involved in planning, management of town and parish centres, community events and promoting tourism. Those parishes are in Saddleworth and Shaw & Crompton. The rest of Oldham Borough is unparished. It is from the seven original townships that most of the current electoral wards are formed. This was administratively convenient but has also proved advantageous for community strength and participation. The Liberal Democrat group has believed for some time that the present number of councillors can no longer be justified. The case for a reduction is made in the separate paper Council size submission for the electoral review of Oldham Metropolitan Borough in 2020, which should be read in conjunction with this one. Suffice it to note here that it is relevant to the case for an extra ward 2. Guiding principles of the review In the interests of fair representation, wards should be as even in population size as practicable; that is a given. The Liberal Democrats have been guided by the Electoral Commission’s document forecasting the impact of demographic trends across the borough over the coming years. Adjustment on these grounds is clearly necessary. Also, on this occasion, the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework (GMSF) needs to be considered. It designates very large areas of land in Royton North, Royton South, Shaw and Crompton wards for strategic housing developments in the coming years. Other wards are also earmarked for significant development. GMSF is not finalized at present but the main thrust of it is backed by policy at local, sub-regional and national level. The practice of keeping wards, as far as possible, within the old township boundaries has served the borough well and we would adhere to that. Research has shown that loyalties and the sense of identity rest more strongly with the original areas than with Page 2 of 5 Oldham as a borough.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The London Gazette, November 20, 1908
    8'.58« THE LONDON GAZETTE, NOVEMBER 20, 1908. In Parliament.—Session 1909. • pipes situate wholly .in the said parish-of OLDHAM CORPORATION. Butterworth, commencing at .or in the winding, shaft of the said Butterworth Hall Colliery and (New Waterworks, Wells, Boreholes, Pumping terminating at or in the Butterworth Ha.ll. Stations ! and Aqueducts; New Road and Pumping Station. Footpath; Discharge of Water into Streams; Work No. 4.—An aqueduct, conduit or line Power to Collect and Impound Water; of pipes, situate wholly in the said parish of Maintenance of Waterworks; Breaking up Butterworth, commencing at or in the Butter-, Streets and Roads and Application of Water worth Hall Pumping Station and terminating Provisions of the Public Health Acts; Con- at or in the south-west corner of the existing firmation of Agreement with Platt Brothers Piethorne reservoir of the Corporation and .and Company Limited; Agreements with numbered 432 on the T»Vs Ordnance Map of Owners, &c., of Lands as to Drainage and the said parish of Butterworth, published in Protection of Waters and Waterworks from 1894. Pollution, &c.; Bye-laws for Preventing Work No. 5.—A well, borehole and pumping Pollution of Water; New Works to be part station (hereinafter referred to as "the Delph. of Water Undertaking of Corporation; New Pumping Station "), situate wholly in the parish Tramways and Incidental Works; Gauge ; and urban district of Saddleworth, in the West Motive Power; New Tramways to be part of Riding of the county of York, in the enclosures Tramways Undertaking of Corporation; Work- numbered 1621 and 1622 on the ysW Ordnance ing Agreements and Traffic Arrangements; Map of the said parish, and urban district .of Omnibuses and Motor Cars on the Trolley Saddleworth, published in 1906.
    [Show full text]
  • 8458 the LONDON GAZETTE, 21 NOVEMBER, 1924. Character to That of the Corporation by Means 13
    8458 THE LONDON GAZETTE, 21 NOVEMBER, 1924. character to that of the Corporation by means 13. The Bill will or may confer rights and of cash, shares, stock or debentures, or by any privileges upon the Corporation in addition and one or more of them. incidental to those hereinbefore referred to. 6. To provide if thought necessary or And Notice is hereby also given that on or desirable that the Corporation shall not issue before the 17th day of December next printed Debentures for any other purpose than that of copies of the Bill will be deposited in the Pri- purchasing or acquiring undertakings or vate Bill Office of the House of Commons and businesses of the character aforesaid, to limit on and after the 21st day of December next a or regulate the amount and value, of Deben- copy of the Bill may be inspected and copies tures so to be created and issued for any may also be obtained at the offices of the Cor- particular purpose, and to make regulations poration at the Boyal Exchange in the City of prescribing and limiting the amount or number London at the price of two shillings and six- of Debentures or the proportion of each issue pence per copy, and also at the offices of tho of the same to be set apart for and paid by the undersigned Parliamentary Agents1 in 39, Vic- Corporation in respect of every such under- toria Street, Westminster. taking or business so purchased or acquired by A notice stating the objects of the Bill has them as aforesaid.
    [Show full text]
  • Joseph Cates, MD, DPH, Annual Re~Bort, Medical O~Cer Of
    1913. PUBLIC HEALTH. 17 already complaining of the large amount of "THE EVOLUlqON OF EPIDEMICS "* work and the large number of committees BvJ. T. C. NASH, M.D. (Edin.), D.P.H. (Camb.). (President of the Etstern Branch of the Society of which they are expected to attend. Medical Officers of Health.) The advocates for placing all sanitary Being a brief epitome or pr6cis of Chadwick Trust matters under the county councils would Lectures I., II. and III., on the Evolution of Epidemics. have us believe that the members of these councils have a much higher sense of duty than T HE evolution of disease implies and involves the members of rural district councils, but this the evolution of ideas of disease as well as certainly cannot apply to all county councils, of causes--the resultants being the labelled as, notwithstanding the permission given in the phenomena. Hence the importance of careful Local Government Act of i888 to appoint observation of phenomena objective and sub- medical officers of health, a cert~dn proportion jective, and of subsequent philosophic reasoning of county councils did not avail themselves of eoncerningsuch phenomena before pronouncing this privilege, and, indeed, only grudgingly a judgment. The history of disease should be appointed such officers when compelled to by traced back to broaden the outlook and the Housing and Town Planning Act of 19o 9. engender liberality of sentiment. Neither Chadwick nor Pasteur were medical DEFORmTIES.--\Vhen not due to tuberculosis men, but both played great pioneer parts in serious deformities are generally the result of preventive medicine, both making and recording infantile paralysis.
    [Show full text]
  • Oldham Radicalism and the Origins of Popular Liberalism, 1830-52 Author(S): Michael Winstanley Source: the Historical Journal, Vol
    Oldham Radicalism and the Origins of Popular Liberalism, 1830-52 Author(s): Michael Winstanley Source: The Historical Journal, Vol. 36, No. 3 (Sep., 1993), pp. 619-643 Published by: Cambridge University Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2639781 Accessed: 22/12/2008 08:12 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Cambridge University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Historical Journal. http://www.jstor.org The Historicaljournal, 36, 3 (I 993), pp.
    [Show full text]
  • Changes to Local Authority Arrangements, Areas and Names in England
    Changes to local authority arrangements, areas and names in England Orders and changes made by the Government and Councils between 1 April 2010 and 30 September 2011 Changes to local authority arrangements, areas and names in England Orders and changes made by the Government and Councils between 1 April 2010 and 30 September 2011 April 2012 Department for Communities and Local Government © Crown copyright, 2012 Copyright in the typographical arrangement rests with the Crown. You may re-use this information (not including logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/ or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or e-mail: [email protected]. This document/publication is also available on our website at www.communities.gov.uk Any enquiries regarding this document/publication should be sent to us at: Department for Communities and Local Government Eland House Bressenden Place London SW1E 5DU Telephone: 030 3444 0000 April, 2012 ISBN: 978-1-4098-3456-4 Department for Communities and Local Government CONTENTS Part A Changes effected by order of the Secretary of State under the Local 4 Government Act 1972 1. Order conferring borough status under Section 245 of the Local Government Act 1972 4 Part B Changes effected by local authorities’ action or Order as notified to the 5 Secretary of State 1. Orders made under section 96 of the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007 abolition of parishes 5 2.
    [Show full text]
  • CPRE – Devolution Discussion Paper (2016)
    DEVOLUTION: A DISCUSSION PAPER FOR CPRE BY LILLIAN BURNS JUNE 2016 1 Where is the government’s devolution of powers agenda heading? CPRE report, June 2016 FOREWORD With the exception of Brexit, the UK government’s devolution agenda for England - which officials describe as “fundamentally changing the way England is run” - is the most significant political process influencing CPRE’s work as we think about our Strategic Plan for 2017-2020. In light of this, we were delighted when Lillian Burns, Vice Chair of CPRE North West, offered to produce an impact assessment of the impact of devolution on CPRE’s work. I am sure you will agree that Lillian has produced a thought-provoking and timely “think piece” on some of the challenges ahead. In principle, CPRE supports empowering local communities – our 2026 Vision aspires to a future where “most decisions on land use are taken locally”. However, as Lillian outlines, there are a range of concerns about how devolution is currently being carried out, particularly in relation to transparency, accountability, and stakeholder engagement. The high degree of complexity involved, and the fact that each devolution deal is unique, presents further challenges for civil society. The devolution agenda has simply not been subjected to the degree of scrutiny that its importance warrants. As Lillian outlines, policy areas that can be devolved from central and local government to Combined Authorities include transport, strategic planning and housing. Given the centrality of these issues to CPRE’s work, we need to understand the devolution process and assess its impact. In the meantime, there is the increasing influence of Local Enterprise Partnerships to consider, not least their ability to make funding decisions based solely on economic growth, and their overall lack of accountability.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Thesis.Pdf
    Civic and municipal leadership: a study of three northern towns between 1832 and 1867 Michael Joseph Brennan Submitted in accordance with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Leeds, School of History March 2013 ii The candidate confirms that the work submitted is his own and that appropriate credit has been given where reference has been made to the work of others. This copy has been submitted on the understanding that it is the copyright material and that no quotation from this thesis may be published without proper acknowledgement. © 2013 The University of Leeds Michael Joseph Brennan iii Acknowledgements This thesis has its origin in an MA in Local Regional History undertaken at the University of Leeds in 1988, but it would never have reached this state without the guidance, support and knowledge of my supervisor, Professor Malcolm Chase of the University of Leeds. I owe him a great debt for helping me to turn my hazy ideas into a coherent piece of work, and reminding me how to study History again, after years spent in education. My thanks are also due to the staff of the School of History and of the University Library for their help and guidance. I have visited the following archive centres: West Yorkshire Archive Services at Halifax and Wakefield, Local Studies Centres at Oldham and Rochdale and The National Archive at Kew. Wherever I have gone, I have been helped with kindness, humour and outstanding professionalism for which I am extremely grateful. I am delighted that my friend and colleague Alastair Linden was able to help with ideas and proof reading.
    [Show full text]
  • 3B2 to Ps Tmp 1..43
    1984L0169 — EN — 22.01.1991 — 001.001 — 1 This document is meant purely as a documentation tool and the institutions do not assume any liability for its contents ►B COUNCIL DIRECTIVE of 28 February 1984 concerning the Community list of less-favoured farming areas within the meaning of Directive 75/ 268/EEC (United Kingdom) (84/169/EEC) (OJ L 82, 26.3.1984, p. 67) Amended by: Official Journal No page date ►M1 Commission Decision 91/25/EEC of 18 December 1990 L 16 25 22.1.1991 Corrected by: ►C1 Corrigendum, OJ L 112, 4.5.1991, p. 79 (91/25/EEC) 1984L0169 — EN — 22.01.1991 — 001.001 — 2 ▼B COUNCIL DIRECTIVE of 28 February 1984 concerning the Community list of less-favoured farming areas within the meaning of Directive 75/268/EEC (United Kingdom) (84/169/EEC) THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, Having regard to Council Directive 75/268/EEC of 28 April 1975 on mountain and hill farming and farming in certain less-favoured areas (1), as last amended by Directive 82/786/EEC (2), and in particular Article 2 (2) thereof, Having regard to the proposal from the Commission, Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (3), Whereas Directive 75/276/EEC (4) indicates which areas in the United Kingdom are included in the Community list of less-favoured areas within the meaning of Article 3 (4) of Directive 75/268/EEC; Whereas, pursuant to Article 2 (1) of Directive 75/268/EEC, the Government of the United Kingdom has requested an extension, via a redefinition,
    [Show full text]
  • Schedule of Representations Received on the Oldham Metropolitan
    Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council Local Development Framework Public Schedule of Representations and Responses Report for the Pre-Submission Public Participation Draft Statement of Community Involvement September 2006 Schedule of comments received on the Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council Pre-Submission Draft Statement of Community Involvement (Regulation 26 version) and the Council’s responses. Where a Representor has made more than one comment on the Draft Statement of Community Involvement these have been recorded separately. The following abbreviations are used in this document: LDF – Local Development Framework LDS – Local Development Scheme LDD – Local Development Document DPD – Development Plan Document SPD – Supplementary Planning Document SCI – Statement of Community Involvement RSS – Regional Spatial Strategy PPS12 – Planning Policy Statement 12 “Local Development Frameworks” EqIA – Equalities Impact Assessment 1 Countryside Agency Nature of Summary of representation Council’s response representation Other The SCI is unlikely to affect any of the Agency’s Noted. Landscape, Access or Recreation interests and therefore we have no specific comments to make. However, we do, of course, support and encourage effective community involvement within the planning system, including the preparation of the LDF. It is one of the Agency’s key principles that community involvement is considered essential to the achievement of our landscape, access and recreation interests in the new planning system. Local planning authorities are therefore encouraged to look at how they can successfully engage communities on these issues, and reflect this in the SCI. The Agency strongly supports community- planning initiatives, which we consider an essential part of good planning. We therefore support, for example, Village Design Statements and Concept Statements and are interested in incorporating these where possible in the new planning system.
    [Show full text]
  • Failsworth 1 Failsworth
    Failsworth 1 Failsworth Coordinates: 53.5102°N 2.1575°W [1] Failsworth Failsworth Pole Failsworth shown within Greater Manchester Population 20,555 (2001 Census) [2] OS grid reference SD895015 - London 163 mi (262 km) SSE Metropolitan borough Oldham Metropolitan county Greater Manchester Region North West Country England Sovereign state United Kingdom Post town MANCHESTER Postcode district M35 Dialling code 0161 Police Greater Manchester Fire Greater Manchester Ambulance North West EU Parliament North West England UK Parliament Ashton-under-Lyne List of places UK England Greater Manchester Failsworth is a town within the Metropolitan Borough of Oldham, in Greater Manchester, England. It lies on undulating ground, on the course of the Rochdale Canal and north bank of the River Medlock. It is 2.7 miles (4.3 km) west-northwest of Ashton-under-Lyne, 2.9 miles (4.7 km) south-southwest of Oldham and 4.2 miles (6.8 km) to the east-northeast of Manchester city centre. Failsworth lies within the orbital M60 motorway, which Failsworth 2 skirts Failsworth's eastern boundary. Failsworth had a total population of 20,555 in 2001. Historically a part of Lancashire, until the 19th century Failsworth was a small agricultural township linked, ecclesiastically, with the parish of Manchester. Farming was the main industry of this rural area, with locals supplementing their incomes by hand-loom weaving in the domestic system. The introduction of textile manufacture during the Industrial Revolution facilitated a process of unplanned urbanisation in the area, giving rise to Failsworth as a mill town, marked architecturally by several large redbrick cotton mills.
    [Show full text]
  • Greater Manchester Act 1981
    Greater Manchester Act 1981 CHAPTER ix LONDON HER MAJESTY'S STATIONERY OFFICE Greater Manchester Act 1981 CHAPTER ix ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I PRELIMINARY Section 1. Citation and .commencement. 2. Interpretation. 3. Appointed day. PART II EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES 4. Advances for land acquisition or building work. 5. Loans for management of land. 6. Grants for industrial purposes. 7. Further power to assist industry. 8. Guarantee of rents, etc., of industrial buildings. 9. Duration of Part TI. c. ix Greater Manchester Act 1981 PART III LANDS, OPEN SPACES AND MUNICIPAL PROPERTY Section 10. Disposal of lost and uncollected property. 11. Byelaws as to leisure centres. 12. Closure of parks. 13. Provision of parking places in parks, etc. 14. Provision of vehicles in parks, etc. 15. Contribution towards provision of recreational facilities. 16. As to certain parks and recreation grounds. PART IV HIGHWAYS 17. Highway amenities. 18. Regulation of placing things on footway. 19. Power to provide kiosks, etc. 20. Buildings under highways. 21. Recovery of street works charges where owner unknown. 22. Street numbers. 23. Interference with property of local authorities, etc. 24. Provision of trees and shrubs. 25. hnprovement lines. 26. Prohibition of parking of goods vehicles in residential streets. 27. Control of verges. 28. Temporary stoppage of footpaths and bridleways. 29. Vesting of former highway land. PART V PUBLIC HEALTH 30. Hairdressers and barbers. 31. Registration of hawkers of food and their premises. 32. Acupuncturists, tattooists, ear-piercers, electrolysists, etc. 33. Definition of" inhabitant" in Act of 1936. 34. Dust, etc., from building operations. 35. Carrying or storage of waste food.
    [Show full text]
  • A Guide to the Archives of the Police Forces of England and Wales
    A Guide to the Archives of the Police Forces of England and Wales Ian Bridgeman Clive Emsley FORWARD BY THE PATRON OF THE POLICE HISTORY SOCIETY, LORD KNIGHTS, CBE, QPM, DL Clive Emsley and Ian Bridgeman have performed a great service in bringing out this comprehensive guide to the police archives of England and Wales, and revealing the wide range that these cover. Given the ravages of time, police mergers, weeders and weevils, coverage is necessarily uneven so that, for example, nothing survives in the Gloucester police archives which dates from before 1929 whereas Cambridge has records going back to 1822. The Cambridgeshire Constabulary is also exceptional in the number of documents which it has retained from the 1830's and 1840's, since police records do not generally pre-date the compulsory establishment of the new police following the 1856 Police Act. Many of the surviving records have already been deposited in local record offices, but what this guide reveals for the first time is the very wide range of the material which remains in police archives - some of it in a very poor state of preservation and much of it unindexed. In particular, most forces - for obvious internal, bureaucratic reasons - seem to have retained their personnel registers which, since they often run consecutively for a hundred or more years, provide an invaluable source for research into family, medical or migration history. Unfortunately, police stations do not always make ideal quarters for such valuable but fragile records. Space is often at a premium, as of course is the financial support necessary for proper conservation.
    [Show full text]