Parish and Town Council Submissions to the Sedgemoor Borough Council
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Local residents submissions to the Selby District Council electoral review. This PDF document contains 8 submissions from County and District Councillors. Some versions of Adobe allow the viewer to move quickly between bookmarks. Click on the submission you would like to view. If you are not taken to that page, please scroll through the document. Lawrence, Arion From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 01 July 2013 09:07 To: Lawrence, Arion Subject: FW: Boundary Review for Selby District Council From: MICHAEL JORDAN [mailto: Sent: 30 June 2013 17:43 To: Reviews@ Subject: Boundary Review for Selby District Council Dear Sir/Madam As a cllr at Sherburn in Elmet on Selby District Council I welcome the review of the district. Whilst my initial feeling was that we should strive for single member wards I can understand this may not always be practical. Splitting a village/town is always going to bring up issues at the crossover point. The main frustration residents seem to have is the fact it is a 2 teir system and I go on record of saying that it should be a unitary council, alas not in my control! We are all supposed to save money and Selby District is now getting too small to be effective, I hope the partnership work with North Yorkshire can alleviate some of the issues. I accept your recommendation and thank you for your work. Cllr Mike Jordan 1 RESPONSE TO THE PROPOSED BOUNDARY CHANGES FOR SELBY DISTRICT PARTICULARLY AS THEY AFFECT THE TOWN OF SELBY My interpretation of your role is that you should do all in your power to ensure robust representation of communities by their elected representatives and to ensure some levelling out around numerical representation within local government. Your interpretation of “communities” must follow natural boundaries and historical foundations albeit these will be subject to some change as populations flow and ebb. Selby District is one of the fastest growing areas in terms of population in the North of England and certainly within North Yorkshire. This may be due to a number of factors but it is often led politically because of the many areas of outstanding beauty and national parks which exist within North Yorkshire and around its edges. For you to take no account of the effect of this planned and agreed expansion beggars belief and will merely mean that this issue will need to be revisited at some time in the not too distant future. This may keep your organisation gainfully employed but does nothing for those who live in the area and particularly those who attempt to achieve a more inclusive democratic process particularly within the Town of Selby which has not traditionally been an area of high turnout in local or national elections. Selby District itself has taken time to establish itself as a larger community and there continue to be considerable differences in the rural and more urban areas both in terms of built environment and levels of population. Your attempt to bring in areas of Barlby which is clearly and obviously divided from Selby Town by a large and fast flowing tidal river has no historical or current basis; these two areas were in different Ridings of Yorkshire and both sides of the river still recognise that. Whilst no one would wish to see us reject change for changes sake your proposed changes not only split the Town in two (East and West) but also split the village of Barlby in two something which definitely does not support either community. Selby Town in its modern form has grown up around the two large former local authority housing estates built around Flaxley Road in the north and Abbots Road in the south. As these former local authority houses have been sold off we have tried locally to develop a wider focus for these two areas of the Town and pushed and gain recognition for the North and South Wards of Selby and many services are now delivered around these boundaries. As I understand it these “wards” will still exist for the purposes of the Town Council elections but you intend to confuse residents even further by then asking them to vote in two new District Wards called “East” and “West”. Selby Town does not split naturally into east and west and to attempt to make the numbers work by pulling in bits from other Wards highlights that this is mainly a numbers game and not about developing and cementing communities. This confusion will make it harder and harder for those of us who support local government to explain to residents not just when but how they should participate in the democratic process no matter which party they wish to vote for. On an election day for District and Town Councils within your suggestions residents may be voting in North Ward for Town and East Ward for District and then have to come to terms with being part of Selby/Barlby for County Council elections. Those who are currently part of Selby South will vote in that ward for Town and Selby West for District (apart from those who you have mysteriously moved into a new fantasy ward called “St. James”). How does any of this support local democracy and encourage people to participate as citizens – I have been a member of local government for more than 20 years and I struggle to understand it. Additional development which is already within the development framework and some of which is underway (Staynor Hall Estate) will see the town develop further and its population rise. It is essential that we continue to develop upon our already agreed and known boundaries and wards so we can then encourage new residents into the existing communities and local authority wards to encourage them to both understand and become part of their new communities. Selby District already suffers from being a “dormitory” area as more and more of the population work outside the District so anything which we can do to encourage a feeling of belonging to the local community where you live is extremely important. I believe that the premise from which you started is fundamentally flawed and stems largely from the wish of the Leader of the ruling Conservative Group to want single member wards and to reduce the number of Councillors. This may not be a bad thing in its own right but how it is done is extremely important. I know from conversations with the Leader that he feels that many of his own Councillors really do not have much involvement with residents and do not do a lot of work between meetings. This is not the case for those of us who represent the poorer more deprived areas of the Town, I am not complaining about this – it is part of the strange world of local government and is inevitable given the vast difference between the average resident of one of our villages and those who live within the local authority housing areas which are largely within Selby Town and Sherburn-in-Elmet. However your organisation seems to apply no weighting to areas of higher deprivation in terms of numbers of voters per councillor – you just take the current population and divide it by the number of proposed councillors and then draw lines on the map. This shows it is ultimately a numbers game and not about robust and fair representation of communities and residents. I believe you are too far removed from local government to understand the different roles and demands on some councillors depending on the area they represent. Once you set the number of Councillors or agreed to accept the Leader’s view that 31 rather than 41 was the target you then appear to have set about making the numbers work by working from the outside boundaries of the District inwards. This then left you with a difficult task for the Town which has led to the dog’s breakfast which you are now proposing. Your starting point should have been the Town. It is where the bulk of the population live and work. It is the largest centre of population in the District and ultimately will be the powerhouse of the area. Its success will reflect on and considerably affect the success of the District. It is the centre of transport, education, social services, highways and all the other services which affect residents’ lives on a daily basis. Selby District itself obviously has three tiers of government and many of these larger services are organised remotely via North Yorkshire County Council but they are delivered and planned by local input within the Town across Selby District. If Selby Town is to survive the current downturn in economic development then it must maintain its current boundaries and develop a greater sense of community which will help increase smaller local shops and business start-ups selling and trading in goods which that community needs and which that community can start to support and grow. Our town centre like many others is not particularly vibrant at the moment although there are many local people who work extremely hard to change that. By maintaining the current electoral wards within the Town those people can continue to encourage people to look to the Town for its shopping and entertainment rather than go outside to the neighbouring cities. The recognised deprivation within pockets of Selby Town is additionally recognised by the recent award of Big Local Lottery status which will see £1,000,000 come into the centre of the town and the two former local authority housing estates over the next 10 years to make a real change for those communities.