South Somerset Conservative Party
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Response to Local Government Boundary Commission for England’s Draft Recommendations for South Somerset District Council for 2018 Submission by Mike Lewis on behalf of the Conservative Group of South Somerset District Council (SSDC) ___________________________________________________________ Prior to the closing date of 30th October 2017, the Conservative Group of SSDC commented on all the Ward boundaries within South Somerset by providing: maps, a statistical basis for each ward to create electoral equality and a reasoning paper in support of our ward recommendations. When the Commissioners published the draft recommendations on 9th January 2018, our reasoning paper for each ward had been omitted from the draft. We immediately notified the Commissioners. Although appendix C acknowledged a Conservative submission and paragraphs 56, 66, 81 and 91 acknowledged at least twelve paragraphs, it stated that the only submission was from the SSDC officers, and individuals or parishes and not from the Conservative Group. Consequently it did not give the public an opportunity to consider the Conservative submission. The Commissioners only placed our full documentation on the LGBCE website on 15th February, which was 37 days after the publication of the draft recommendations! This meant that for more than 5 weeks, your website did not provide the submission in full, neither did it achieve the transparency of submissions you were seeking for the public at large. It was even stated, incorrectly, that the Conservative Group had not provided any evidence to support their submission. It is worth mentioning that the statistical part of our submission on a spreadsheet supplied all the percentage variations for each ward in SSDC. The comment column gave facts as to any parishes that were being moved, and the supporting evidence which was crucial to the argument, was simply omitted. The latter had in effect been hidden from public scrutiny for more than 5 weeks, by which time most people had formed their revised opinions without it. As a Conservative Group, we are now responding to your draft recommendations with that evidence, but amending it in the light of the LGBGCE’s and officers’ recommendations. Our proposal is for 14 x 2 member wards and 30 single member wards, with no 3 member wards. Although 3 member wards can provide cover if one member falls ill, we do not favour them because generally one member tends to work more than others; and where 3 members are from different parties, a ward of 3 x 2,293 electors is a huge number of which to be aware. 5 March 2018 Page 1 Where the Conservative group have a proposal, we have added a ‘C’ as a prefix to the LGBCE numbering system, eg 35 becomes C35. Where we agree with the recommendation, we refer to the Ward with the plain number, for example 34 for Bruton. We agree to the LGBCE recommendations for the following 13 wards: 34 Bruton 44 Northstone Option 1 47 Turnhill 48 Wessex 71 Coker 77 Parrett 78 Hamdon & St Michael 79 Martock 81 – 90 Chard (5 wards) We agree with the SSDC Officers’ recommendations for: C56 Eggwood NB in this case, the officers’ recommendation C64 Windwhistle NB in this case, the officers’ recommendation 34 Bruton We agree with the LGBCE and officers’ recommendation to keep the status quo. C35 Cary We agree with one of the District Councillors that Babcary should remain within the Cary Ward because of its historical links with Cary. The “Catsash Hundred” ran from Cary to Babcary. It was referred to in the Subsidy of 1334 and was a royal administrative unit. Currently Babcary are working with Carymoor Parish Council and Castle Cary Town Council on the water quality of the River Cary. The dualling of the A303 between Sparkford and Ilchester will separate Babcary from the villages to the south in Camelot Ward, whereas virtually the whole of Cary ward is to the north of the A303. Babcary is served through Avon and Somerset Constabulary via Wincanton North Police Community Support officers. If Babcary is moved to Camelot Ward, then the police support would be part of a completely different police structure of Wincanton South. North Cadbury and Yarlington currently form North Cadbury and Yarlington Parish Council. Para 112 page 32 of the Local Government Boundary Commission states, “The Schedule provides that … each parish ward lies wholly within a single ward.” Moreover Galhampton and 5 March 2018 Page 2 Woolston come within “North Cadbury and Yarlington Parish Council”. The Parish Councillors have challenged the proposal to split the parishes. We therefore propose that North Cadbury and Yarlington remain together reflecting community identities and interests, in the Cary Ward, and not split between Cary and Camelot. Importantly, keeping Babcary, North Cadbury and Yarlington within the Cary ward would unlock the difficulties over the knock-on changes to Camelot and Blackmoor Vale. Although close to maximum, Cary would still have only 2,504 for each of the two councillors: +9.2% C36 Camelot Camelot at present has 2400 electors and +4%: a good total in every respect. The Commissioners recommend in their draft removing Marston Magna and Rimpton from Camelot, in line with the officers’ recommendation, and adding Babcary. Doing so makes the total electors 1975 and -16%, a long way outside tolerance. There is no mention in paragraphs 36 (Camelot), 38 Blackmoor Vale and Milborne Port), 39 (re Henstridge and Charlton Horethorne), nor in the Officers’ recommendations, of: South Cadbury and Sutton Montis (both currently in Cary) Blackford and Compton Pauncefoot (a civil parish currently in Blackmoor Vale). It is only when one views the map that the proposed boundary changes become apparent. The map says: North and South Cadbury would be split South Cadbury, Sutton Montis, and Blackford and Compton Pauncefoot would move from Blackmoor Vale to Camelot That does not make for good governance, especially as there is very little linkage for Blackford and Compton Pauncefoot with Camelot. The map and the text are not aligned. Rimpton Parish Council and some residents have argued strongly that there is a strong connection between Rimpton and Queen Camel where the Medical Centre, school and shop provide many of the services needed by the electors of Rimpton. Marston Magna is adjacent to Queen Camel on the A359, on the main road to Yeovil. 5 March 2018 Page 3 Adding South Cadbury, and Blackford and Compton Pauncefoot would add 390, bringing the Camelot total to 2365 and +3%. On the map the Commissioners evidently recommend removing Marston Magna and Rimpton from Camelot, in line with the officers’ recommendation, and adding: Babcary, South Cadbury, Sutton Montis, and Blackford and Compton Pauncefoot, bringing the Camelot total to 2365 and +3%, but with a change for seven communities. That is very disruptive for a settled group of villages. South Cadbury and Sutton Montis should be placed in the Blackmore Vale ward; and Blackford and Compton Pauncefoot should remain within the Blackmore Vale ward. South Cadbury and Sutton Montis were moved from the Cary Division of the County Council to the Blackmore Vale only last time in 2013, so a South Cadbury resident would have moved from Blackmore Vale to Cary and then have to move to Camelot. This is very disruptive and does not encourage community links. At least the District and County Council boundaries would be aligned for the Blackmore Vale by placing South Cadbury and Sutton Montis in this ward. C37 Tower and Wincanton Tower ward is one of the most if not the most rural ward in South Somerset and if merged with Wincanton, it would be dominated by the urban sprawl of Wincanton which is one of the largest market towns in South Somerset. Bruton is the magnet for many residents in Tower ward, not Wincanton. Merging the two wards is highly unlikely to change that pattern. One of the parishes in Tower ward, Pitcombe, adjoins Bruton and is closer to Castle Cary than to Wincanton; making very poor linkage. One of the ward councillors and individuals have commented on the poor governance that would happen if Tower and Wincanton became a 3 member ward since the parishes within Tower would become dominated by having 3 councillors attending parish council meetings. The view of many in Tower Ward and ours [Wincanton] is to retain a single member ward for Tower and a 2 member ward for Wincanton, thus retaining good governance. C38, C39, C40 Blackmoor Vale and Milborne Port. Blackmoor Vale is very rural in nature, and the A357 spine road links the villages of the vale, stretching from Holton in the north to Henstridge in the south. Many residents within the Blackmore Vale attend the Doctor’s surgery in Stalbridge (south of Henstridge). The three Primary schools in the Blackmore Vale at Horsington, Charlton Horethorne and Abbas and Templecombe provide a community focus throughout the Blackmore Vale for the younger generation. 5 March 2018 Page 4 Milborne Port is much larger than many of the villages put together, having 2435 electors. Alone, it is within the tolerance at +6%. It has a bigger school of its own. To add villages to Milborne Port to make a two- member ward, would disadvantage the added villages. Para 39 gives no indication as to whether Corton Denham would remain in the Blackmoor Vale since the officers’ proposals assume that it is within Camelot ward which it is not. To reach Ivelchester ward the electors travelling south by road would pass through Dorset to reach the outskirts of Rimpton. Corton Denham should stay in the Blackmore Vale. Neither does the proposal for Blackford and Compton Pauncefoot make it clear that the map recommendation is to move the parish away from the Blackmore Vale, breaking the ties that these rural villages have built up over the centuries.