Political Group and Party Submissions to the Hertfordshire County Council Electoral Review
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Political group and party submissions to the Hertfordshire County Council electoral review This PDF document contains 5 submissions from Political groups and parties. 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. BROXBOURNE BOROUGH (District quota 12,686) There is a significant degree of electoral imbalance in Broxbourne, with Flamstead End & Turnford being 17% above quota and the other divisions all with variances between 5% and 9%. The major part of the population of the Borough is found running north/south down what was the old A10 from Hoddesdon via Broxbourne, Wormley & Turnford and Cheshunt to Waltham Cross. Each of these communities has its own identity, but there are no absolutely firm limits, making it relatively easy to adjust electoral boundaries to reflect quota. The other part of the population lies west of the current A10, including the distinct ‘village’ community of Goffs Oak. However, the electorate west of the A10 is not mathematically close to a complete number of divisions, so it is necessary to straddle the A10 – although our proposals largely avoid crossing the road where it is a duel-carriageway. Our approach has been to build on the current divisions, making adjustments where necessary, by moving complete polling districts. This disrupts established electoral patterns as little as possible. Starting in the south of the Borough with Waltham Cross; this division is 8% below quota. We propose adding the smallest contiguous polling district, AFA. This polling district forms part of the Cheshunt South & Theobalds Ward, three of whose polling districts (AFC, AFD and AFE) are in the current Waltham Cross Division. To the west of the A10 is the Goffs Oak & Bury Green Division. This is current 5% below quota. We propose adding polling district AIA which, following the 2012 Borough Boundary Review, forms part of the Goffs Oak Ward. This also helps reduce the excess electorate in Flamstead End & Turnford Division. Moving east of the A10, Cheshunt Central Division was already 5% below quota. Losing AFA to Waltham Cross increases this deficiency which is partly compensated by transferring AHD from the overlarge, Flamstead End & Turnford. While (with the loss of AIA) this brings Flamstead End & Turnford to just 0.6% above quota, it leaves the revised Cheshunt Central still 6.8% below. However, as the northern boundary of Cheshunt Central is unchanged, and leaves the combined electorate for the two divisions north of that line at just 63 above quota, we cannot devise an alternative which would remove this shortage in Cheshunt Central – without splitting two or more polling districts. As mentioned, taken together, the two northern divisions have electorate of almost precisely the right number. The best combination of complete polling districts requires ABC to be transferred from the current Hoddesdon North division to Hoddesdon South, leaving them 4.3% above and 3.6% below quota, respectively. As much of the population of this southern division is in the distinct community of Broxbourne, we suggest renaming the division ‘Hoddesdon South & Broxbourne’. Taken together, these proposals tackle the marked excess of electorate in Flamstead End & Turnford, largely reduce inequalities elsewhere, and disrupt established patterns of representation as little as possible. They would result in new divisions as follows: Waltham Cross +5.5% Goffs Oak +0.1% Cheshunt Central -6.8% Flamstead End & Turnford +0.6% Hoddesdon South & Broxbourne -3.6% Hoddesdon North +4.3% Polling District Current division Voters Goffs Oak & Bury Green Waltham Cross Flamstead Enf & Turnford Hoddesdon North Hoddesdon South & Broxbourne Cheshunt Central AAA Hoddesdon North 2300 2300 AAB Hoddesdon North 1990 1990 AAC Hoddesdon North 1657 1657 AAD Hoddesdon South 2027 2027 ABA Hoddesdon North 3906 3906 ABB Hoddesdon North 1740 1740 ABC Hoddesdon South 1634 1634 ACA Hoddesdon South 2453 2453 ACB Hoddesdon South 2806 2806 ACC Hoddesdon South 2492 2492 ADA Hoddesdon South 2450 2450 ADB Flamstead End & Turnford 907 907 ADC Flamstead End & Turnford 354 354 ADD Flamstead End & Turnford 4430 4430 ADE Cheshunt Central 364 364 AEA Cheshunt Central 1704 1704 AEB Cheshunt Central 1608 1608 AEC Cheshunt Central 1383 1383 AED Cheshunt Central 2465 2465 AFA Cheshunt Central 1721 1721 AFB Cheshunt Central 1899 1899 AFC Waltham Cross 2136 2136 AFD Waltham Cross 1184 1184 AFE Waltham Cross 277 277 AGA Waltham Cross 2496 2496 AGB Waltham Cross 2356 2356 AGC Waltham Cross 1645 1645 AGD Waltham Cross 1566 1566 AHA Cheshunt Central 346 346 AHB Cheshunt Central 558 558 AHC Flamstead End & Turnford 1297 1297 AHD Flamstead End & Turnford 1497 1497 AHE Flamstead End & Turnford 2169 2169 AHF Flamstead End & Turnford 1412 1412 AIA Flamstead End & Turnford 607 607 AIB Goffs Oak & Bury Green 4721 4721 AIC Goffs Oak & Bury Green 2260 2260 AJA Flamstead End & Turnford 1601 1601 AJB Goffs Oak & Bury Green 3537 3537 AJC Goffs Oak & Bury Green 1568 1568 AJD Flamstead End & Turnford 589 589 Voters 76115 Voters per division 12686 12694 13383 12759 13228 12227 11825 76115 Variance % 0.1 5.5 0.6 4.3 -3.6 -6.8 Variance number 8 697 73 542 -459 -861 DACORUM BOROUGH (District quota 11,774) The current arrangements in Dacorum show a very marked electoral imbalance with only three of the ten divisions having variances of less than 10% and five, exceeding 20%. The identity of communities within Dacorum is very strong indeed, focussed on the towns of Hemel Hempstead, Berkhamsted and Tring. Hemel Hempstead is a ‘new town’ with a strong, urban character and, while the village communities around it look to the town for major services, they would resist strongly any suggestion that their local electoral interests were common with the town. While there are substantial variances within the current Hemel Hempstead Divisions, taken together the electorate is just 1.4% below the quota for six seats. Hence, we submit that there is an overwhelming case to continue to form six divisions entirely within Hemel Hempstead. Our proposals are heavily influenced by the identity of communities within the town, often defined by busy local roads. We acknowledge that the proposed North East Division is 7% below quota, but local community identity is such that there it would be inappropriate to add any of the contiguous polling districts. While it might be outside the Commission’s current timeframe for projecting population growth, it is recognised local that further housing growth on Spencer Park and Marchmont Fields are inevitable. We also acknowledge that the contiguous proposed divisions of Town and South East are respectively 7.6% above and 9.2% below quota. There is an option (which we do not formally propose but which the Commission might want to consider) to cross the dual carriageway (St Albans Road) and include part of polling district AAB in South East. Selden Hill, Maynard Road and the Park Lane redevelopment of the old Royal Mail Sorting Office are semi-detached from the rest of AAB. We also invite the Commission to take this opportunity to tidy up a long-standing anomaly regarding Woodfield Drive. Numbers 2 to 12 appear on the registers of both Nash Mills Ward (a Parish) and Leverstock Green Ward. We submit that these should be included only in Leverstock Green Ward. The issue of Berkhamsted is problematical. Berkhamsted is a very distinct town with its own Town Council and has been represented by a single county councillor. However, the electorate is now projected at just over 25% above quota and we assume that this would not be acceptable to the Commission. The configuration and population of the rural areas to the north and south of Berkhamsted do not lend themselves to a division of the town and its hinterland into two divisions. Given that the contiguous division to the north (Bridgewater) is 23% below quota, there seems to be no alternative but to transfer one of the Berkhamsted polling districts to Bridgewater – and our proposal is KAA much of which abuts Northchurch with homes in KAA having Northchurch as its postal address. Northchurch is already in Bridgewater Division. That said, there are very strong community reasons why the Berkhamsted should remain undivided. Even adding KAA, Bridgewater remains below quota, while the contiguous Tring is 11% above. We suggest transferring the Aldbury polling district (EAA) from Tring to Bridgewater to adjust this imbalance. The village of Aldbury to the East of the main railway line, while Tring is to the west. Finally, we turn to the Kings Langley division which is entirely defined by the District Boundary and the southern boundaries of Hemel Hempstead and Berkhamsted. It is currently 5% below quota, a variance which does not require any adjustment to be made. Hence, we propose no change for Kings Langley. Taken together, these proposals resolve the marked imbalance across the district, while (except for the unfortunate impact on Berkhamsted) preserving community identity and, in the main, established electoral patterns. They would result in new divisions as follows: Hemel Hempstead Town +7.6% Hemel Hempstead St Pauls -3.1% Hemel Hempstead East -0.7% Hemel Hempstead North West +4.2% Hemel Hempstead South East -9.2% Hemel Hempstead North East -7.1% Tring +4.3% Bridgewater +0.7% Berkhamsted +8.4% Kings Langley -5.2% Polling District Current division Voters Hemel Hempstead Town Hemel Hempstead PaulsSt Hemel Hempstead