• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

LABOUR GROUP SUBMISSION IN RESPONSE TO THE DRAFT WARD BOUNDARY PROPOSALS FOR HULL INTRODUCTION In our response to the Draft Submission from the Boundary Commission we have put a detailed further submission. We have felt this necessary as we believe we were misinformed at the briefing meeting in June 2017 attended by Labour and Conservative Councillors, which led to us putting in a uniformed “three-member” ward proposition for the entire City, as the guidance stated that this was the preferred option. Given that the Commission’s draft proposals have accepted a plan based upon two and three member Wards, we have now put in two revised proposals that form part of our principal objection to the draft proposals. These include:- 1) A challenge to the draft proposal and a restatement of the argument for a cross-river Ward. 2) If this strong argument still does not carry resonance, we then offer a strongly argued alternative to the most contentious and deeply unpopular elements of the draft proposals for West of the River. Our evidenced alternative stems from the Boundary Commission acceptance of a settlement of two and three member Wards, in its draft and builds upon this. We trust in the assurances that we have been given that the Commission WILL meaningfully consider this substantial proposal, and afford it the full and detailed consideration that we feel it deserves. We do remain deeply concerned that the current proposals without amendment will change the political balance of the City without the casting of a single vote, with scant regard of the effect this has on long- standing established Hull communities. The refusal of the main opposition group to seek to engage in a Council-wide submission, (See Appendix IV, email sent to Leader of Liberal Democrat Group), clearly shows the lack of commitment to any non-partisan approach. Despite their assurances they would consider a joint submission up until the 3rd March 2017, the Lib-Dems refused even to consider any changes to the two main areas of community contention, namely Beverley/Sculcoates and Hessle Road while striving only to increase the Kingswood Ward to three seats in order to create what they perceive to be a further seat for themselves. 1 Although we have some areas of difference with the Conservative and Unionist Group you will see agreement on the main areas of contention in their submission and ours.. We believe the amendments we propose are absolutely essential given some of the major issues created in the draft proposals. We believe for the process to retain democratic legitimacy the principal concerns below need addressing:- 1) The proposed Beverley and Sculcoates Ward 2) The proposed St Andrews and Newington Ward , [and the deeply unpopular proposal to divide Hessle Road] In addressing these ward proposals there is inevitably a ‘knock-on’ effect with surrounding wards in order to achieve electoral and community integrity. In a City that contains so many natural dividers there will always have to be compromise and, as with the Labour Group’s original submission, we have been guided by fairness and not by crude partisan interests as has been shown by many of the wards we proposed originally and here in our response to the Commissions draft proposals. It is truly regrettable that we could not draw the Majority Opposition Group into an agreement and that they took so long to reveal that this was not going to be an option. We are the belief that their unwillingness to look any joint agreements stems from the belief that the Commission’s draft proposals are politically advantageous for them alone. As was stated in our original submission this process of re-warding should be a technical process, and not one that results in altering the existing political balance that has been arrived at democratically by the residents of Hull. Our original submission did exactly this and attempted to not alter the political plurality of the existing City, and made some proposals clearly against our sectional political interest, for the greater good. We will provide detailed objections to the proposed Wards identified above and go on to recommend solutions to the problems we have identified with a fully researched set of figures to back up these proposals. 2 PROPOSAL 1- REVISITING THE CROSS-RIVER WARD INTRODUCTION Hull Labour Group feels that the Boundary Commission have been too quick to dismiss the case for a Cross-River Ward at Kingswood and Beverley. This premature dismissal led to the rejection of much of our proposed template for West and North Hull. This dismissal is all the more surprising when the alternative proposed instead is the deeply unpopular “shotgun” marriage that is the proposal for a Beverley and Sculcoates Ward. As the Boundary Commission is supposed to look at issues of community, numbers and governance, we will explain why the case can be made to support this. The main proponents of the outdated narrative about the river being an ‘uncrossable divide’ were the Liberal Democrats in their submission to the Commission. A completely different argument was put to the Boundary Commission for England at the public hearing on 24th October 2016 in Hull the transcript of which reveals that the author of the Liberal Democrat Local Government Boundary Commission for England Submission; Cllr Dave McCobb; extols a case for a Parliamentary Boundary crossing the River Hull at the Southern end arguing “Drypool” sees itself as the City Centre, (Note 1). Although the Boundary Commissions are independent of one another, it is just not plausible to make two different arguments depending on your audience. CASE There has been a North Hull Constituency in parliament for forty years, and throughout this time the river has been crossed by this Constituency Boundary. It is against this backdrop that the misleading narrative of a city divided principally between East and West of the River Hull, as the only important factor is just plain wrong. There has always been a North, West and East Hull. There is a principal 1940s estate area off Beverley Road called North Hull Estate. People from this area would see themselves as from North Hull, not West Hull. Equally the Bransholme Estate which is 50 years old in 2017 has a separate identity as part of Hull North, and would not see themselves as “East Hull”. The very fact the Boundary Commission is revisiting Hull is due to the housing growth of Kingswood. A cursory look at the population shows a modest increase, 3 which means that mostly it is internal churn with people from elsewhere in Hull West and East of the river moving to Kingswood. Given this they do not consider the river per se as a boundary. Many of the residents of North Bransholme and Sutton Park moved here after the mass housing clearances of Hessle Road in the 1970s and 1980s and many residents still return to this road to shop and socialise on Saturdays. Such migration is still continuing on Kingswood as residents become upwardly aspirant. As the Boundary is just like other Roads, it has to be seen as no more of a community divide than that on the draft proposal elsewhere in the City. VEHICLE MOVEMENTS The sheer volume of vehicle movements that are reproduced below, clearly demonstrate that there are huge traffic movements between the two parts of this proposed Ward and affirms our view that retail patterns merge around the central location of the Kingwood Retail Park which is far more modally important to these “sub-urban” population groups than the City Centre which is considerably further away in distance, time and convenience for the residents of this area who overwhelmingly drive. This latter fact is reinforced by the fact that the Bus Service to the City Centre from the top of Beverley Road is not commercially viable and is one of the City Council’s subsidised routes. Other bus routes on Beverley Road below Clough Road are full self-supporting, where there is far less car ownership, and clear connections to the City Centre.. Below is the listed vehicle movements over the two bridges over a 12 hour period. This shows that far from being community dividers the Bridges unify and unite these communities Jun-16 2 Way Eastbound Westbound Flow A1033 Ennerdale Bridge AM Peak 1326 1393 2719 PM Peak 1777 1592 3369 12 Hour 13720 13754 27474 Sutton Road Bridge AM Peak 765 750 1515 PM Peak 618 850 1468 12 Hour 7875 8646 16521 4 Chart of Vehicular Movements Across Bridges June 2016 Source: Hull City Council Business Intelligence Team, Strategic Planning and Partnerships Segment Households F 33% G 9% H 23% I 35% Hull City Council Customer Insight Segmentation Source: Source: Hull City Council Business Intelligence Team, Strategic Planning and Partnerships DEMOGRAPHICS The enclosed demographics show clearly far more similarities on the proposed cross-river Ward, where the commonalities are clearer. As stated previously these are communities which share the characteristics of home ownership, car ownership and higher salaried employment. Compared to elsewhere on the Beverley Road, where there is significant ethnic diversity both these communities in our proposed Beverley and Kingswood Ward are fairly monocultural. If we contrast this with the proposed Boundary Commission proposal, presented below, the rainbow nature of the map clearly show the lack of a cohesive community footprint in Beverley and Sculcoates when compared to the above Proposed Ward. 5 Segment Households B 3% C 3% D 5% E 6% F 18% G 6% H 11% I 5% J 20% L 24% Summary We invite the Boundary Commission to look again at their premature rejection of the Beverley and Kingswood Ward.

Load more

  28

Copy Link