New electoral arrangements for Council Draft recommendations December 2019

Translations and other formats:

To get this report in another language or in a large-print or Braille version, please contact the Local Government Boundary Commission for at:

Tel: 0330 500 1525

Email: [email protected]

Licensing:

The mapping in this report is based upon Ordnance Survey material with the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of the Keeper of Public Records © Crown copyright and database right. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and database right.

Licence Number: GD 100049926 2019

A note on our mapping:

The maps shown in this report are for illustrative purposes only. Whilst best efforts have been made by our staff to ensure that the maps included in this report are representative of the boundaries described by the text, there may be slight variations between these maps and the large pdf map that accompanies this report, or the digital mapping supplied on our consultation portal. This is due to the way in which the final mapped products are produced. The reader should therefore refer to either the large pdf supplied with this report or the digital mapping for the true likeness of the boundaries intended. The boundaries as shown on either the large pdf map or the digital mapping should always appear identical.

Contents

Introduction 1 Who we are and what we do 1 What is an electoral review? 1 Why Merton? 2 Our proposals for Merton 2 How will the recommendations affect you? 2 Have your say 3 Review timetable 3 Analysis and draft recommendations 5 Submissions received 5 Electorate figures 5 Number of councillors 6 Ward boundaries consultation 6 Draft recommendations 7 Merton / 9 13 North Wimbledon 16 South Merton 19 West Merton 21 Conclusions 25 Summary of electoral arrangements 25 Have your say 27 Equalities 31 Appendices 33 Appendix A 33 Draft recommendations for Merton 33 Appendix B 35 Outline map 35 Appendix C 37 Submissions received 37 Appendix D 38 Glossary and abbreviations 38

Introduction Who we are and what we do

1 The Local Government Boundary Commission for England (LGBCE) is an independent body set up by Parliament1. We are not part of government or any political party. We are accountable to Parliament through a committee of MPs chaired by the Speaker of the House of Commons. Our main role is to carry out electoral reviews of local authorities throughout England.

2 The members of the Commission are:

• Professor Colin Mellors OBE • Amanda Nobbs OBE (Chair) • Steve Robinson • Andrew Scallan CBE (Deputy Chair) • Jolyon Jackson CBE • Susan Johnson OBE (Chief Executive) • Peter Maddison QPM

What is an electoral review?

3 An electoral review examines and proposes new electoral arrangements for a local authority. A local authority’s electoral arrangements decide:

• How many councillors are needed. • How many wards or electoral divisions there should be, where their boundaries are and what they should be called. • How many councillors should represent each ward or division.

4 When carrying out an electoral review the Commission has three main considerations:

• Improving electoral equality by equalising the number of electors that each councillor represents. • Ensuring that the recommendations reflect community identity. • Providing arrangements that support effective and convenient local government.

5 Our task is to strike the best balance between these three considerations when making our recommendations.

1 Under the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009

1

6 More detail regarding the powers that we have, as well as the further guidance and information about electoral reviews and review process in general, can be found on our website at www.lgbce.org.uk.

Why Merton?

7 We are conducting a review of Merton Council (‘the Council’) as the value of each vote in borough council elections varies depending on where you live in Merton. Some councillors currently represent many more or fewer voters than others. This is ‘electoral inequality’. Our aim is to create ‘electoral equality’, where votes are as equal as possible, ideally within 10% of being exactly equal.

8 This electoral review is being carried out to ensure that:

• The wards in Merton are in the best possible places to help the Council carry out its responsibilities effectively. • The number of voters represented by each councillor is approximately the same across the borough.

Our proposals for Merton

9 Merton should be represented by 57 councillors, 3 fewer than there are now.

10 Merton should have 20 wards, the same as there are now.

11 The boundaries of 18 wards should change; two will stay the same.

How will the recommendations affect you?

12 The recommendations will determine how many councillors will serve on the Council. They will also decide which ward you vote in, and which other communities are in that ward. Your ward name may also change.

13 Our recommendations cannot affect the external boundaries of the borough or result in changes to postcodes. They do not take into account parliamentary constituency boundaries. The recommendations will not have an effect on local taxes, house prices, or car and house insurance premiums and we are not able to consider any representations which are based on these issues.

2

Have your say 14 We will consult on the draft recommendations for a 11-week period, from 17 December 2019 to 2 March 2020. We encourage everyone to use this opportunity to comment on these proposed wards as the more public views we hear, the more informed our decisions will be in making our final recommendations.

15 We ask everyone wishing to contribute ideas for the new wards to read this report and look at the accompanying map before responding to us.

16 You have until 2 March 2020 to have your say on the draft recommendations. See page 27 for how to send us your response.

Review timetable 17 We wrote to the Council to ask its views on the appropriate number of councillors for Merton. We then held a period of consultation with the public on warding patterns for the borough. The submissions received during consultation have informed our draft recommendations.

18 The review is being conducted as follows:

Stage starts Description

16 April 2019 Number of councillors decided 4 June 2019 Start of consultation seeking views on new wards End of consultation; we begin analysing submissions and 12 August 2019 forming draft recommendations Publication of draft recommendations; start of second 17 December 2019 consultation End of consultation; we begin analysing submissions and 2 March 2020 forming final recommendations 2 June 2020 Publication of final recommendations

3

4

Analysis and draft recommendations

19 Legislation2 states that our recommendations should not be based only on how many electors3 there are now, but also on how many there are likely to be in the five years after the publication of our final recommendations. We must also try to recommend strong, clearly identifiable boundaries for our wards.

20 In reality, we are unlikely to be able to create wards with exactly the same number of electors in each; we have to be flexible. However, we try to keep the number of electors represented by each councillor as close to the average for the council as possible.

21 We work out the average number of electors per councillor for each individual local authority by dividing the electorate by the number of councillors, as shown on the table below.

2019 2025 Electorate of Merton 151,605 162,915 Number of councillors 60 57 Average number of electors per 2,527 2,858 councillor

22 When the number of electors per councillor in a ward is within 10% of the average for the authority, we refer to the ward as having ‘good electoral equality’. All of our proposed wards for Merton will have good electoral equality by 2025.

Submissions received 23 See Appendix C for details of the submissions received. All submissions may be viewed at our offices by appointment, or on our website at www.lgbce.org.uk

Electorate figures 24 The Council submitted electorate forecasts for 2025, a period five years on from the scheduled publication of our final recommendations in 2020. These forecasts were broken down to polling district level and predicted an increase in the electorate of around 7.5% by 2025.

25 We considered the information provided by the Council and are satisfied that the projected figures are the best available at the present time. We have used these figures to produce our draft recommendations.

2 Schedule 2 to the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009. 3 Electors refers to the number of people registered to vote, not the whole adult population.

5

Number of councillors

26 Merton Council currently has 60 councillors. We have looked at evidence provided by the Council and have concluded that decreasing by three will ensure the Council can carry out its roles and responsibilities effectively.

27 We therefore invited proposals for new patterns of wards that would be represented by 57 councillors – for example, 57 one-councillor wards, 19 three- councillor wards, or a mix of one-, two- and three-councillor wards.

28 We received one submission about the number of councillors in response to our consultation on ward patterns. The submission made political points regarding the responsiveness of councillors to issues, but did not provide compelling evidence for an alternative council size. We therefore based our draft recommendations on a 57-councillor council.

Ward boundaries consultation

29 We received 26 submissions in response to our consultation on ward boundaries. These included three borough -wide proposals; from the Merton Conservative Group, Liberal Democrat Group, and Labour Group. The Council itself did not provide a submission. The remainder of the submissions provided localised comments for arrangements in particular areas of the borough.

30 The three borough-wide schemes provided mixed patterns of two- and three- councillor wards across Merton. We carefully considered the proposals received and were of the view that the proposed patterns of wards resulted in good levels of electoral equality in most areas of the authority and generally used clearly identifiable boundaries.

31 Our draft recommendations also take into account local evidence that we received, which provided further evidence of community links and locally recognised boundaries. In some areas we considered that the proposals did not provide for the best balance between our statutory criteria and so we identified alternative boundaries.

32 We visited the area in order to look at the various different proposals on the ground. This tour of Merton helped us to decide between the different boundaries proposed.

6

Draft recommendations 33 Our draft recommendations are for 17 three-councillor wards and three two- councillor wards. We consider that our draft recommendations will provide for good electoral equality while reflecting community identities and interests where we received such evidence during consultation. The draft recommendations are predominately based on a scheme proposed by the Conservative Group, but varying in several places to take account of other evidence and provide a better balance of the statutory criteria

34 The tables and maps on pages 9-24 detail our draft recommendations for each area of Merton. They detail how the proposed warding arrangements reflect the three statutory4 criteria of:

• Equality of representation. • Reflecting community interests and identities. • Providing for effective and convenient local government.

35 A summary of our proposed new wards is set out in the table starting on page 33 and on the large map accompanying this report.

36 We welcome all comments on these draft recommendations, particularly on the location of the ward boundaries, and the names of our proposed wards.

4 Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009.

7

8

Merton / South Wimbledon

Number of Ward name Variance 2025 councillors Abbey 3 4% 3 1% Lavender Fields 3 4% 2 -4% Trinity 3 7%

Abbey 37 Our proposed Abbey ward is based on the Conservative Group proposals, although the Liberal Democrat proposals for this area were substantially similar. The ward is centred on the hub area around South Wimbledon underground station, and includes the area covered by the active Battles Area Resident’s Association.

38 The Labour proposal in this area was for a long North/South running ward, running from the Kipling Drive estate in the North to the edge of Hall Park in the South. Although this provided for good electoral equality, we do not consider that

9

this proposal reflects natural community links, or allows for easy travel throughout the proposed ward.

Colliers Wood and Lavender Fields

39 We propose that the boundaries of Colliers Wood ward remain unchanged. The Conservative Group proposed that this ward remain unaltered, and the Liberal Democrat Group proposed only the minor change of including the Kipling Drive area within Colliers Wood, which was rejected as this area has no direct road access to the rest of Colliers Wood.

40 The Labour proposal in this area was substantially similar, with the exception of a relatively small number of electors to the south of Merantun Way, who were proposed to be moved into a Merton Abbey ward.

41 We received two persuasive representations to the effect that Runnymede and neighbouring streets had a greater affinity to Colliers Wood rather than Lavender Fields. However, when visiting the area, we did not consider that Liberty Avenue, to the immediate south of this area made for a strong or clearly identifiable boundary and we were not clear which roads in this area should be included in a Colliers Wood ward and which should remain in Lavender Fields. We would particularly welcome consultation responses from residents in this area to aid us in identifying the limits of the Colliers Wood community.

42 One submission suggested that Fleming Mead, and neighbouring streets might be a more natural fit in the Lavender Fields ward rather than Colliers Wood. We were not persuaded by this proposal which we note did not come from a resident of the area. We do however welcome further submissions during this consultation.

43 Our proposed Lavender Fields ward, based on Conservative proposals is centred upon the Lavender Park recreation area, together with Liberty Primary School. The boundaries of this ward are similar to the existing ward. However we have made amendments in the South West, and East of the ward aimed at uniting communities and producing good electoral equality.

44 Our Colliers Wood and Lavender Fields wards are forecast to have good electoral equality by 2025.

Merton Park and Trinity 45 We received varying proposals for this area, from all three political groups, and Merton Park Ward Independent Residents (MPWIR). A submission from a local resident was received suggesting that the existing ward boundaries remain unchanged, but we note that the existing ward boundaries did not produce good

10

electoral equality. Competing proposals suggested either expanding the ward to the North East or moving sections in the North and/or South into neighbouring wards.

46 A resident’s submission suggested that the A238 Kingston Road, to the north, would be a more natural boundary than the existing boundary along Henfield Road and a footpath; and suggested that this was reinforced by educational catchment areas. When visiting the area, we considered that Kingston Road was indeed a stronger boundary than the existing boundary along Henfield Lane. This aided the decision to abolish Dundonald ward and move its component areas into neighbouring wards. All four submissions containing detailed proposals for the Dundonald ward area suggested that the existing ward did not reflect community identities and proposed significant changes.

47 The loss of the area south of Henfield Road and including roads between Merton Hall Road and Rothesay Avenue meant that Merton Park could retain the area to the South, south of Martin Way, and still have good electoral equality as a two-member ward. The Conservative Group proposed Martin Way as the southern boundary of Merton Park, but when visiting the area, we did not consider that Martin Way represented a strong boundary, as there are many transport and community facilities in this area which would be likely to draw people together.

48 The Labour proposal, also adopted by MPWIR, was for a three-member ward retaining the existing northern boundary, and incorporating an area to the North East, south of Kingston Road and north of the Nelson Trading Estate. While there was a certain amount of evidence to support this proposal, it also required moving residents of Parkleigh Road, Nursery Road and Willmore road into a ward facing across the Merton Industrial Park. The Commission did not consider that this area had any community linkages with other areas within the proposed ward.

49 Our proposed Trinity ward, combining proposals from the Conservative and Liberal Democrat groups, includes the majority of Wimbledon Town Centre. The ward increases in size to take in the eastern part of the previous Dundonald ward. We received different representations with regard to Dundonald, all of which suggested making significant changes or abolishing the ward completely. On visiting the area, we considered that the eastern part of Dundonald fell more naturally within the Trinity ward, and that the tram line crossing the area did not present as significant a barrier as rail lines elsewhere in the borough did; as the tram line allows significant level access across at both stations and road junctions.

50 An alternative, which allows for good electoral equality, would be for the eastern section of Dundonald, between the tram line to the East and railway line to the West to be a single-member ward. None of the consultation submissions we received supported the idea of single-member wards, hence our reluctance to propose this in our Draft Recommendations, but we would be particularly interested

11

in any responses from the residents of this area to help us determine whether this community fits naturally within Trinity ward or not.

51 Based on the Commission’s draft recommendations, Merton Park and Trinity wards are forecast to have good electoral equality by 2025.

12

Mitcham

Number of Ward name Variance 2025 councillors Cricket Green 3 5% Figge’s Marsh 3 -2% Graveney 3 0% Longthornton 3 5% 3 -7%

13

Cricket Green 52 We are proposing only minor changes to the boundaries of the previous Cricket Green ward, in order to align with the Cricket Green Conservation Area, as suggested in a submission from the Community & Heritage. Apart from this change, the proposed ward follows the pattern proposed by the Conservative Group.

53 The Labour proposal would see the boundary between Cricket Green and Pollards Hill wards moved to the A237 Road. While this is a strong potential boundary, and there would be a negligible effect on electoral equality, we considered that was a shared amenity between residents of neighbouring wards, and should be split between the two wards. The Road boundary proposed by the Conservative and Liberal Democrat Groups uses a major road, and we are persuaded to use it as we consider it provides for a strong and clearly identifiable boundary.

54 Based on the our draft recommendations, Cricket Green ward is forecast to have good electoral equality by 2025.

Figge’s Marsh and Graveney

55 Figge’s Marsh ward, named after the area of parkland in the north of the ward, is based on proposals from the Conservative Group, with the Labour Group making a similar proposal. Along Cedars Avenue, we have departed from the Conservative proposals, in order to maintain a more recognisable and stronger boundary, running along the length of Cedars Avenue rather than incorporating Jesmond Close within Pollards Hill ward.

56 The Liberal Democrats proposed a new ward of Mitcham Town, which exclude Figge’s Marsh park. While there was some evidence of community identity in this proposal, the Commission considered that this proposal, and the consequences for neighbouring wards would have a negative effect on overall electoral equality, both for the proposed new ward, and neighbouring wards.

57 We propose moving several streets from the existing Figge’s Marsh ward into our proposed Graveney ward. We visited this area and considered that the edge of Figge’s Marsh park provides a strong and clear boundary, and therefore propose this. This proposal echoes that of the Labour and Conservative Groups.

58 The Labour and Liberal Democrat proposals for Graveney were very similar, differing only around the Summerhill Way & Spring Grove area. We did not receive any submissions from residents of this area, and would particularly welcome comments on our draft recommendations from this part of the borough.

14

59 Based on the Commission’s draft recommendations, Figge’s Marsh and Graveney wards have good electoral equality in 2025.

Longthornton and Pollards Hill

60 Longthornton and Pollards Hill wards, on the edge of the Merton borough area, see relatively minor changes proposed to existing boundaries which provide for good levels of electoral equality, and ensure that where possible, communities are grouped together.

61 We are proposing to move Barnfield Avenue, Donne Place, Jonson Close, and Marlowe Square into Longthornton ward, in order to improve electoral equality across these wards.

62 These wards are mostly based on the Conservative Group proposals, although proposals from the Labour Group did not differ substantively. Labour suggested that the name of Pollards Hill could be expanded to incorporate a reference to Mitcham Common – the Commission is not proposing this change, since we did not adopt Labour’s proposal (discussed at paragraph 53) to move the majority of Mitcham Common into Pollards Hill ward. However, we would welcome any comments from residents of the area with regard to the ward names or proposed boundaries in this area.

63 The Liberal Democrat proposal was for Pollards Hill to expand to the north of Manor Road, as far as Clay Avenue. As well as poorer electoral equality, we did not consider that there was sufficient evidence of community linkages to support this proposal.

64 Based on the Commission’s draft recommendations, Longthornton and Pollards Hill will have good electoral equality by 2025.

15

North Wimbledon

Number of Ward name Variance 2025 councillors Hillside 2 3% Village 3 0% 2% Wandle 2

Wimbledon Park 3 4%

Hillside and Village 65 Our proposed Hillside ward is significantly smaller than the existing Hillside ward, and is represented by two councillors rather than three, in consequence. This ward is based upon the Liberal Democrat Group proposal. The Conservative Group proposed a ward crossing the main Waterloo railway line, which would have resulted in no vehicular access between the two segments of the ward and accordingly we were not persuaded to adopt it.

66 The Labour proposal in this area was for a very long ward, ranging from in the west to Leopold Road in the north east. While this offered good electoral equality as a three-member ward, we felt that this did not provide for easy travel throughout the ward, or reflect community identity.

16

67 Our boundary between Hillside and Village wards splits Ridgway Place and Thornton Road. We visited this area on our tour of Merton, and considered that, as well as there being evidence of different communities along these roads, the length and steepness of the hills in this area also contributed to a boundary of this type being effective. We would welcome submissions from residents of this area to determine if this boundary has been drawn appropriately.

68 All proposals the proposals we received suggested a ward based on the existing Village ward, dominated geographically by . Our proposed boundaries mostly follow the Conservative Group submission, with the exception of streets to the south east of Ridgway, which were included within the Conservative’s proposed College Ward.

69 Based on the Commission’s draft recommendations, Hillside and Village wards are forecast to have good electoral equality by 2025.

Wandle

70 This is a new ward, based on proposals from the Conservative Group, and incorporating significant planned development around the former Stadium. Haydon’s Road traverses the length of the ward, linking the sections north and south of the railway line.

71 A submission was received that Kipling Drive and the surrounding streets, to the east of Wandle Meadow Nature Park would sit more naturally within Colliers Wood, rather than Wandle or another ward to the west. This was also the basis of the Liberal Democrat submission for this area. We visited this area on our tour of Merton and are persuaded that, since the only road access into this small estate is via North Road, it is appropriate for this area to remain in a ward with areas on the other side of the nature park and the .

72 Based on the Commission’s draft recommendations, Wandle is forecast to have good electoral equality by 2025.

Wimbledon Park

73 This ward closely follows the boundaries of the existing ward, except for the extreme eastern section, which moves into the new Wandle ward.

74 Various proposals were received for boundaries based on the two railway lines which run through this ward, including one from the Wimbledon Society which produced proposals for the northern half of the borough. The Wimbledon Society proposals did not produce good electoral equality in several areas, although they

17

were helpful in allowing the Commission to identify the “hubs” of communities throughout Wimbledon.

75 The Labour Group proposed a boundary between Wimbledon Park and Wandle based on the railway line, in which each ward would return two councillors. We considered this proposal carefully, and while we appreciate the merits of strong boundaries in this area, the knock-on implications for other wards further south in the borough meant that we were not persuaded to adopt it.

76 We considered that, although the area around Weir Road is somewhat isolated from the rest of the ward by the railway line, the nature of this area (an industrial estate with very few electors) makes this acceptable.

77 Based on the Commission’s draft recommendations, Wimbledon Park is forecast to have good electoral equality by 2025.

18

South Merton

Number of Ward name Variance 2025 councillors 3 -8% Ravensbury 3 -4% St Helier 3 7%

Lower Morden

78 This ward is based on proposals from the Liberal Democrat group, and closely follows the boundaries of the existing ward, changing only to incorporate Churston Drive, and a portion of the previous St Helier ward south of Rutland Drive on the edge of the borough.

79 Proposals from the Conservative and Labour groups were similar in many respects, differing mostly with regard to the extent that this ward should cross the A24. The area to the south of Rutland Drive but within Merton, is potentially isolated from any direction, being surrounded by a major road, allotments, a railway line and the borough boundary. For reasons of electoral equality, it is suggested that these streets move into Lower Morden, but we would welcome submissions from residents of this area with regard to where they feel community linkages within Merton lie.

80 We received proposals to the effect that this ward could be re-named , and the boundaries adjusted to take in a larger segment of the park, possibly including South Thames College. While we were not immediately persuaded by

19

these submissions, we would be particularly interested in any submissions from local residents or users of South Thames College with regard to either the name of the ward, or whether the college fits more naturally within St Helier or Lower Morden.

81 Based on the Commission’s draft recommendations, Lower Morden is forecast to have good electoral equality by 2025.

Ravensbury and St Helier

82 These wards closely follow separate, but similar proposals from the Labour, and Liberal Democrat Groups respectively. The Conservatives proposed an east- west boundary between a new St Helier ward in the south and a new Morden Central ward. These proposals provided for good electoral equality, but relied upon proposals for the southern boundary of Merton Park ward which we did not feel made for strong or effective boundaries.

83 is proposed to be split between St Helier and Ravensbury wards based on watercourses, as proposed by the Liberal Democrat group, rather than a boundary running along Morden Hall Road as proposed by Labour. This change has a minimal effect upon electoral equality, and we would welcome consultation responses from residents and users of Morden Hall Park, to determine which is the more appropriate boundary in this area.

84 Based on the Commission’s draft recommendations, Ravensbury and St Helier wards is forecast to have good electoral equality by 2025.

20

West Merton

Number of Ward name Variance 2025 councillors Cannon Hill 3 -5% Raynes Park 3 4% West Barnes 3 -6%

Cannon Hill

85 This ward, following proposals from the Liberal Democrat Group, includes a portion of the former Merton Park ward to the east of the Sutton Loop railway line. The ward is centred around the Joseph Hood School and Recreation Ground.

86 The Conservative Group proposal for this area involved retaining the existing boundary of the railway line, and some minor changes in the south west of the ward. Given changes in Merton Park, this would result in poor electoral equality. The Commission considers that there is reasonable access across the railway line by

21

means of Kingston Road, Whatley Avenue and Cannon Hill Lane to provide for convenient access to all parts of this proposed ward.

87 and the northern section of Morden Hall Park provide natural boundaries for the remainder of this ward. Existing boundaries are followed to the South and West, with the exception of Churston Drive which we are including in our Lower Morden ward.

88 The Labour proposals in this area suggested that a number of streets to the west of Cannon Hill Common move into this ward. We were not persuaded that there was evidence of community links between these streets and the remainder of Cannon Hill and therefore did not adopt this proposal.

89 Based on the Commission’s draft recommendations, Cannon Hill has good electoral equality by 2025.

Raynes Park

90 The western section of the former Dundonald ward (“The Apostles”) moves into this ward, which follows Conservative proposals. Community evidence was provided that residents of these streets consider themselves to be living in Raynes Park

91 Proposals were received from the Labour Group to divide the existing Raynes Park ward into four neighbouring wards, including a retained but shifted Dundonald ward. While these proposals would provide for good electoral equality, the Commission was not persuaded that adequate evidence had been provided to justify splitting the well-established community of Raynes Park.

92 The Liberal Democrat proposal suggested bringing the community of into Raynes Park ward. While this offered good electoral equality, we did not consider that the boundaries proposed were clearly identifiable, or that there was sufficient evidence of community links between Copse Hill and the remainder of Raynes Park.

93 The northern boundary of our proposed Raynes Park ward, between The Downs and Cambridge Road follows a number of property lines in order to avoid splitting various small culs-de-sac. We would be particularly interested to hear from any residents of Arterberry Road to determine where an appropriate point is for the boundary to cross this area.

94 Based on the Commission’s draft recommendations, Raynes Park is forecast to have good electoral equality by 2025.

22

West Barnes

95 There are no proposed changes to the boundaries of this ward. The Liberal Democrat submission proposed no changes, while the Conservative group suggested only minor changes in the south east of the ward.

96 The Labour group suggested a wider alteration, as part of the proposal to move Raynes Park into four separate wards. These suggestions included streets such as Aboyne Drive, Camberley Avenue, Taunton Avenue, and Somerset Avenue from north of the railway line moving into West Barnes. The Commission did not consider that this reflected community identity and in addition to our decision to ensure a ward based on Raynes Park is adopted we are not persuaded to adopt it.

97 One submission was received from a local resident on Meadow Close, stating that streets in this area had a greater affinity with Raynes Park rather than West Barnes. However, we considered that this area was sufficiently far from the Raynes Park area to make any boundary change to include these streets within Raynes Park ward impractical.

98 Based on the Commission’s draft recommendations, West Barnes is forecast to have good electoral equality by 2025.

23

24

Conclusions

99 The table below provides a summary as to the impact of our draft recommendations on electoral equality in Merton, referencing the 2020 and 2025 electorate figures. A full list of wards, names and their corresponding electoral variances can be found at Appendix A to the back of this report. An outline map of the wards is provided at Appendix B.

Summary of electoral arrangements

Draft recommendations

2019 2025 Number of councillors 60 57 Number of electoral wards/divisions 20 20 Average number of electors per councillor 2,527 2,858 Number of wards with a variance more than 10% 4 0 from the average Number of wards with a variance more than 20% 0 0 from the average

Draft recommendations

Merton Council should be made up of 57 councillors serving 20 wards representing three two-councillor and 17 three-councillor wards. The details and names are shown in Appendix A and illustrated on the large maps accompanying this report.

Mapping Sheet 1, Map 1 shows the proposed wards for Merton Council. You can also view our draft recommendations for Merton on our interactive maps at www.consultation.lgbce.org.uk

25

26

Have your say

100 The Commission has an open mind about its draft recommendations. Every representation we receive will be considered, regardless of who it is from or whether it relates to the whole borough or just a part of it.

101 If you agree with our recommendations, please let us know. If you don’t think our recommendations are right for Merton, we want to hear alternative proposals for a different pattern of wards.

102 Our website has a special consultation area where you can explore the maps and draw your own proposed boundaries. You can find it at www.consultation.lgbce.org.uk

103 Submissions can also be made by emailing [email protected] or by writing to:

Review Officer (Merton) The Local Government Boundary Commission for England 1st Floor, Windsor House 50 Victoria Street SW1H 0TL

104 The Commission aims to propose a pattern of wards for Merton which delivers:

• Electoral equality: each local councillor represents a similar number of voters. • Community identity: reflects the identity and interests of local communities. • Effective and convenient local government: helping your council discharge its responsibilities effectively.

105 A good pattern of wards should:

• Provide good electoral equality, with each councillor representing, as closely as possible, the same number of voters. • Reflect community interests and identities and include evidence of community links. • Be based on strong, easily identifiable boundaries. • Help the council deliver effective and convenient local government.

27

106 Electoral equality:

• Does your proposal mean that councillors would represent roughly the same number of voters as elsewhere in Merton?

107 Community identity:

• Community groups: is there a residents’ association or other group that represents the area? • Interests: what issues bind the community together or separate it from other parts of your area? • Identifiable boundaries: are there natural or constructed features which make strong boundaries for your proposals?

108 Effective local government:

• Are any of the proposed wards too large or small to be represented effectively? • Are the proposed names of the wards appropriate? • Are there good links across your proposed wards? Is there any form of public transport?

109 Please note that the consultation stages of an electoral review are public consultations. In the interests of openness and transparency, we make available for public inspection full copies of all representations the Commission takes into account as part of a review. Accordingly, copies of all representations will be placed on deposit at our offices and on our website at www.lgbce.org.uk. A list of respondents will be available from us on request after the end of the consultation period.

110 If you are a member of the public and not writing on behalf of a council or organisation we will remove any personal identifiers. This includes your name, postal or email addresses, signatures or phone numbers from your submission before it is made public. We will remove signatures from all letters, no matter who they are from.

111 In the light of representations received, we will review our draft recommendations and consider whether they should be altered. As indicated earlier, it is therefore important that all interested parties let us have their views and evidence, whether or not they agree with the draft recommendations. We will then publish our final recommendations.

112 After the publication of our final recommendations, the changes we have proposed must be approved by Parliament. An Order – the legal document which brings into force our recommendations – will be laid in draft in Parliament. The draft

28

Order will provide for new electoral arrangements to be implemented at the all-out elections for Merton Council in 2022.

29

30

Equalities 113 The Commission has looked at how it carries out reviews under the guidelines set out in Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010. It has made best endeavours to ensure that people with protected characteristics can participate in the review process and is sufficiently satisfied that no adverse equality impacts will arise as a result of the outcome of the review.

31

32

Appendices Appendix A Draft recommendations for Merton

Number of Variance Number of Variance Number of Electorate Electorate Ward name electors per from average electors per from councillors (2019) (2025) councillor % councillor average % 1 Abbey 3 7,382 2,461 -7 8,925 2,975 4

2 Cannon Hill 3 7,813 2,604 -2 8,171 2,724 -5

3 Colliers Wood 3 8,274 2,758 4 8,619 2,873 1

4 Cricket Green 3 8,011 2,670 1 8,982 2,994 5

5 Figge's Marsh 3 7,676 2,559 -4 8,387 2,796 -2

6 Graveney 3 8,217 2,739 3 8,586 2,862 0

7 Hillside 2 5,891 2,946 11 5,915 2,958 3

8 Lavender Fields 3 8,003 2,668 0 8,933 2,978 4

9 Longthornton 3 8,127 2,709 2 8,175 2,725 -5

10 Lower Morden 3 7,892 2,631 -1 7,873 2,624 -8

11 Merton Park 2 5,254 2,627 -1 5,509 2,754 -4

12 Pollards Hill 3 8,014 2,671 0 8,004 2,668 -7

33

Number of Variance Number of Variance Number of Electorate Electorate Ward name electors per from average electors per from councillors (2019) (2025) councillor % councillor average % 13 Ravensbury 3 6,858 2,286 -14 8,224 2,741 -4

14 Raynes Park 3 8,613 2,871 8 8,956 2,985 4

15 St Helier 3 8,298 2,766 4 9,161 3,054 7

16 Trinity 3 8,945 2,982 12 9,147 3,049 7

17 Village 3 8,571 2,857 7 8,583 2,861 0

18 Wandle 2 4,486 2,243 -16 5,805 2,903 2

19 West Barnes 3 7,601 2,534 -5 8,056 2,685 -6

20 Wimbledon Park 3 7,678 2,559 -4 8,905 2,968 4

Totals 57 151,604 – – 162,916 – –

Averages – – 2,660 – – 2,858 –

Source: Electorate figures are based on information provided by Merton Council.

Note: The ‘variance from average’ column shows by how far, in percentage terms, the number of electors per councillor in each electoral ward/division varies from the average for the borough/district/county. The minus symbol (-) denotes a lower than average number of electors. Figures have been rounded to the nearest whole number.

34

Appendix B Outline map

Number Ward name 1 Abbey 2 Cannon Hill 3 Colliers Wood 4 Cricket Green 5 Figge's Marsh 6 Graveney 7 Hillside 8 Lavender Fields 9 Longthornton 10 Lower Morden 11 Merton Park 12 Pollards Hill 13 Ravensbury 14 Raynes Park 15 St Helier 16 Trinity 17 Village

35

18 Wandle 19 West Barnes 20 Wimbledon Park

A more detailed version of this map can be seen on the large map accompanying this report, or on our website: www.lgbce.org.uk/current-reviews/south-west

36

Appendix C Submissions received

All submissions received can also be viewed on our website at: www.lgbce.org.uk/current-reviews/greater-london/merton

Political Groups

• Merton Conservatives • Merton Labour Group • Merton Liberal Democrats • Merton Park Ward Independent Residents

Members of Parliament

• Stephen Hammond MP (Wimbledon)

Local Organisations

• Mitcham Cricket Green Community & Heritage • Wimbledon Society

Local Residents

• 19 local residents

37

Appendix D Glossary and abbreviations

Council size The number of councillors elected to serve on a council

Electoral Change Order (or Order) A legal document which implements changes to the electoral arrangements of a local authority

Division A specific area of a county, defined for electoral, administrative and representational purposes. Eligible electors can vote in whichever division they are registered for the candidate or candidates they wish to represent them on the county council

Electoral fairness When one elector’s vote is worth the same as another’s

Electoral inequality Where there is a difference between the number of electors represented by a councillor and the average for the local authority

Electorate People in the authority who are registered to vote in elections. For the purposes of this report, we refer specifically to the electorate for local government elections

Number of electors per councillor The total number of electors in a local authority divided by the number of councillors

Over-represented Where there are fewer electors per councillor in a ward or division than the average

Parish A specific and defined area of land within a single local authority enclosed within a parish boundary. There are over 10,000 parishes in England, which provide the first tier of representation to their local residents

38

Parish council A body elected by electors in the parish which serves and represents the area defined by the parish boundaries. See also ‘Town council’

Parish (or town) council electoral The total number of councillors on any arrangements one parish or town council; the number, names and boundaries of parish wards; and the number of councillors for each ward

Parish ward A particular area of a parish, defined for electoral, administrative and representational purposes. Eligible electors vote in whichever parish ward they live for candidate or candidates they wish to represent them on the parish council

Town council A parish council which has been given ceremonial ‘town’ status. More information on achieving such status can be found at www.nalc.gov.uk

Under-represented Where there are more electors per councillor in a ward or division than the average

Variance (or electoral variance) How far the number of electors per councillor in a ward or division varies in percentage terms from the average

Ward A specific area of a district or borough, defined for electoral, administrative and representational purposes. Eligible electors can vote in whichever ward they are registered for the candidate or candidates they wish to represent them on the district or borough council

39 The Local Government Boundary Local Government Boundary Commission for Commission for England (LGBCE) was set England up by Parliament, independent of 1st Floor, Windsor House Government and political parties. It is 50 Victoria Street, London directly accountable to Parliament through a SW1H 0TL committee chaired by the Speaker of the House of Commons. It is responsible for Telephone: 0330 500 1525 conducting boundary, electoral and Email: [email protected] Online: www.lgbce.org.uk or structural reviews of local government. www.consultation.lgbce.org.uk Twitter: @LGBCE