Councillor submissions to the Vale Council electoral review

This PDF document contains 5 submissions from 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.

Local Government Boundary Commission for Consultation Portal Page 1 of 2

Aylesbury Vale District

Personal Details:

Name: Corry Cashman

Aylesbury Vale District Organisation Name: Council

Map Features:

Comment text: If the commissioners’ recommendations are agreed it will have a negative effect on the present ward which comprises the parishes of Slapton, Cheddington and . Slapton Parish: It will mean that Slapton, in the space of 13 years , will have been in three different wards (, Cheddington and ). It hardly contributes to building a sense of community. Cheddington and Marsworth Parishes: I strongly disagree with the Commission’s suggestion that the Cheddington and Wards should be combined into a 2 member ward. The mooted alternative of a three member ward by also including Edlesborough would, in my view, be even worse. The original AVDC proposal, which maintained the division of this area into single member wards, allowed a direct one-to-one relationship between the Parish Councils in this area (including PC) and their District Councillor. Indeed, there has been no problem under the current arrangement where it is quite clear that matters concerning Ivinghoe Aston are directed to the District Councillor for Edlesborough, and those concerning the rest of Ivinghoe, to the councillor for Pitstone. It also means that all electors are represented by one district councillor each, and avoids all the disadvantages of geographically large multi member wards in a rural area. In short it also means that people, represented by a single district councillor, know “where the buck stops” and whom they should approach with matters of district council concern. These proposals are based mainly on your observation that Ivinghoe and Pitstone are contiguous. They have been for at least 150 years and have always had two separate Parish Councils. Residents are used to the division at Parish level and it is difficult to see why replicating it at District level should cause them, or anybody else, any problems. We believe that the benefits you claim for keeping them together in the same ward are illusory in this case and are far outweighed by the disadvantages of creating a two or even three member ward, forcing distinct communities into the same ward for no real gain. The result of the multi member approach would be that each Parish Council in the area would be required to communicate with at least two district Councillors on all matters. Similarly, each Councillor would have to keep up to speed with the activities of more Parish Councils increasing the time pressure on an already busy position. As already mentioned, the line of accountability in a single member ward is absolutely clear. One councillor is approached, and is responsible for taking the issue further and reporting back. This applies to individual electors as well as parish councils. The tradition of multi member wards arose in urban areas with high populations and small geographical areas. This is inappropriate in rural areas if it is avoidable (we accept that it isn’t realistically avoidable in areas like and Winslow). People look to their own small community for their representative, particularly on District Council matters which can be very parochial in nature, such as planning, waste collection, or social housing. Corry Cashman District Councillor for Cheddington ward on Aylesbury Vale District Council

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk//node/print/informed-representation/3149 08/04/2014

Local Government Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 1 of 2

Aylesbury Vale District

Personal Details:

Name: Carole Paternoster

Organisation Name: Aylesbury Vale District Council

Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database rights 2013.

Map Features:

Comment text: I agree with the draft recommendations for the and wards, as published by the Local Government Boundary Commission for England. The proposals maintain the integrity of the seven parishes concerned, whilst maintaining electoral equality.

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk//node/print/informed-representation/3052 08/04/2014 Local Government Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 2 of 2

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk//node/print/informed-representation/3052 08/04/2014 Dunkeyson, Nicholas

-----Original Message----- From: Whyte, Warren - (County Councillor) Sent: 10 March 2014 22:33 To: Reviews@ Subject: Aylesbury Vale District Council review

I am responding to your proposals for changes relating to the Buckingham area. I am unable to support your proposals for many reasons:

1. The loss of relationship between existing Buckingham and parish boundaries. 2. The northern streets of Buckingham do not look towards Maids Moreton for their services, rather Buckingham 3. Blurring of borders will confuse responsibility for parish matters 4. The moving of a Fishers Field from south to north is less problematic, but loses the historical river boundary. 5. The figures of electors in 2019 page 27 don't appear to include the displaced Buckingham North 6. The 2019 figures for Buckingham South don't seem to fully take into account the approved growth in housing numbers, with 700 dwellings in Lace Hill already partially occupied, and several hundred more approved in Road, Chandos Road, and more planned in Buckingham's emerging Neighbourhood Plan and student accommodation planned by the university.

In summary I do not agree with the assumption you've made or the resulting proposed boundary changes you suggest. A slight imbalance in electors will be better for the town than forcing parts of the town to relate to an adjacent village.

Yours faithfully,

Cllr Warren Whyte, County Council Chairman, Environment, Transport and Localities Select Committee Chairman, Buckingham Area Local Area Forum Buckingham East division, including the towns and parishes of Akeley, Buckingham, , Foscote, Leckhampstead, , , Maids Moreton, Silverstone Circuit, Stowe and Thornborough