Electoral Review of Coastal – comments on Draft Recommendations

From: Dr Thérèse Coffey, Member of Parliament for

Date: 28.4.14

Contents SUMMARY AND SUPPORTING PRINCIPLES ...... 1 PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS ...... 2 MODIFICATION 1 ...... 2 MODIFICATION 2 ...... 2 INDIVIDUAL WARDS ...... 3 - Support and rename to ALDE VALLEY...... 3 DEBEN - support ...... 3 NORTH, SOUTH, EAST and WEST – support ...... 3 – support ...... 3 - support ...... 3 – support ...... 4 EAST & WEST – support ...... 4 KIRTON – support ...... 4 – support ...... 4 – support ...... 4 MELTON – support ...... 4 & – support ...... 4 ORFORD & – support ...... 4 & ...... 5 - support ...... 5 RUSHMERE – modify ...... 5 - support ...... 5 THE TRIMLEYS – support ...... 5 & – support ...... 5 - support ...... 5 WOODBRIDGE – support...... 5

SUMMARY AND SUPPORTING PRINCIPLES I support the draft recommendations proposed by the Local Government Boundary Commission for with two minor changes – one responding to the Commission’s invitation to comment on the Rushmere ward and a proposed name change. The electoral equality was the principal reason for the review, with which the recommendations almost exclusively reconcile. I provide additional comments to support community links for the draft recommendations. In forming my submission, I have looked at the comments published relating to the Phase 1 of the consultation. I have also looked at parish council websites and minutes of meetings to look at what may have been discussed in response to the draft recommendations.

I recognise the view of a small number of parishes about links to towns but this is an already established arrangement across the district. Furthermore, I have not been able to identify any particular detriment for villages where they have been included in wards with a more significant urban centre. The most extreme example of combining a major urban environment with rural parishes is the joint parish council for the three parishes of Brightwell, Foxhall and Purdis Farm which consists of very rural, farming-focused parishes of Foxhall and Brightwell with the major housing and shopping centre of Purdis Farm.

The most difficult area to create new wards with good electoral equality is the Martlesham/Woodbridge/Melton areas. I support the draft recommendations in these areas, recognising that crossover between villages and market towns. There may be room to move a couple of parishes around but it runs the risk of unduly creating very large rural wards, which adds significant burdens for single councillors. I would suggest that the recommendations are right to broadly tilt significant urban areas to be under-represented (i.e. have more electors per councillor than average) due to density of its population rather than to have under-represented rural wards as may be the case. It is also likely that windfall housing growth is likely to be in urban areas or around key service centres, rather than in very rural parishes – as per the Local Plan.

The Local Plan identified key and local service centres in addition to the towns and major centres of Felixstowe, Woodbridge, Kesgrave, Framlingham, Saxmundham, Aldeburgh, Leiston, , Purdis Farm and Martlesham Heath. Key service centres are Alderton, , Bramfield, , , , Eyke, Grundisburgh, , , Martlesham village, Melton village, Orford, Otley, Peasenhall, Rendlesham, Snape, , Trimley St Mary, Westleton, Wickham Market, and Yoxford.

There is also the question of wards and parishes crossing major roads. I appreciate that in parts of the district, major roads and significant tracts of farmland can broadly provide a strategic barrier between areas but the roads, including any bypasses, were placed irrespective of parish boundaries and there are many parishes split themselves by A roads – in fact, almost all the parishes along the A12 including Martlesham, Woodbridge, , , Saxmundham, , Yoxford, Darsham and Blythburgh. School catchment areas also do not respect these road barriers, nor do other public services like GP surgery catchment areas.

In any comments I make below, I refer to the 2019 electorate.

PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS

MODIFICATION 1 The first change is that the name of the Aldeburgh ward identified should become the Alde Valley ward. This would recognise the varied communities in the proposed ward. I recognise that Leiston High School has rebranded itself Alde Valley but that was also to recognise its wider catchment area.

MODIFICATION 2 In light of the Commission’s own question regarding the northern part of the current Rushmere ward/parish, I would support the additional warding of the parish such that properties north of the A1214 are grouped with other parishes previously identified to be part of the Rushmere ward. I estimate 860 voters from Rushmere combined with the parishes of Playford, , Tuddenham, and Witnesham would create a single member ward of 2515 electors, perhaps to be called the FYNN VALLEY ward, leaving 4678 electors to form a two-member ward for RUSHMERE. INDIVIDUAL WARDS

ALDEBURGH - Support and rename to ALDE VALLEY. This provides for good electoral equality and connections of small rural parishes to a seaside town.

Aldringham requested to be linked to , Knodishall and similar rural parishes. It did not wish to be linked to Leiston. Linked along the A1094

I note the views of Leiston Town Council and the near-identical submission from the District Council. The Town Council in its original submission did not include Knodishall in its proposed ward.

Coldfair Green Primary school is in Knodishall and has catchment areas of Aldringham, , most of Friston and Knodishall itself.

The Aldeburgh Parish Benefice is to be remodelled to include Aldringham, Friston, Knodishall and Thorpeness.

The A1094 links Aldeburgh through to Snape and the A12. Aldringham is geographically closer to Leiston than Knodishall but the two parishes are geographic neighbours (approximately 2/3 mile) linked by Aldringham Lane. Aldringham is linked to Aldeburgh by the B1122. The 521 bus runs from Aldeburgh through Thorpeness, Aldringham, Leiston, Knodishall, Friston and then on towards Saxmundham. The 65 bus links Aldeburgh to Snape; the 64A Aldeburgh to Aldringham. The Suffolk Link Blyth bus (demand responsive transport) serves most, if not all, of this ward.

GP surgeries covered by this area include Aldeburgh, Leiston and Saxmundham.

DEBEN - support This covers a large part of the Deben peninsula. The existing electorate is too small to retain the same ward pattern. Key service centres include Hollesley and Alderton.

Bawdsey and Hollesley Primary Schools catchment area parishes are Alderton, , Boyton, , Hollesley, , Shingle Street, and Sutton. The only parish in this list not included in the Deben ward is Capel St Andrew. That reflects the decision of the Commission to include Capel St Andrew in Orford & Eyke, as it is part of a joint parish council with Butley and .

The previous ward included and . Bromeswell is on the A1152 – not the road that goes to Sutton or Shottisham and the rest of the peninsula in this proposed ward. It is also grouped with Melton for playground facility money. Sutton Heath, largely former housing for the Armed Forces, is on Heath Road that branches off the B1083 and is not directly connected to Sutton. More is said in the Melton ward comments.

FELIXSTOWE NORTH, SOUTH, EAST and WEST – support My only comment would be regarding the Town Council and the splitting of the Allenby ward from the rest of the North ward. While I understand the rationale, it seems unnecessarily complicated for electoral purposes and I am not aware any stakeholder requested its creation.

FRAMLINGHAM – support

GRUNDISBURGH - support I note the desire of the Commission not to split parishes which are joined in one parish council, which is the case of .

I recognise there may be pressure to add parishes to Grundisburgh. I would have no specific objection to any additions that would not result in electoral inequality but I would caution on how this would significantly increase the size of the area to be represented. HACHESTON – support I note the desire of the Commission not to split parishes which are joined in one parish council and recognise that Farnham and have many shared interests.

KESGRAVE EAST & WEST – support

KIRTON – support

LEISTON – support Leiston itself cannot support two councillors. Addition of nearby parishes are needed.

I recognise that Parish Council wishes not to be linked with Leiston but is geographically very close. Theberton shares a postcode with Leiston IP16.

Middleton Parish Council noted the draft recommendation at its March meeting but did not offer additional minuted comments.

In Phase 1 of the consultation, an anonymous Theberton resident cited links to Leiston for doctor, pubs and schools. They also suggested the working village of Theberton was more akin to the working town of Leiston. Cllr T Cooper of Leiston suggested Theberton, Knodishall and should be included in the ward. This meets part of that suggestion.

Middleton Primary School serves both Theberton and Middleton parishes.

Middleton, Theberton and Leiston are linked by the B1122. The 196 bus links Leiston to Theberton and Middleton, then on to Westleton. The area is also served by the Suffolk Blyth link bus (demand responsive transport).

I understand requests to include the nearby Knodishall but that would have significant knock-on impact on electoral inequality. Moving Middleton to & Wenhaston would keep both wards within the 10% but would add extra onus to the already large rural council and leave Leiston over-represented.

MARTLESHAM – support This area is likely to experience significant increase in population as it has been designated as a major housing area in the Local Plan. The housing is of rather high density compared to rural parishes nearby, though not as high as neighbouring Kesgrave. I note the concerns regarding the two polling districts which have been moved into Woodbridge and Kesgrave East wards but the geographical proximity is stronger for those two hosting wards.

MELTON – support This appears to be a mixed ward reaching across a broad geography.

Melton Primary School includes catchment area parishes of Bromeswell and Ufford.

A primary school in Woodbridge (Kyson) is the designated school for children from .

Sutton Heath is a relatively new community that has very recently created its own parish identity, just two years ago. I have spoken to residents and parish councillors there from which I discerned that Melton was used as the key service centre.

NACTON & PURDIS FARM – support

ORFORD & EYKE – support I know this is a very large ward but the identity and links within the communities are . That is particularly true in the submission which recommended links with Butley, , Orford and Wantisden – which this ward satisfies. Eyke did not wish to be linked to Rendlesham; while losing the link to Hollesley, it was not on a direct road to that village but is readily linked with other parishes in the ward via the B1084 and the A1152/B1069. Eyke Primary School includes Eyke, Campsea Ash, parts of , Tunstall and Snape Maltings (which is in the parish of Tunstall) in its catchment area.

PEASENHALL & YOXFORD This is the rural inland of the most northernly part of Suffolk Coastal district, which is also west of the railway line that stretches up close to the A12. The two key service centres of Peasenhall and Yoxford share the same road of A1120. It provides for excellent electoral equality.

RENDLESHAM - support RUSHMERE – modify

Split off northern part of Rushmere St Andrew parish, leaving a two-member ward for those electors south of the A1214 as RUSHMERE. The northern part of the parish should then be joined with Swilland, Westerfield, Witnesham, Tuddenham and Playford parishes to form a single-member ward to be called FYNN VALLEY.

SAXMUNDHAM - support This was also supported by Saxmundham Town Council.

THE TRIMLEYS – support

WENHASTON & WESTLETON – support This ward is largely based on the previous Walberswick and Wenhaston ward, east of the railway line, but reaches further down the coast.

WICKHAM MARKET - support

WOODBRIDGE – support Woodbridge is a market town that acts as a hub for several parishes and itself has gradually expanded, including to other side of the A12. Regarding the A12 as a barrier, there are parts of the Woodbridge area that are already on the other side of the A12 – admittedly quite a small number of electors (approx. 115).

I recognise the desire of Martlesham Parish council to have all parts of its parish in one ward but the northern polling district is clearly part of the Woodbridge community.

I understand the argument put forward by some about adding to Woodbridge that part of Melton parish off Bredfield and Pytches Roads. I have spent some time on the calculation of a new Woodbridge ward on that basis which would work for that specific ward but the knock-on consequences for other areas leads to significant electoral inequality.

Ref: – west of the A12 but the designated primary school is in Woodbridge (Woodbridge Primary School). The two nearest GP surgeries are in Woodbridge. The 30 bus service connects Woodbridge to Hasketon, then on to Bredfield and Grundisburgh.

Ref: and – there is a primary school locally I note the concerns of Little Bealings parish council which does not want to be with a town but I have not been able to find any comments on public websites from Great Bealings parish council. The Bealings are not joined as councils but have similar interests. The 71 and 72 bus services connect to the Bealings from Woodbridge via Martlesham.