Contents Summary 1 1 Introduction 3 2 Analysis and final recommendations 5 Submissions received 5 Electorate figures 6 Council size 6 Electoral fairness 8 General analysis 8 Electoral arrangements 10 Burslem, Tunstall and Chell 11 Hanley and Northwood 14 Stoke and Penkhull 15 South of the A50/A500 16 East of the city 18 Conclusions 21 3 What happens next? 23 4 Mapping 25 Appendices A Glossary and abbreviations 27 B Code of practice on written consultation 31 C Table C1: Final recommendations for 33 Stoke-on-Trent City Council D Additional legislation we have had regard to 37 Summary The Local Government Boundary Commission for England is an independent body which conducts electoral reviews of local authority areas. The broad purpose of an electoral review is to decide on the appropriate electoral arrangements – the number of councillors and the names, number and boundaries of wards – for a specific local authority. This electoral review is being conducted following a direction from the Electoral Commission. The Commission considered it necessary to undertake a review of Stoke-on- Trent City Council in the interests of providing for effective and convenient local government. The Boundary Committee for England commenced the review in 2009. However, on 1 April 2010 the Local Government Boundary Commission for England assumed the functions of the Boundary Committee. It therefore fell to us to complete the work of the Boundary Committee. This review has been conducted as follows: Stage Stage starts Description One 20 October 2009 Submission of proposals to the Boundary Committee Two 12 January 2010 The Boundary Committee’s analysis and deliberation Three 26 March 2010 Publication of draft recommendations and consultation on them Four 14 June 2010 Analysis of submissions received and formulation of final recommendations Draft recommendations The Boundary Committee proposed a council size of 44 members and a mixed pattern of wards, including single-, two- and three-member wards. The draft recommendations were constructed on the basis of reflecting community evidence received, transport and communication links within the city and visits to the area. In places the draft recommendations reflected the scheme consulted on by the Council. The Boundary Committee divided the city into five distinct areas in order to build a warding pattern. It identified a number of clear breaks or barriers to movement within the city, both natural and man-made, and constructed draft recommendations using these barriers. In two areas these boundaries were crossed in order to improve the levels of electoral equality and access within the proposed wards. Submissions received During Stage Three the Commission received 177 representations, with Stoke-on-Trent City Council and a local resident providing city-wide comments. The Council opposed a mixture of single- and multi-member wards across the city and proposed a uniform pattern 1 of 44 single-member wards, on the grounds that electoral arrangements would be easy to understand, consistent across the city (Stoke-on-Trent City Council currently has 20 three- member wards) and provide a level playing field for all candidates at future local elections. The local resident proposed a pattern of 22 two-member wards. We also received representations on specific wards from MPs, city councillors, residents’ associations and local residents. All submissions can be viewed on our website: www.lgbce.org.uk. Analysis and final recommendations Electorate figures The City Council submitted electoral forecasts with a projected increase of approximately 1% within the five-year period 2008–13. The Council provided some details of its methodology in support of the increase. Following changes to the legislation, we must now consider the electorate forecasts five years from the end of the review. The City Council provided forecasts for 2015. While we received some correspondence during stages One and Three regarding the levels of electoral registration in the city, we are satisfied that the City Council’s projections are the best estimate at this time. These have formed the basis of our final recommendations. General analysis We have given careful consideration to all the Stage Three submissions received in response to the draft recommendations and are broadly confirming the draft recommendations as final. We note Stoke-on-Trent City Council’s objections to the proposed mixed warding pattern of single- and multi-member wards. However, we do not consider that evidence was received to justify a uniform warding pattern of single- or multi-member wards, particularly given their impact on communities in the city. The City Council proposed some minor amendments to the draft recommendations, some of which we have adopted. We are also recommending a two-member Great Chell & Packmoor ward, as proposed by a number of residents’ associations during Stage Three, including those covering Chell Area, Brindley Ford Community and Fegg Hayes. Our final recommendations for Stoke-on- Trent are that the Council should have 31 single-member wards, five two-member wards and one three-member ward. Our final recommendations take account of all the submissions received. What happens next? We have now completed our review of electoral arrangements for Stoke-on-Trent City Council. The changes we have proposed must be approved by Parliament. A draft Order – the legal document which brings into force our recommendations – will be laid in Parliament. The draft Order will provide for new electoral arrangements which will come into force at the next elections for Stoke-on-Trent City Council, in 2011. We are grateful to all those organisations and individuals who have contributed to the review through expressing their views and advice. The full report is available to download at www.lgbce.org.uk. 2 1 Introduction 1 On 10 June 2009 the Electoral Commission directed the Boundary Committee to conduct a review of the electoral arrangements of Stoke-on-Trent City Council. The review commenced on 4 August 2009. The Boundary Committee wrote to Stoke-on-Trent City Council together with other interested parties, inviting the submission of proposals to us on the most appropriate council size for the new council (this is referred to as ‘council size’ throughout this report). The Boundary Committee used the submissions it received to inform its decision on council size. On 20 October 2009 it announced that it was minded to recommend a 45-member council, and invited the submission of proposals on the warding arrangements for Stoke-on-Trent based on 45 councillors. Following the consultation the Committee reduced the council size to 44 councillors as this provided for better electoral equality across the city. The submissions received during this stage of the review informed the Boundary Committee’s Draft recommendations on the new electoral arrangements in Stoke-on-Trent, which was published on 26 March 2010. It then undertook a further 11-week period of consultation, which ended on 14 June 2010. 2 On 1 April 2010, the Local Government Boundary Commission for England assumed the functions of the Boundary Committee. We have now considered the draft recommendations in the light of the further evidence and decided whether or not to make modifications to them. What is an electoral review? 3 The main aim of an electoral review is to try to ensure ‘electoral equality’, which means that all councillors in a single authority represent approximately the same number of electors. Our objective is to make recommendations that will improve electoral equality, while also trying to reflect communities in the area and provide for effective and convenient local government. 4 Our three main considerations – equalising the number of electors each councillor represents; reflecting community identities and interests; and providing for effective and convenient local government – are set out in legislation 1 and our task is to strike the best balance between them when making our recommendations. 5 Our powers, as well as the guidance we have provided for electoral reviews and further information on the review process, can be found on our website at www.lgbce.org.uk . Why are we conducting a review in Stoke-on-Trent? 6 In October 2007, the Stoke-on-Trent Governance Commission was established by the Government to ‘review the governance of Stoke-on-Trent and to inform public debate which will be taking place on the future pattern of the city’s governance’. In its final report to the Government and City Council in May 2008, the Commission made 14 recommendations. It recommended, among other matters, that: ■ The City Council should move to all-out elections, i.e. hold elections once every four years (the council currently elects by thirds, with elections in three years 1 Schedule 2 to the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009 3 out of four). ■ There should be a uniform pattern of single-member wards (the council currently has a uniform pattern of three-member wards). ■ Work should be commenced on building a case for an appropriate council size at an early date (the Council currently comprises 60 councillors). 7 The Commission’s recommendations in relation to electoral arrangements were initially accepted by the City Council. However, following consultation on a move to whole council elections, the City Council failed to pass a resolution to move to such a cycle by the necessary two-thirds majority. The Government was informed of this decision. 8 On 8 May 2009, the then Minister for Local Government announced in the House of Commons that the Government were minded to intervene to make an Order under section 86 of the Local Government Act 2000 specifying a scheme of whole council elections for Stoke-on-Trent City Council from 2011. 9 The then Minister for Local Government also announced that he would ask the Electoral Commission to respond to the Governance Commission’s recommendations referred to in the second and third bullet point above and to direct the Boundary Committee to undertake an electoral review with a view to any new electoral arrangements being implemented in May 2011.