Mike Coleman Appendix Chairman of the Council County Hall West Street T: 01243 752701 [email protected] www.westsussex.gov.uk PO19 1RQ

2 June 2011 Boundary Commission for

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am writing to set out West Sussex County Council’s formal response to the current consultation on Parliamentary boundaries. The County Council welcomes the opportunity to comment on the proposals and appreciates that the Commission is having to work to stricter criteria in electorate numbers than before. It welcomes the retention of eight MPs for West Sussex and that there are no proposals for crossing boundaries with neighbouring local authorities.

The consultation document sets out proposed changes to six district wards within West Sussex. The County Council recognises that at least three of these are necessary to ensure that Arundel and South Downs, Bognor Regis and Littlehampton and Chichester constituencies comply with the electoral quota. It supports the Commission’s proposals to:

• move Plaistow ward from Chichester constituency to Arundel and South Downs constituency • move Barnham ward from Arundel and South Downs constituency to Bognor Regis and Littlehampton constituency. • move Copthorne and Worth ward from Horsham constituency to Crawley constituency.

The County Council does not consider that the other three proposed changes are either necessary or are desirable to local electorates. Namely:

• ward in Chichester constituency should remain unchanged. Easebourne is strongly aligned to , which will remain in Chichester constituency and Easebourne should therefore remain in Chichester also. Retaining Easebourne in Chichester constituency will not breach the electoral quota rules and will not adversely affect the shape of either constituency. • Bolney ward in Mid Sussex constituency should remain unchanged. Bolney is part of Mid Sussex district and is naturally considered part of Mid Sussex constituency. Its electorate would consider themselves to be part of Mid Sussex. It is not necessary to move Bolney to comply with the electoral quota, although it is accepted that the shape would be neater if the ward were moved. • Given the two arguments above, it would be necessary to retain Walberton ward in Arundel and South Downs constituency to ensure that it complies with the electoral quota.

The County Council accepts that, although the moving of Copthorne and Worth ward will split Worth Parish, this already occurs at District level and is necessary to achieve compliance with the electoral quota.

The County Council does not believe that any better solutions can be reached through a more radical reorganisation of constituencies.

Finally, the proposed name change of East Worthing and Shoreham to Worthing East and Shoreham as part of a national drive for consistency is supported.

Yours faithfully,

Mike Coleman Chairman of West Sussex County Council