From: Keepers Cottage - SKYE Sent: 01 August 2013 10:22 To: Reviews@ Subject: East Lindsey recommendations - submission from Skegness Conservatives John Cowpe Chairman Skegness Conservatives Branch 35 Queens Road Skegness Lincs PE25 2ET The Review Officer (East Lindsey) Local Government Boundary Commission for England Layden House 76-86 Turnmill Street London EC1M 5LG 1st August, 2013 Dear Sirs, The Skegness Conservative Branch wishes to make the following representations on the Boundary Commission’s draft recommendations for East Lindsey. Firstly, we wish to endorse fully the view expressed by East Lindsey District Council in its initial submission of May, 2012, and its revised submission of July, 2012, that the council should continue to have 60 members, rather than the proposed reduction to 55. One result of such a reduction would be the merging of the Seacroft and Scarbrough Wards, in Skegness, with the consequent reduction from four to three of the number of district councillors representing that area. In our view the two areas are very different in character and as such would not fit well together under one ward. We believe the current workload of the four councillors representing those areas is suitable for what is required and that the electorate would not be best served by a reduction to three. The recommendation that Skegness Town Council should, at the same time, have an increase in the number of councillors from 20 to 21 would seem to create an anomaly. However, what gives us the greatest concern is that the district council and town council wards in Skegness would have different boundaries. This in our view would be a serious mistake. It would be difficult enough for the political parties to carry out their electioneering under these new arrangements, but we believe for the general public it would create great confusion. There is already some confusion about the present boundaries among voters. The new proposals would make things much worse. There is very low turnout of voters in local elections. These changes could lead to even greater alienation and even lower turnouts. To summarise, our branch would prefer the status quo, with no merger of the Seacroft and Scarbrough Wards, no reduction in the number of Skegness district councillors, and no increase in the number of town councillors. The branch also wishes to make representations in relation to the proposed new Firsby and Wainfleet Ward. We would submit that there is very little community of interest or connectivity between the rural villages of Firsby, Irby in the Marsh, Little Steeping, Great Steeping and Bratoft and the urban centre of Wainfleet, with its town mentality. The Firsby Group of Parishes orientate themselves economically towards Spilsby as their service/shopping centre, NOT Wainfleet. Schools are concentrated at Wainfleet and Spilsby, with only Friskney and Great Steeping having primary schools in the more rural areas. In conclusion, we would submit that the present arrangements in the above areas work very well and would be best left alone, Yours faithfully, John Cowpe. .