From: Gill, Councillor Kieron Sent: 04 November 2018 12:58 To: reviews Cc: Ethapemi, Councillor Tony; Gbajumo, Councillor Erica Subject: Support for Brent Council's Proposal 1 Attachments: Support for proposal one.docx; ATT00001.htm Dear Electoral Commision, Please find enclosed a letter from Councillors Tony Ethapemi, Erica Gbajumo and Kieron Gill in relation to the up coming Ward Boundary changes occurring in Brent. Your sincerely, Kieron Gill Councillor Brondesbury Park, Brent. Co‐councillor with Tony Ethapemi and Erica Gbajumo. The use of Brent Council's e‐mail system may be monitored and communications read in order to secure effective operation of the system and other lawful purposes. 1 Dear Electoral commission, We would like to wholeheartedly endorse the new Brent Ward Map that has been created by Brent Council (specifically their “Proposal 1” (link below*)). We think this map is undoubtedly the best for what we feel are several very strong reasons – it was created by the only body with the expertise to overcome the many technical obstacles to the creation of such a map, namely Brent Council. – in a similar vein it was created by the only body that is not partisan and this map was thus created from a neutral point of view to meet the technical specifications you spelt out. I think it’s worth mentioning that all the other maps that will come your way will lack this neutrality and will have been created by people with the specific purpose of gaining a political advantage. It is thus the most equitable option for all. It is however worth mentioning that these ward maps will have political implications and the only point we would make with respect to that is that Brondesbury Park, as outlined in Proposal 1, largely remains as it was, and its value as a ward comes from the fact that it is the most politically competitive ward in the whole of Brent, and that such political competition has been empirically proven to push political parties to optimise their performance for their voters/residents and thus is a social good. Thus it is a uniquely well-balanced ward and this is excellent for democracy. Lastly we feel two person wards have serious drawbacks namely; -two member wards will not function if one of the councillors is sick or has poor work outputs-9,000 people for one councillor! -two member wards mean you provide a worse service to your residents- harder to get a councillor, less cover if the other is busy, less pooled knowledge/skills etc. So we would wish to make plain that we wholeheartedly endorse Brent Council’s Proposal one, for what we hope you’d agree are excellent reasons. Councillor Tony Ethapemi Councillor Erica Gbajumo Councillor Kieron Gill *http://democracy.brent.gov.uk/documents/s74542/06b.%20Proposal%201 %20-%20Full%20Borough%20Map.pdf From: Hector, Councillor Claudia Sent: 04 November 2018 15:25 To: reviews Subject: Ward patten boundaries for south east Brent Attachments: Kensal Green ward.pdf; ATT00001.htm The initial proposals that were published for Brent in both cases showed what amounted to the carving up of Kensal Green ward (no 20) into Brondesbury ward (no 11), for the most part, plus some streets added to Queen’s Park (no8) and Harlesden (no 15). Clearly something has to be done to bring the numbers of voters in relation to the numbers of councillors into alignment with the overall aim of about 4,000 plus per councillor. However the choice of Kensal Green as the ward to carve up is arbitrary, to say the least. Kensal Green has more voters than Brondesbury Park. It also has a distinct identity. If any ward should be chosen for being carved up it should be Brondesbury. However most local people who have taken an interest in this think that the best way forward for everyone is for all three wards, KG, BP and QP, to continue as two councillor wards. This has the advantage of our being able to draw our boundaries such that it makes a very close fit to the locality known as Kensal Green, and keeps all three wards at a manageable size. We can give some streets to Harlesden which needs more residents. The residents of Kensal Green are proud of their identity. We have numerous community groups with “Kensal” in their name. Sent from my iPad The use of Brent Council's e‐mail system may be monitored and communications read in order to secure effective operation of the system and other lawful purposes. 1 From: Chan, Councillor Jumbo Sent: 04 November 2018 19:59 To: reviews Subject: [Submission] Support for a Kensal Green ward Attachments: Kensal Green ward.pdf Dear Sir/Madam, I am writing to you as both a resident of and councillor for Kensal Green ward in the London Borough of Brent. I am attaching a warding pattern proposal which includes a modified version of the current Kensal Green ward (see 'Kensal Green ward.pdf'), and I wish to write in support of it. I believe that we currently have a thriving and distinct community. I am proud to be a member of and councillor supporting groups such as Kensal Green Residents' Association, Friends of Kensal Rise Library, Kensal Green Fingers, Kensal Green Streets and many more other groups which are centred around the current Kensal Green ward. I understand that Brent Council has created two proposals which seeks to omit Kensal Green ward, and instead, subsume it into a two much larger Brondesbury Park and Queen's Park wards. I believe this is a grave oversight, as it will not only tear apart and destroy a unique community which is very different to these two latter wards, but moreover, will lead to poor governance and unwieldy administration as these two wards will be far too big. If one were to ask residents of Kensal Green whether they feel they live in Brondesbury Park and Queen's Park, and they will resoundingly deny such an assertion. As you can see in the attached warding pattern proposal, some of the current Kensal Green ward is lost to Harlesden. However, residents have told me that they would very much like to keep most of Kensal Green ward as it is (including Cholmondeley Avenue, Radcliffe Avenue, Ancona Road, Spezia Road, Leghorn Road, Rucklidge Avenue, Palermo Road, Odessa Road and all of Furness Road), as well as extend the ward eastwards to Chamberlayne Road (which currently belongs to Queen's Park ward). According to the attached warding proposal, the population distribution means that – if the wards are divided into Kensal Green, Brondesbury Park and Queen's Park wards, rather than two bigger Brondesbury Park and Queen's Park wards – there might only be two rather than the current three councillors. If this means three more cohesive and governable wards than the two massive and unwieldy Brondesbury Park and Queen's Park wards, then it is a sacrifice worth making. In supporting the attached warding proposal, which seeks to keep a Kensal Green ward, I have sought to take into account that each ward have the same number of voters, cohesive community interests and identities, and effective and convenient local government. If you would like any further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Jumbo Cllr Jun Bo (Jumbo) Chan Labour Councillor for Kensal Green Ward, and resident of 1 The use of Brent Council's e‐mail system may be monitored and communications read in order to secure effective operation of the system and other lawful purposes. 2 From: Long, Councillor Janice Sent: 04 November 2018 23:24 To: reviews Subject: LONDON BOROUGH OF BRENT ELECTORAL BOUNDARY REVIEW The Review Officer (Brent) Local Government Boundary Commission for England 1st Floor, Windsor House 50 Victoria Street, London, SW1H 0TL Dear Sir I am writing to express my support for the proposals by Brent Labour Party and the Brent & Harrow Co- operative Party for the boundary review in LB Brent. And I also endorse one of the main principles behind the proposal, that the North Circular Road is a major physical barrier that divides communities. There are some road level crossings but the NCR is mainly crossed by pedestrians using footbridges or underpasses. You use these when you have to get to a place on the other side of the NCR, eg Brent Park Tesco or Neasden Town Centre but it has meant there is little community connection.. You cannot easily cross the NCR by bicycle and the inability to easily cross the NCR has led to lower cycling rates in the north of the borough. I have been a councillor since 1994 and have served in several wards. Since 2014 I have been a councillor in Dudden Hill ward, part of which runs along the NCR by Neasden Town Centre. There is an underpass from Neasden Shoppings Centre and a footbridge near the edge of the ward that takes you across to the Welsh Harp reservoir. I have never had need to use the footbridge. The underpass is used by people who live north of the NCR to access Neasden shopping centre. But residents of the Town Centre and its neighbouring streets have little reason to cross the NCR and go north. When events are held in the Town centre, eg Council consultation events, the Neasden Festival, as a councillor I ask people where they live. Many respond by giving addresses in Dollis Hill or CWH6 but very few are from the area north of the NCR. I have attended events at St Catherines Church (now the polling station for CDU1 and CDu2) where many people who attend come from Dollis Hill ward.