Draft recommendations on the future electoral arrangements for Rutland May 2002 BOUNDARY COMMITTEE FOR ENGLAND © Crown Copyright 2002 Applications for reproduction should be made to: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office Copyright Unit. The mapping in this report is reproduced from OS mapping by the Boundary Committee for England with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, © Crown Copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. Licence Number: GD 03114G. This report is printed on recycled paper. 2 BOUNDARY COMMITTEE FOR ENGLAND CONTENTS page WHAT IS THE BOUNDARY COMMITTEE FOR ENGLAND? 5 SUMMARY 7 1 INTRODUCTION 11 2 CURRENT ELECTORAL ARRANGEMENTS 13 3 SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED 17 4 ANALYSIS AND DRAFT RECOMMENDATIONS 19 5 WHAT HAPPENS NEXT? 29 APPENDICES A Draft Recommendations for Rutland: Detailed Mapping 31 B Code of Practice on Written Consultation 33 A large map illustrating the existing and proposed ward boundaries for Oakham Town is inserted inside the back cover of this report. BOUNDARY COMMITTEE FOR ENGLAND 3 4 BOUNDARY COMMITTEE FOR ENGLAND WHAT IS THE BOUNDARY COMMITTEE FOR ENGLAND? The Boundary Committee for England is a committee of the Electoral Commission, an independent body set up by Parliament under the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000. The functions of the Local Government Commission for England were transferred to the Electoral Commission and its Boundary Committee on 1 April 2002 by the Local Government Commission for England (Transfer of Functions) Order 2001 (SI 2001 No 3692). The Order also transferred to the Electoral Commission the functions of the Secretary of State in relation to taking decisions on recommendations for changes to local authority electoral arrangements and their implementation. Members of the Committee are: Pamela Gordon (Chair) Professor Michael Clarke CBE Kru Desai Robin Gray Joan Jones Ann M Kelly Professor Colin Mellors Archie Gall (Director) We are required by law to review the electoral arrangements of every principal local authority in England. Our aim is to ensure that the number of electors represented by each councillor in an area is as nearly as possible the same, taking into account local circumstances. We can recommend changes to ward boundaries, the number of councillors and ward names. We can also recommend changes to the electoral arrangements of parish and town councils. BOUNDARY COMMITTEE FOR ENGLAND 5 6 BOUNDARY COMMITTEE FOR ENGLAND SUMMARY The Local Government Commission for England (LGCE) began a review of the electoral arrangements for Rutland on 16 October 2001. As a consequence of the transfer of functions referred to earlier, it falls to us the Boundary Committee for England, to complete the work of the LGCE. • This report summarises the submissions received during the first stage of the review, and makes draft recommendations for change. We found that the current arrangements provide unequal representation of electors in Rutland: • in 12 of the 16 wards the number of electors represented by each councillor varies by more than 10 per cent from the average for the district and eight wards vary by more than 20 per cent from the average; • by 2006 this situation is expected to worsen, with the number of electors per councillor forecast to vary by more than 10 per cent from the average in 14 wards and by more than 20 per cent in six wards. Our main draft recommendations for future electoral arrangements (see Tables 1 and 2 and paragraphs 64-65) are that: • Rutland County Council should have 26 councillors, six more than at present; • there should be 16 wards the same as at present; • the boundaries of 15 of the existing wards should be modified, with one ward retaining its existing boundaries. The purpose of these proposals is to ensure that, in future, each Rutland councillor represents approximately the same number of electors, bearing in mind local circumstances. • In 12 of the proposed 16 wards the number of electors per councillor would vary by no more than 10 per cent from the district average. • This improved level of electoral equality is expected to improve further with the number of electors per councillor in all 16 wards expected to vary by no more than 10 per cent from the average for the district in 2006. Recommendations are also made for changes to parish and town council electoral arrangements which provide for: • revised warding arrangements and the reduction and re-distribution of councillors for the parish of Oakham. This report sets out our draft recommendations on which comments are invited. • We will consult on these proposals for eight weeks from 14 May 2002. We take this consultation very seriously. We may decide to move away from our draft recommendations in the light of comments or suggestions that we receive. It is therefore important that all interested parties let us have their views and evidence, whether or not they agree with our draft recommendations. BOUNDARY COMMITTEE FOR ENGLAND 7 • After considering local views, we will decide whether to modify our draft recommendations. We will then submit our final recommendations to the Electoral Commission which, with effect from 1 April 2002, will be responsible for implementing change to local authority electoral arrangements. • The Electoral Commission will decide whether to accept, modify or reject our final recommendations. It will also determine when any changes come into effect. You should express your views by writing directly to us at the address below by 8 July 2002: Team Leader Rutland Review Boundary Committee for England Trevelyan House Great Peter Street London SW1P 2HW 8 BOUNDARY COMMITTEE FOR ENGLAND Table 1: Draft Recommendations: Summary Ward name Number of Constituent areas Map councillors reference 1 Braunston & Belton 1 The parishes of Ayston, Belton-in-Rutland, Map 2 Braunston-in-Rutland, Brooke, Leighfield, Preston, Ridlington and Wardley 2 Chater 1 The parishes of Gunthorpe, Lyndon, Manton, Map 2 Martinsthorpe, Morcott, Pilton and Wing 3 Cottesmore 2 The parishes of Barrow, Cottesmore, Market Map 2 Overton and Teigh 4 Exton 1 The parishes of Ashwell, Burley, Egleton, Exton, Map 2 Hambleton, Horn and Whitwell 5 Greetham 1 The parishes of Clipsham, Greetham, Pickworth, Map 2 Stretton and Thistleton 6 Ketton 2 The parishes of Barrowden, Ketton, Tinwell and Map 2 Tixover 7 Langham 1 The parish of Langham Map 2 8 Lyddington 1 The parishes of Bisbrooke, Caldecott, Glaston, Map 2 Lyddington, Seaton, Stoke Dry and Thorpe By Water 9 Normanton 2 The parishes of Edith Weston, Empingham, Map 2 Normanton, North Luffenham and South Luffenham 10 Oakham North East 2 part of Oakham parish (the proposed Oakham North Large Map East parish ward) 11 Oakham North West 2 part of Oakham parish (the proposed Oakham North Large Map West parish ward); the parish of Barleythorpe 12 Oakham South 2 part of Oakham parish (the proposed Oakham Large Map East South East parish ward) 13 Oakham South West 2 part of Oakham parish (the proposed Oakham Large Map South West parish ward) 14 Ryhall & Casterton 2 The parishes of Essendine, Great Casterton, Little Map 2 Casterton, Ryhall and Tickencote 15 Uppingham 3 Unchanged – The parishes of Beaumont Chase and Map 2 Uppingham 16 Whissendine 1 The parish of Whissendine Map 2 Notes: 1 The whole district is parished 2 The wards in the above table are illustrated on Map 2 and the Large Map inserted in the back of this report. BOUNDARY COMMITTEE FOR ENGLAND 9 Table 2: Draft Recommendations for Rutland Ward name Number Electorate Number of Variance Electorate Number of Variance of (2001) electors per from (2006) electors from councillors councillor average per average % councillor % 1 Braunston & Belton 1 985 985 -2 1,028 1,028 -4 2 Chater 1 971 971 -3 1,002 1,002 -6 3 Cottesmore 2 2,033 1,017 1 2,083 1,042 -3 4 Exton 1 1,083 1,083 8 1,113 1,113 4 5 Greetham 1 921 921 -8 969 969 -9 6 Ketton 2 2,073 1,037 3 2,186 1,093 2 7 Langham 1 875 875 -13 1,042 1,042 -3 8 Lyddington 1 1,064 1,064 6 1,081 1,081 1 9 Normanton 2 2,262 1,131 13 2,279 1,140 6 10 Oakham 2 1,886 943 -6 2,048 1,024 -4 North East 11 Oakham 2 2,196 1,098 10 2,243 1,122 5 North West 12 Oakham 2 1,727 864 -14 2,172 1,086 1 South East 13 Oakham 2 2,065 1,033 3 2,094 1,047 -2 South West 14 Ryhall & Casterton 2 2,203 1,102 10 2,289 1,145 7 15 Uppingham 3 2,750 917 -9 3,143 1,048 -2 16 Whissendine 1 972 972 -3 1,055 1,055 -1 Totals 26 26,066 – – 27,827 – – Averages – – 1,003 – – 1,070 – Source: Electorate figures are based on Rutland County Council’s submission. Note: The ‘variance from average’ column shows by how far, in percentage terms, the number of electors per councillor varies from the average for the district. The minus symbol (-) denotes a lower than average number of electors. Figures have been rounded to the nearest whole number. 10 BOUNDARY COMMITTEE FOR ENGLAND 1 INTRODUCTION 1 This report contains the proposals for the electoral arrangements for the district of Rutland, on which we are now consulting. This district being reviewed as part of the programme of periodic electoral reviews (PERs) of all 386 principal local authority areas in England. The programme started in 1996 and is currently expected to finish in 2004. 2 Rutland’s last review was carried out by the Local Government Boundary Commission for England, which reported to the Secretary of State in May 1977 (Report no.