Copeland Constituency Labour Party

Transcription

1

2 Copeland Constituency Labour Party Submission on warding arrangements LGBCE review of Copeland Borough Council Introduction This document outlines Copeland Constituency Labour Party s response to the consultation on warding arrangements at Copeland Borough Council. It builds on responses Copeland Labour Group to the earlier stage of consultation with the Council. Throughout the document we refer to Copeland Constituency Labour Party as the CLP. We have had regard throughout preparing our submission to the three statutory criteria by which you are bound in deciding on warding arrangements: 1. Delivering electoral equality for local voters 2. Interests and identities of local communities 3. Effective and convenient local government Numbers As presented to you in the submission and extra information Copeland Labour Group, we feel that reducing the number of councillors to 33, that no arrangement of wards can meet criteria 3. The arguments put forward in the Mayor s submission are flawed in the statement of minimum numbers. The Constitution outlines separation of Executive some other major committee functions, meaning members cannot serve on the Executive and these committees at the same time. The Constitution also states the legal position that the Mayor may have between 2 and 9 members on his/her Executive: this is not fixed and can be changed at any time at the Mayor s discretion (as long as Council are informed). Although the current Mayor has 3 members on his Executive, the new Mayor elected in 2019 (when these boundaries come into place) may well choose to have more. It is unreasonable in workload terms to expect backbench councillors to serve on more than one of these committees. On this basis, the minimum number of councillors required is 39. This a factual, indisputable argument. GROUP A Present Possible Executive 3 Cllrs plus Mayor 9 Cllrs plus Mayor Audit & Governance 7 Cllrs plus Independent chair Planning OSC TOTAL Cllrs no independent chair

3 In addition, Audit and Governance currently has an externally independent chair as provided for in the Constitution. He is not a councillor. Although there are no plans to change this, there may be an argument for doing so when the current Chair retires (which is likely in the next few years, as he is already stepping down other roles he holds around Cumbria). Subjectively we in the CLP re-assert that a higher ratio is required across the borough for three reasons: Rural sparsity Urban deprivation Unique additional burdens of the strategic nuclear sites and the Lake District National Park Proposal for 33 councillors Putting aside the arguments in the paragraph above, this submission presents what we believe to be the best configuration of wards if there are 33 councillors. Labour members took part in workshops across the borough with colleagues Conservative and Independent groups. With agreement across the political groups, a paper was taken to full council. Minor amendments were accepted at that meeting and the report agreed by Council. Or submission on ward boundaries is identical to that passed by Council. 18 new wards with a total of 33 councillors. For clarity, appendix 1 shows the constituent polling districts for each proposed new ward. The CLP has consulted widely across the borough to ensure we have local knowledge to inform our plans and challenge our assumptions. We recognise that ward names will be consulted on in the next phase but have made some guiding comments in this submission. We have used names we think would be acceptable; whilst our boundaries are the same as the submission Copeland Borough Council, our labels may be different. Interests and identities of local communities. Polling districts were used as the building blocks for new wards. The CLP s staring premise was that the urban centres of towns and villages should not be split, if at all possible. Mindful of consequential warding arrangements as well as maintaining community integrity we have tried to keep parishes together. However, where this has not been possible, we believe the split reflects locally understood boundaries within those parishes and leads to reasonable warding arrangements for them in future. Within Whitehaven, we have been careful not to split estates and to keep like housing with like. In grouping polling districts across parishes, we were mindful of communication links: roads go up valleys not across mountain ranges. The settlements that are grouped together have similar characteristics. Electoral equality Using polling districts has advantages for maintaining natural communities together but has disadvantages in that their size various considerably in both geography and numbers of electors. In practice it means that it is considerably easier to move boundaries in rural areas with many small (in electoral terms), than in the urban areas. If the LGBCE was minded to adjust boundaries in the urban areas, then looking at reconfiguring urban polling districts would help; currently in many urban areas the

4 polling districts split towns along roads (so that one side is in a different area to the other). This is administratively efficient whilst these polling districts are in the same ward, but is confusing for electors and doesn t keep communities together where that is not the case. Comments on specific wards NB appendix 1 shows which polling districts are assigned to each new proposed ward. The CLP has not supplied a map but these ae identical to those in the Copeland Borough Council submission. For clarity, as stated earlier, our working titles may differ those in that submission. North Copeland The villages of Parton, Lowca and Distington along with Gilgarran and Pica each have strong individual identities. However, the three parishes (along with that of Moresby) have a long history of working together. They have a joint parish council development plan and regularly collaborate. Frizington and Moresby We felt it important that the if possible the whole of the Frizington village is in one ward but it is too large for a single councillor. Equally Moresby should be kept as a whole parish. These two areas have more in common with each other than with the more sparse rural areas bordering them. Therefore, the CLP thinks that as there is a direct communication link between them they should be contained within a single ward. Egremont & Cleator and Cleator Moor Cleator Moor parish is made up of two main settlements, the town of Cleator Moor and the village of Cleator, plus some rural hamlets. The CLP believes it is important to keep the whole of the town of Cleator Moor together. Unfortunately keeping the Cleator polling districts takes the ward over the 3- councillor electorate limit. Splitting Cleator Moor Parish in this way is recognisable and gives sensible warding within the parish. The CLP believes that this configuration is preferable to splitting the urban area of Cleator Moor town, keeping Cleator and adding in other areas the surrounding area to make two 2-member wards. However, we recognise that there is strong feeling on this. It is important that the ward name reflects that this is both settlements and does not suggest Cleator has become part of Egremont! Moor Row and Bigrigg Along with the settlement of Keekle, Bigrigg and Moor Row are similar communities joined by a road used as a main through route. Bigrigg and Moor Row are part of Egremont parish but the CLP has been advised the suggested boundary is already the line of the warding for Egremont Town Council i.e. it is an established delineament of a community. This configuration splits the A1 polling district. However, as LGBCE will have noticed, there is little physical connection between the two sides of this area (although it is one parish, Weddicar) as the centre is a large area of moss (boggy moorland). Arlecdon and Ennerdale A large rural are characterised by distinctive hamlets with few facilities except in the slightly larger villages of Ennerdale Bridge and Arlecdon. Some configuration of this ward has been in existence since the formation of Copeland itself, indicating that it has repeatedly been seen as having a sense of place. Along with South Copeland this will be the most rural ward in the borough.

5 Beckermet Beckermet is a large rural village south of Egremont and Thornhill a large social housing estate in the parish, along with the settlements of Haile, Wilton and Braystones they form a coherent mostly rural ward just outside the National Park. St Bees The coastal villages and hamlets of St Bees parish along with approximately half of Lowside quarter. This configuration reclaims the Rottingdon polling division to St Bees (in which parish it lies) an association with Sandwith (in Whitehaven parish). Seascale and Gosforth wards We did consider combining these as one 2- member ward, but were persuaded by members ( other groups as Labour currently has no representation in this area) that they should be kept separate because of their individual identities. The CLP feels there is some merit to both arguments. South Copeland This area of the borough is characterised by a large number of small hamlets spread over a large geographic area. There are numerous small schools and churches. The village of Bootle and town of Millom provide shopping and banking facilities for most of the area. Although each hamlet may be more or less associated with one of the more major settlements they do not have any real collective identities and it hard to group them sensibly whilst taking note of the road networks. The vast majority of this ward lies within the Lake District National Park. Originally configured as two 1-member wards, the CLP believes that it is better for ease of administration to be one larger 2-member ward. Although geographically very large we think it is easier to co-ordinate workload in this way. As travel is up and down valleys, we think that doing so would not significantly increase travelling. Face to face contact tends to be in the larger centres and for members the majority of travelling in any case occurs in travelling to and the council offices in Whitehaven (assuming they live in their ward). Along with Arlecdon and Ennerdale this will be the most rural ward in the borough. Millom The CLP, after consultation with people in the town, strongly believe that the whole of the current Holborn Hill and Newtown wards which constitute the urban area of Millom should be contained together in one ward. Councillors all three political groups agreed this in the workshops and this was particularly endorsed by those Millom and the south of Copeland (again all three groups). Whitehaven - Comprising the six new wards of Hensingham, Hillcrest, Central, Corkickle, Kells and South Whitehaven. The CLP strongly asserts that the boundary of Whitehaven parish should be respected in any plan. Any configuration that attaches portions of outside parishes leads to loss of community identity and poor warding for either those parishes or for Whitehaven Town Council. Each ward brings together areas of the town with similar identities. Most of the names are those with which the people living there are familiar. South Whitehaven although not an area name is one that has been used and brings together a number of different mainly social housing estates with far too many names to fit into a ward title! The area has had development plans collectively for a number of years. This ward will have the highest indices of deprivation in the borough, containing many LSOAs in the top 20% and some in the top 10%.

6 Summary This submission lays out our arguments as to why Copeland Constituency Labour Party support the ward layout approved and submitted by Copeland Borough Council. We believe that it is the best way to meet the criteria if there are 33 councillors: 1. Delivering electoral equality for local voters 2. Interests and identities of local communities However, as we state in the section on numbers we do not believe that effective government can take place with these numbers. However, the CLP believes that this is the best way with 33 councillors to try and meet that criteria: 3. Effective and convenient local government The CLP believes that officers LGBCE are intending to visit the constituency as part of their investigations, before making their final proposals for consultation. We would like to meet with you and talk through the points in this submission and answer questions, on it and other areas your officers might like to explore. We can be contacted on Gillian Troughton Secretary Copeland Constituency Labour Party

7 Appendix 1 polling districts Polling District No. of electors A2 656 A3 199 J1 19 J2 289 J3 348 J4 247 B1 355 B2 119 B3 590 B6 740 D1 602 D2 534 D M1 322 M2 582 M3 754 R1 281 U2 68 E1 858 E2 855 E F2 664 F K3 6 M4 452 M5 514 M6 646 B8 148 F1 492 H3 712 H I I2 807 I3 651 A1 A 26 Ward working title no. cllrs electors electors/cllr Arlecdon & Ennerdale mean minimum maximum Beckermet Central Cleator Moor Corkickle Egremont & Cleator D5 442 K K2 772 U1 772 U3 337 Frizington & Moresby

8 Polling District No. of electors B7 155 L1 986 L2 72 L3 75 X2 247 X3 76 X5 23 X6 92 X7 23 O1 652 O2 701 O3 407 O4 689 O5 645 O6 184 D D6 22 P P2 936 R2 728 R Q2 713 V V Q A1 B 339 H1 681 H2 935 G G2 393 G3 621 G4 268 G5 444 X1 256 X8 507 X9 966 Ward working title no. cllrs electors electors/cllr mean minimum maximum Gosforth Hensingham Hillcrest Kells Millom Moor Row & Bigrigg North Copeland Seascale

9 Polling District No. of electors C1 407 C2 235 C3 116 C4 69 C5 13 C6 240 N S1 399 S2 190 S3 116 S4 12 S5 307 S6 100 X4 217 T1 247 T2 635 T3 790 T4 810 T5 716 W2 300 W3 894 W4 939 W5 296 B4 292 B5 49 I4 22 W1 47 Y Ward working title no. cllrs electors electors/cllr mean minimum maximum South Copeland South Whitehaven St Bees Total mean minimum maximum