Agenda item
Local Government Boundary Commission for England's (LGBCE) draft recommendations for the new electoral arrangements for Brent Council
The purpose of this report is to seek views and prompt a discussion about the LGBCE’s draft recommendations on the new electoral arrangements for Brent.
Minutes:
The Committee noted the draft recommendations on the new electoral arrangements for Brent by Local Government Boundary Commission for England - LGBCE. (The term ‘LGBCE’ was used interchangeably with the phrase ‘the Commission’ and ‘the Boundary Commission’). The report intended to prompt a discussion and invited comments.
Carolyn Downs (Chief Executive) highlighted that the key principles for comments at the meeting must have regard to the following principles set out by the LGBCE:
· electoral equality;
· community identity; and
· effective and convenient local government.
Councillor M Butt (Leader and the Chair of the meeting) concurred with the Chief Executive. He added that in light of these principles, the Committee should aim to reach a consensus, wherever possible, beyond electability for specific councillors or impact on just a particular ward by taking a council-wide approach.
In addition to the Committee Members, the registered speakers - Councillors Nerva, Long, Shahzad, Dar, Colacicco, together with, the Chair of local Labour Party’s Local Campaign Forum (LCF), Tessa Van Gelderen, also made representation and provided feedback about the LGBCE’s draft recommendations to the Committee.
During a comprehensive discussion, the following key points were noted:
· Carolyn Downs (Chief Executive) stated that Brent Council had not been able submit an official response to the LGBCE as there was no cross-party consensus on this issue unlike perhaps in some other local authorities. She highlighted that Brent North Conservative Association had already submitted their own response to the Commission which, by and large, seemed to have been taken on board in the draft recommendations published by the Boundary Commission. She added that it was her intention to write to the Commission with her independent views as the Chief Executive;
Committee Members:
· Councillor Agha stated that, based on the feedback, the Council should aim for a concrete Borough-wide response instead of ward-based comments;
· Councillor S Choudhary said that the Boundary Commission had made a mess of the proposal by woefully ignoring the natural boundaries of various wards as it arbitrarily incorporated significantly differing variances, ranging from 3% to 9%, within some of the newly proposed ward boundaries in their draft recommendations;
· Councillor Tatler emphasised the need for a strong collective voice. She added that the new ‘Kingsbury’ ward name was a better representation of the area and its identity instead of existing ‘Fryent’ but the Kingsbury underground/train station must be within the final boundary of the Kingsbury ward which was currently not the case;
· Cllr McLennan stated that, as a long standing resident of Willesden Green, she was of the view that the newly proposed name of ‘Roundwood’ did not mean anything to the local community in terms of community identity and local heritage; and
· Councillor M Butt (Leader and the Chair) reminded that it was about building consensus and reaching a compromise wherever possible by working together. He reminded that it was critical to ensure that local representatives and community stakeholders wrote to the Boundary Commission in numbers to demonstrate a strength of feeling for or against a particular proposal in the draft recommendations so that it was taken on board by LGBCE before the deadline for consultation.
Registered Speakers:
Councillor Nerva (Queens Park) felt that there were difficult and complicated boundaries in Brent and highlighted various other points. He felt that the proposed recommendation by the Boundary Commission broadly addressed geographical change and was a granular approach. He said that it was important ‘not’ to have great inequality between the North and the South of the Borough now that Brent would have reduced number of councillors, from 60 currently, to be reduced down to 57. Declaring a personal interest as local councillor, he added that he was particularly disappointed about the proposed change to the name of ‘Queens Park’ ward given its clear identity and prominence and therefore the name of ‘Queens Park’ ward ought to be kept. He ended by stating that the proposed boundary changes, between ‘Willesden Green’ and ‘Harlesden’ wards, with the newly proposed ‘Roundwood’ ward also did not make any sense;
Cllr Long ( Dudden Hill) stated that, despite some reservations, she and local residents generally would agree with the changes subject to their comments about the name changes be taken on board – i.e. it should be ‘Dudden Hill and Willesden’, and not ‘Dollis Hill’. She argued that the local petrol station construction area should naturally go into the newly proposed ‘Roundwood’ ward and people were generally happy with the proposed name. However, the newly proposed name of a neighbouring ward ‘Gladstone’ ward was quite confusing for some because such a ward, i.e. Gladstone used to exist in another part of Brent therefore the new ward name should be anything other than Gladstone to avoid confusion - may be it could be called Neasden. Cllr Hirani (Dudden Hill and Committee Member) said that ‘Dudden Hill’ ward name was not recognised as a proper place as such and it should perhaps be better called ‘Willesden and Dollis Hill’ ward as Dollis Hill had its own long standing identity along with a well-established train/underground station. Carolyn Downs (Chief Executive) highlighted that the two views expressed by local ward Members seemed at odds with each other and demonstrated the difficulty faced at times in reaching a council-wide consensus;
Councillor Shahzad (Mapesbury) stated that the draft recommendations proposed by the Boundary Commission about Mapesbury were completely unacceptable to the local electorates. He informed that the local community and all key stakeholders had signed a strongly representative petition protesting the draft recommendations. He informed that the all three ward councillors have reached a local consensus, i.e. call the new ward ‘Cricklewood Mapesbury’ ward and keep the boundary as explained at the previous Brent Council consultation meeting i.e. ensure all CMA3 were in the ward boundary, and included Riffel Road, Chandos Road, Kenneth Crescent, Jeymer Avenue and Marley Walk to ensure that Park Avenue North was the ward boundary. Councillor Shahzad stated that that the opposition to the draft recommendation was based on the calculation that 1,100 local electorates would have to be unnecessarily removed as a result of the change proposed by the Boundary Commission which was not only contradictory to the local consensus, community benefit and the natural boundary lines of the ward but the draft recommendation was also incongruous to its own fundamental principles set out by the LGBCE. He handed in copies of the signed petition to Carolyn Downs, Chief Executive, which was signed by local residents and all stakeholders - including local businesses, faith groups, community organisations, as well as, the 900-strong local residents’ association - MEPRA. Cllr Shahzad was reminded to ensure that this petition, along with any other local objection or suggestion letters, was sent directly by the concerned parties to the Boundary Commission - a reminder which was also highlighted to all about their respective submissions and local community views in relation to the draft recommendations by the LGBCE;
Cllr Dar (Mapesbury) stated that he had lived in Cricklewood for the past 53 years and it used to be under London Borough of Willesden until the borough dissolved. He highlighted the historical importance, community identity and vibrant diversity of Cricklewood and confirmed that ‘Cricklewood Mapesbury’ ward name was agreed as a compromise to reach a local consensus;
Cllr Lia Colacicco (Mapesbury) emphasised that the draft recommendation by the Boundary Commission, if adopted, would result in the local church and pubic house being removed from the ward which was totally unacceptable and hugely upsetting for the local community; and
Tessa Van Gelderen (LCF Chair, Brent Labour Party) stated that she was broadly supportive of the draft recommendations, subject to views about the changes made to ward name were taken on board. She said the new wards should be called ‘Harlesden and Kensal Green’ and ‘Queens Park and Kensal Rise’. She added that many people who were happy with the proposal often remained silent in her view about such proposals which should be understood. She added that people who were happy with the proposal may not come forward to have their say. However, she was reminded by the Councillor M Butt (Leader and the Chair), that the number of responses submitted for or against a given proposal mattered to the Commission as the volume of comments would be an important factor in their final determination as it was a ‘numbers game’.
After a comprehensive discussion, Councillor M Butt (Leader and the Chair) reminded everyone that it was in everyone’s interest to ensure their local submissions, whatever these may be, were submitted to the LGBCE before the deadline of 15 April 2019 - the final recommendation by the Boundary Commission would be published in July 2019.
Thomas Cattermole (Head of Executive and Member Services) prompted that that the Boundary Commission was desperately seeking input from the local residents and it was specifically highlighted in the document.
RESOLVED that:
i. The content of the report be noted and recommendations set out on page 13 under sections 2.1 to 2.3 of the report by Thomas Cattermole (Head of Executive and Member Services) and Matt Willis (Principal Electoral Services Manager) be agreed;
ii. Carolyn Downs (Chief Executive) would collate key comments for circulation in a draft format with a view to send those comments to the LGBCE; and
iii. Carolyn Downs (Chief Executive) would also send her own independent assessment of the draft recommendations to the Boundary Commission as the Chief Executive of Brent Council.
Supporting documents:
- 07. LGBCE Draft recommendations for Brent, item 7. PDF 101 KB
- Appendix 1 - cover, item 7. PDF 11 KB
- 07a. Appendix 1 - Brent Cex Letter, item 7. PDF 125 KB
- Appendix 2 - cover, item 7. PDF 11 KB
- 07b. Appendix 2 - Brent LGBCE recommendations summary, item 7. PDF 8 MB
- Appendix 3 - cover, item 7. PDF 11 KB
- 07c. Appendix 3 - Brent Draft LGBCE recommendations report, item 7. PDF 2 MB
- Appendix 4 - cover, item 7. PDF 11 KB
- 07d. Appendix 4 - Brent draft LGBCE recommendations map, item 7. PDF 14 MB