Cllr. Graves on the Boundary Review
You may not be aware but next year the council is changing its voting system. Instead of elections every year where one councillor is up for election the change will mean 3 councillors are up for election once every four years.
What comes with this change is a potential to change the ward boundaries, indeed some changes are necessary to balance up the number of electors in each ward. There have been some movements in certain wards.
Last year the whole council suggested and the majority voted on marginal changes to the wards balance them up and to keep 3 councillors per ward.
Unfortunately, the Labour party have seen this as an opportunity for them to gain more seats by introducing a proposal to split up certain areas in Derby. The main changes are in Alvaston, Chaddesden and Littleover where they could gain up to an extra 4-6 seats. This is classed as gerrymandering. The Boundary commission are obliged to consider these suggestions, however, they will take views from anyone in the city. Below is what I have submitted.
If you feel this is not acceptable please engage with the Boundary Commission by emailing them reviews@lgbce.org.uk and expressing your views.
Statement by Cllr Alan Graves leader of Reform Derby on Derby City Council
This statement is my personal view on the Local Government Boundary review
If I may refresh the last contribution my party put to you.
- Number of councillors per ward – we agreed 3
- Additional Wards – we agreed to keep to 17
Back in September Reform Derby replied to the document and made the points that all 4 parties Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrats and Reform came to a consensus that we would keep to the prerequisite number of councillors per ward at three. There was a cross party meeting between the leaders of the each group and that was agreed by all of us.
You may recall that the other parties wanted to increase the number of councillors by a further 6, something we disagreed with and the Boundary Commission decided that 51 (the original number) was in fact just about right.
These new proposals seem to have come after all parties agreed to keeping to 3 member wards. Almost as if someone within the Labour hierarchy realised a potential to surreptitiously rearrange the basic ward structure to increase their numbers on the council. The two main areas that would suffer are Alvaston and Chaddesden. Polling data shows that there are polling areas that favour a Labour outcome. The current ward boundaries realise Reform as victors in Alvaston and the Conservatives as victors in Chaddesden.
It is therefore, quite clear that the Labour proposals have absolutely nothing to do with serving the people better. It is gerrymandering at the highest level.
The council on the other hand offered marginal improvements to the existing wards to better fit with population numbers. Up until the council meeting where this was agreed, The Labour group had shown signs of agreement. At this meeting they had changed their minds.
The Labour party hold just under a third of all seats and to make the changes they suggest would probably increase their seat numbers from 16 to 20+. It is obvious that their proposal is to gain political advantage.
I believe, and the Conservatives, Liberal Democrats and Reform, the council proposal is by far the most sensible suggestion and it keeps all wards to their 3 councillor wards. Something the Labour group agreed to originally.
I refer to the Reform Derby response to explain that the Labour proposal does not in fact bring together local communities any better than the council proposal.
Yours faithfully
Cllr Alan Graves – Leader of Reform Derby
Regards
Cllr Alan Graves
Reform Derby Leader
Change Derby Politics for Good through Reform
