Every 20 years or so we have ward reviews. These are meant to keep representation fair and if you have say large number of new homes built etc.

Of course here we have had a fairly static population with Nether Hall the only growth area. At the last review in 2004 or so our ward was deemed under sized. Due to this then Orchard Hills/Daisy Bank was added to the ward. At the time I believed this was wrong.

Not as some may say because it meant moving from a marginal ward to a solid tory ward. But because I believe all wards and seats should have facilities in common. We should have councillors to represent us that represent an area that everyone shares the same aims and ambitions no matter who we may vote for.

After all many times in conversations the Tories here have told me they always won Pheasey so no worries there 🙂

So the review is here

My response is below and be interested if anyone thinks the same !

Hi,

I have lived in Pheasey Park Farm Ward all my life and very keen on politics. Our ward at the last review to equal the numbers had polling district NF added. This district is known as orchard Hills.

I like to think that wards should represent local areas with common interests and shared facilities etc. Orchard Hills and Pheasey do not share this. We are separated by a large expanse of Green Belt known as Barr Beacon. This acts as a natural barrier between the two areas.

With recent reviews especially in neighbouring Birmingham we have seen the boundary commission is willing to have different number of councillors per wards. There is an obvious change that can be made here.

Polling district NF can be moved to Paddock ward which they do share a lot of commonality and shared services like churches, shopping areas etc. I believe this is around 2500 voters. With that number moving Paddock can be given one extra councillor making their ward 4 councillors and Pheasey can be 2 councillors for around 8000 voters.

This would leave us slightly under represented but is a logical move.

Regards,

Ian