Wilmslow Town Council is calling for the town to be kept as a single entity represented in parliament by one MP.
Members of the Council have decided to make a representation to the Boundary Commission regarding the proposed changes to parliamentary constituencies, designed to reduce the number from 650 to 600 and to ensure that the number of electors in each constituency is more equal.
The Boundary Commission for England has put forward initial proposals to abolish the current Tatton parliamentary constituency before the next scheduled General Election in 2020 and split Wilmslow between two constituencies.
The proposals would see the Macclesfield constituency extend to the north‐west to include most of Wilmslow, Alderley Edge and the Chelford ward from the existing Tatton constituency. Whilst Wilmslow Dean Row and Handforth would be included the Bramhall and Poynton constituency whilst Knutsford, Mobberley and High Legh are in the proposed Altrincham and Tatton Park constituency.
Wilmslow Town Council discussed these initial proposals at their meeting on Monday, 22nd November along with the counter proposal from Tatton MP George Osborne which would keep Wilmslow united in a single parliamentary seat by moving the town as a whole into a constituency alongside Cheadle.
Councillors agreed that the prime issue was whether they wanted to keep Wilmslow intact as a town represented by a single MP.
Councillor Keith Chapman said "My view is yes we should keep it as a block. There is nothing to gain from having two MPs because then you have got almost no accountability. Whether we go with Cheadle or not is open for discussion but certainly we really wouldn't want to see the town split into having two MPs and nobody really knowing who represents them overall."
Speaking about George Osborne's proposal, Councillor Martin Watkins said "Joining with Cheadle is not something new, it is just reinventing the wheel. It is how it used to be. What is actually being proposed is a constituency which includes Alderley Edge, Wilmslow, Handforth and Cheadle."
Councillor Yvonne Warren said "I feel a lot of people in Wilmslow would prefer the Macclesfield option and to ask the Boundary Commission to include the whole of Wilmslow, isn't that an option there? I know a lot of people feel nervous about joining up with Cheadle because of the Manchester connection."
Councillor Martin Watkins responded "One of the things is if we are to go to the Boundary Commission and make proposals we need to show that our proposals are neutral in terms of the count. The one about joining us with Cheadle is neutral. For us to stay as a town and put it back into Macclesfield is not neutral, it increases the figure and the Boundary Commission is saying it doesn't want to see that."
Councillor Christopher Dodson said "Given this council represents the whole of Wilmslow I do think there is logic in trying to keep Wilmslow together as a single entity. Therefore I would be in support of a representation to the Boundary Commission by this council along the lines of what George Osborne has suggested."
Councillor Frank McCarthy added "The thought of breaking it up and turning it into more than one entity pulling in two directions is actually ludicrous to me. Whatever comes the town should remain as an entity in itself as far as the boundaries are concerned and I think as well the logical thing is to go back to what it used to be which is the one with Cheadle."
Councillor David Jefferay commented "I think it's pretty much unanimous that we want to keep Wilmslow as a block so I think we should make a representation stating that. What I think is less conclusive is whether we accept George Osborne's proposal.
"I think we should stop short of going with his proposal because my personal view is I'd rather go with Macclesfield but we don't have the time or resources to come up with counter proposal. I don't think we would be representing the majority of residents of Wilmslow if we went with George Osborne's proposal."
After much discussion the Town Council agreed to write to the Boundary Commission and George Osborne stating "Whilst the Town Council would prefer to be part of a constituency solely made up of areas of Cheshire, the priority of the Council is that Wilmslow as a whole remains in a single parliamentary constituency and would accept a proposal to ensure this happens."
Representations need to be sent by post to Boundary Commission for England, 35 Great Smith Street, London, SW1P 3BQ or online by December 5th 2016.
Comments
Here's what readers have had to say so far. Why not add your thoughts below.
Yes, having more than one MP would make people who work for the Town Council's jobs a bit harder. So of course they don't want it.
But, apparently, not that much harder to make them come up with a coherent alternative plan.
I don't buy their arguments. Other than pointing out that we are stuck implementing a bone-headed idea to reduce the total number of MPs from 650 to 600, which is unnecessary and of course going to cause this sort of argument to be made in every UK constituency (well, except for the Isle of Wight, Na h-Eileanan an Iar & Orkney and Shetland).
The outgoing member for Tatton has trousered a cool £324,000, mainly in the USA, over the last month. http://bit.ly/2gsfr4w
Even 600 MP's is far too many given the costs involved at that other countries operate very well with far, far bigger constituency sizes. Less bureaucrats is usually a good thing and only the MP's seem to have a problem with the reduction.
Finally, according to Wikiopedia (yes, I know, but it's the best I can get hold of at the moment), the rough populations for each area are:
Wilmslow: 24,000
Cheadle: 15,000
Handforth 9,000
Alderley Edge 5,000
Therefore, it is very much a case of Cheadle joining a Cheshire constituency rather than Wilmslow joining a Manchester based one.
So all in all, a change for the better that should be welcomed and not feared.
Even if Wilmslow and Cheadle were joined for the Westminster seat, we would still be stuck with CEC for local mis-government.