|
Mr. J. Davis
xxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxx
|
Mr. P. Shevlin
Chief Executive
Oswestry Borough Council
Castle View
Oswestry
Shropshire SY11 1JR
22nd February 2006
Dear Mr. Shevlin,
I understand that you are already
aware of the concern of Maesbury residents that they are not effectively
represented as a part of the very large Oswestry
Rural Parish. This concern has been evident locally for many years but,
until recently, local people were seemingly unaware
that anything could be done about it. I would therefore be grateful for
your consideration of the following.
This letter is to request that
Oswestry Borough Council conduct a review of
Parish boundaries in accordance with S.9(2)(v) of the Local Government and Rating Act 1997, i.e.:
“The recommendations which the council may make following the review are
recommendations for . . . the constitution of a new parish by . . . the
separation of part of any parish”.
Environment Circular 11/97
from the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, which
is still current, states:
Parish councils have two
main roles: community representation and local administration. For both
purposes it is desirable that a parish should reflect a small, distinctive
and recognisable community of interest, with its own sense of identity.
The feeling of local community and the wishes of local inhabitants are
the primary considerations.
The very large Oswestry
Rural Parish does not meet the above criteria, and the community in the
Maesbury area would be more effectively served if the Maesbury with Aston
Ward were converted into a separate Maesbury Parish. The remaining four
wards may wish to be renamed according to local preference.
It might also be appropriate
to consider whether the parts of Morton and Crickheath
currently in the Morda with Sweeney Ward should join the proposed Maesbury
Parish; and perhaps various boundary issues could be reviewed at the same
time.
Reasons for this request (based
on the above and guidelines in ‘Periodic and Further Electoral Reviews’
Appendix C, from Electoral Commission):
Parish Size
- The attached maps show that
the Rural Parish is by far the largest in the Borough. It can be seen
on map 2 that a Maesbury Parish, based on the ward, would still have
one of the larger land areas of the parishes.
- The four parishes in the
north of the Borough, which are also electoral wards, are each based
on one large village plus the surrounding areas. The three electoral
wards in the south of the Borough all serve multiple communities, and
are all divided into smaller parishes which better reflect the natural
boundaries of those communities. Only the Rural Parish attempts to serve
distinct communities of any significant size with just one Parish Council.
- The proposed Maesbury Parish
would have a population of about 600. Knockin, Melverley and Llanyblodwell Parishes all have fewer people, whilst
the Kinnerley and West Felton parishes are
similar to Maesbury. The Morda and Trefonen area would have a population of about 3,400,
which is similar to St. Martins, Gobowen,
Weston Rhyn and Whittington. When the Rural
Parish was created in 1894 the population of the Morda & Trefonen area was
far less than today, and the huge expansion in recent years has left
a serious imbalance for Maesbury.
Geography, Communications and History
- From a geographical perspective
there is a significant difference between the relatively flat land of
the Maesbury Ward, all between 60-100 metres above sea level, which
is mostly grade 2 and 3 arable farmland, and the Morda and Trefonen area which
ranges from 100 to 400 metres above the sea and includes a large number
of small hill farms.
- Communications within each
of the proposed parishes are relatively easy with lanes leading out
from Trefonen or Maesbury. However it is extremely
difficult to drive from the Maesbury to Trefonen
without leaving the parish.
- There are significant historical
differences between the two proposed parishes. The western area is distinctly
Welsh in character and place-names, and the Welsh language is spoken
in the Western Wards. The Maesbury area has far less Welsh influence
and the place names are mostly of Anglo-Saxon origin. The Maesbury area
was described in detail in the Domesday Book
of 1086, whereas the western wards of the Rural Parish were not mentioned
at all, because the book only covered England as it was at that time.
Community Identity
- The existence of a distinct
community in the Maesbury area is demonstrated by the existence of the
Maesbury Primary
School, St. John’s Church
(with ecclesiastical parish boundaries similar to those of the Ward),
Maesbury Women’s Institute, and the Maesbury Community
Action Group.
Community Views
- On January 23, 2006, a public
meeting was held at the Original Ball, Maesbury, attended by about 40
local residents. After some brief discussion an informal show of hands
gave about 75% in support for the idea of Maesbury having its own Parish
Council, the rest abstained, none voted against. This was a wide cross-section
of the community, such as two potential developers and a road haulier,
alongside many who are against both developments and lorries
in the village. There was a free and open discussion. Those present
represented almost 10% of 500 electors in the Ward, a far higher sample
than opinion polls achieve. A further meeting will be held on February
27, where a petition will be launched which is expected to be signed
by a majority of the electors.
- There is a long history
of difficulty in persuading electors from Maesbury to take up the three
seats allocated on the Rural Parish Council. But it can be seen from
the above that this is not due to local apathy. Several Maesbury people
have attended Parish Council meetings with a view to becoming involved,
but the agenda is inevitably dominated by the affairs of the other wards
leaving very little of any relevance to Maesbury. This imbalance, and
the resulting lack of involvement, cannot be good for democracy.
Finances
- Some of the abstentions
at the above meeting were because people thought the proposal was for
an ‘extra’ council, hence extra council tax. This is, of course, quite
wrong. The precept for the Rural Parish is currently £22.50, giving
an income of £31,000 p.a. Far from the conventional wisdom of ‘ecomony of scale’, three smaller parishes in the borough
set lower precepts (Llanyblodwell £14.50;
Melverley £16.00; Kinnerley
£20.36) whilst the much bigger Oswestry Town
Council sets a precept of £39.00.
By dividing the rural parish and keeping the same precept, Maesbury
would have an income of about £6,500 (compared with £3,300 for Knockin Parish and a mere £800 for Melverley).
The Rural Parish Clerk estimates Maesbury’s
share of the expenditure, without staff, to be £4.500, leaving £2.000
p.a. to employ a clerk. At current national pay scales that would give
Maesbury a clerk for 5 hours per week. We already have 2, possibly 3,
people of considerable professional experience, now with time to spare,
who are interested in serving the community in this way, and content
to work more hours as needed, without extra payment. This voluntary
input is clearly how the small parishes generally avoid high precepts.
Recent Developments
By the late 20th century Maesbury was suffering the fate of so many
English villages in becoming just a dormitory for the nearby town. The
canal was little more than a dried-out ditch; the village shop had gone;
soon followed by the Post Office; one pub was closed and not expected
to reopen, the other was struggling; and the school looked like it was
about to run out of children. The solution from the planners was simply
to build more houses in the false hope of reviving local services; in
fact the population of the area in 2006 is slightly less than it was in
the 1901 Census, but with twice as many houses – just fewer people per
house. But there was a better solution.
The new millennium saw the
dawning of a third golden age for Maesbury - the canal was coming back.
In April 2003 the first canal boats travelled through Maesbury after a
gap of about 80 years. The next section should open in 2006.
The impact of this has been
extraordinary. The once struggling Navigation Inn is now a smart restaurant
and bistro, as well as a local pub again; part of the old mill, is now
Maesbury Marine Services, building and maintaining canal boats; a barn
conversion is home to 'Body and Face' beauty treatment centre. All of
these businesses are attracting up-market customers from outside of the
village. And in June 2006 Maesbury will buck the national trend by opening
a brand new Post Office, complete with a community shop, café and accommodation
for ramblers. A camp site, for tents only, is planned, supplementing two
B&Bs already here; the proposed Parish hosts two golf courses, Oswestry and Mile End; the Wat's
Dyke Way long distance footpath will reconnect Maesbury with its ancient
heritage; and the village road is likely to be used to connect the national
and regional cycle networks. Even the school is attracting parents from
Oswestry as well as those in the village, thanks to excellent
Ofsted reports, and is now full again.
Maesbury's
first golden age was as the ancient capital of the borderlands – it was
the principle Anglo-Saxon fortified settlement of the area before the
Normans built Oswestry;
the second was as the major inland canal port for the area in the 19th
century - the third will clearly be based on leisure and tourism. Almost
miraculously the area escaped the worst development disasters of the 20th
century and so much of historic and environmental importance still survives
in our largely unspoilt landscape.
There is no doubt that Maesbury
is regaining its importance in the economic and political life of the
borderlands. However, in a recent discussion with a county footpaths officer,
he commented that the proposed Wat’s Dyke Way
should terminate in Llanymynech rather than
Maesbury – because long distance paths “should end somewhere rather than
nowhere”.
Perhaps the most crucial point
of Circular 11/97, quoted above, is about the sense of local identity.
The people of Maesbury want it to be ‘somewhere’ again; they want to have
a greater say in local affairs, and they need a Maesbury Parish Council
to promote the area and to ensure that it provides the best for both visitors
and residents in the 21st century.
John Davis
Former Local Government Officer, on behalf of those who voted on January
23rd
For further details of
everything above see www.maesbury.org
|