Walsall final recommendations

Bloxwich

Beechdale, Leamore & Reedswood

In the previous consultation, we received a submission from Councillor Jukes that requested that Birchills-Leamore ward be renamed Beechdale, Birchills & Leamore. We were initially not persuaded to adopt this ward name change as we considered the community evidence provided to be insufficient. We nonetheless encouraged the submission of additional evidence to help us assess whether a change in ward name would be appropriate.

During the consultation on our draft recommendations, we received submissions from Valerie Vaz MP, the Labour Group and Councillor Hicken that supported a ward name change. Valerie Vaz and Councillor Hicken strongly supported the inclusion of Beechdale in the name, while the Labour Group suggested renaming the ward Beechdale, Leamore & Reedswood, to recognise the three distinct communities within our proposed ward.

We have decided to adopt the Labour Group’s proposed name of Beechdale, Leamore & Reedswood. This change reflects the submissions made during both rounds of consultation, which emphasised the need to recognise the Beechdale community within the ward name and to better reflect community identities and interests.

We also consider the removal of ‘Birchills’ from the name reflects the submissions made by Councillor Hicken and Ms Vaz. They stated that, as a result of our decision to move the southernmost part of the existing Birchills-Leamore ward into St Matthews ward, the ‘Birchills’ area no longer forms a significant part of the ward. They therefore argued that it would be unsuitable to retain the ‘Birchills’ part of the ward name if we proposed no further boundary changes in this section of the ward.

The Labour Group supported the decision to include the area around Irvine Road, Odell Road and Nursery Road in our Bloxwich West ward. However, Councillor Hicken, Councillor Follows and two local residents stated that this area should be transferred from our proposed Bloxwich West ward. They argued that this modification would unite the Leamore community within a single ward and provide for a better balance of representation between wards.

We have decided to broadly adopt this proposal as part of the final recommendations, placing the northern boundary of Beechdale, Leamore & Reedswood ward along Reeves Street and High Street. We have been persuaded by the evidence received that this change will better reflect community identities, and also note the reduced electoral variance that results from this change in Beechdale, Leamore & Reedswood ward. This ward was forecast to have an electoral variance of -10% by 2029 under our draft proposals, but will now have an electoral variance of -4% by 2029.

Bloxwich East & Blakenall Heath and Bloxwich West

The Labour Group supported our decision to include the new residential development at the former Elkington Works and Cerro EMS site within our proposed Bloxwich East ward but requested that we include the Dolphin Close area on the opposite side of Slacky Lane, which has also been subject to recent development. The group stated that our proposed boundary along Slacky Lane would isolate a growing community. We have decided to adopt this proposal as part of our final recommendations as we agree that this modification will better reflect community identities and interests.

The Labour Group also proposed that we transfer Blakenall Lane, Blakenall Row, Dawson Street, Chapel Street and one side of Foster Street from our draft Blakenall ward into a renamed Bloxwich East & Blakenall Heath ward. They argued that this would unite the Blakenall Heath community within a single ward. We have been persuaded by the evidence received – which highlighted the presence of various amenities that serve the Blakenall Heath community, such as shops, a church, a children’s centre and a charity-run community hub – that this proposal will better reflect community identities and interests. We also consider that the Labour Group’s suggested ward name is appropriate and have adopted it in our final recommendations.

In our draft recommendations, we transferred the roads to the west of Stafford Road, from The Bell public house to the Turnberry estate junction, from the existing Bloxwich West ward to our proposed Bloxwich East ward. Based on the evidence we received, we were persuaded that this adjustment represented a good balance of our statutory criteria. We received a mixture of support and opposition concerning this decision during the consultation on our draft recommendations.

The Labour Group, Councillors Flint, C. Statham and M. Statham and 22 local residents supported this boundary, with a number of these submissions stating that this alignment united electors residing on both sides of the A34 road within a single ward and helped achieve good electoral equality across wards.

However, Councillors Allen, Harrison, Follows and Hicken and eight local residents opposed the boundary. These submissions broadly argued that electors residing on the western side of Stafford Road have stronger community links with the remainder of Bloxwich West ward. Several of these submissions also stated that this proposal does not reflect road and pathway access routes and that we should examine alternative proposals to resolve the over-representation of Bloxwich East ward.

We carefully reviewed the submissions received regarding this particular boundary, given the support and opposition we received. However, including electors on the west of Stafford Road, from The Bell public house to the Turnberry estate junction, in a Bloxwich West ward, would result in a forecast electoral variance of -12% by 2029 for our reconfigured Bloxwich East & Blakenall Heath ward. We consider this variance too high for us to accept, particularly given the support we also received for this boundary. Therefore, while we acknowledge there is a mixture of support and opposition concerning this proposal, we have decided not to make any changes to this particular boundary as part of our final recommendations.

We were not persuaded to adopt a local resident’s proposal to extend Bloxwich East ward to encompass part of Bell Lane, Stamping Way, Bealeys Lane and Broad Lane, as we consider that no evidence relating to community identities and interests was submitted in support of this proposal.

Harden, Goscote & Ryecroft

We received two submissions concerning our proposed Blakenall ward. The Labour Group requested that we consider changing the ward name to Harden, Goscote & Ryecroft to reflect the three main communities in the ward, which they stated each have their own strong, distinct identities. The group argued that this ward name change would be particularly appropriate if we were minded to adopt their proposal to transfer electors residing on Blakenall Lane, Blakenall Row, Dawson Street, Chapel Street and one side of Foster Street to a renamed Bloxwich East & Blakenall Heath ward.

We have been persuaded by the evidence provided by the Labour Group to support this change. We agree that the current ward name should be amended to better reflect the constituent communities of the ward, and we have therefore renamed our proposed Blakenall ward as Harden, Goscote & Ryecroft as part of our final recommendations.

Walsall town

Paddock

The Labour Group, Valerie Vaz MP, Councillor Hussain and four local residents supported our decision to unite the Chuckery community within our proposed Paddock ward. This community was previously split between wards and it was generally considered that our recommendations for Paddock ward would better reflect the community identities and interests of the Chuckery community. The Independent Group stated their preference for the area to be in St Matthew’s ward, but expressed satisfaction that the community would now be entirely in a single ward. Councillor Hicken opposed our decision to place the Chuckery in Paddock ward, stating that it should be in St Matthew’s ward.

After considering all the evidence we have received, we have determined that our decision to place the Chuckery in Paddock ward effectively balances our statutory criteria and will reflect local community identities. We therefore propose no changes to Paddock ward in our final recommendations.

Palfrey & The Delves

The Independent Group and Valerie Vaz MP supported our decision to retain the boundaries of the existing Palfrey ward in our draft recommendations.

During the consultation on those recommendations, we received a submission from a local resident who requested that we rename the ward to Palfrey & The Delves. They stated that the ward is comprised of the two distinct communities of Palfrey and The Delves, and that electors to the south of the Walsall Ring Road consider themselves residents of The Delves rather than Palfrey.

We have been persuaded by the evidence that a ward name change would be suitable and would better represent the two main communities within the ward. We are thus renaming our proposed Palfrey ward to Palfrey & The Delves in our final recommendations.

 Pleck

The Independent Group and Valerie Vaz MP supported our decision to retain the boundaries of the existing Pleck ward in our draft recommendations.

 Councillor Hicken argued that our draft recommendations had placed parts of the Birchills and Reedswood areas in Pleck ward, thereby dividing these communities between wards. Consequently, they suggested transferring these areas from our proposed Pleck ward. However, we decided not to adopt this proposal, because it would result in the Pleck ward being significantly over-represented by 2029.

 St Matthew’s

Valerie Vaz MP and the Labour Group supported our decision to transfer the Proffitt Street area from the current Blakenall ward, and the Hospital Street area of the existing Birchills-Leamore ward, into our proposed St Matthew’s ward. The Labour Group argued that this proposal reunited the Mirpuri community and that these two areas have strong links and share several community facilities. A local resident also supported the latter modification.

Conversely, Councillor Hicken opposed both of these modifications. ​They argued that the Walsall Ring Road represents a significant barrier between communities and that the draft recommendations divide the Birchills community across three wards. They argued that the area north of the Ring Road would be best represented by either Birchills-Leamore or Blakenall ward councillors.

After careful deliberation, we have decided to confirm our draft recommendations for St Matthew’s ward as final. We remain of the view that based on our visit to the area – in addition to the evidence provided by Valerie Vaz MP, the Labour Group and the local resident – electors residing to the south of the former Walsall and Wolverhampton railway line have good links to the town centre and should thus be placed in a St Matthew’s ward.

Another local resident stated that St Matthew’s ward should be renamed Central Walsall. We decided not to adopt this amendment as no supporting evidence was submitted to support this name change.

Pelsall and Rushall-Shelfield

Pelsall

We received two submissions regarding Pelsall ward. The Labour Group supported the ward, stating it reunited the Pelsall community. The other submission came from the Autumn Close Residents’ Forum, expressing concern that our proposed extension of Pelsall ward, which incorporated Autumn Close, could negatively impact community identities and interests. This concern arose from potential changes in the local councillors who had historically served the Rushall-Shelfield ward, where the cul-de-sac is currently located. Additionally, they requested that the ward’s name incorporate ‘High Heath’, regardless of which ward Autumn Close and the broader area was placed.

We have retained the draft boundaries for Pelsall ward, without any alterations. Our decision is based on the absence of compelling community evidence that would justify modifying the proposed boundaries. Additionally, we are unconvinced that the evidence presented adequately demonstrates the distinctiveness of the High Heath area as a community warranting its inclusion in the ward name.

Rushall-Shelfield

We received a mix of support and opposition regarding our proposed Rushall-Shelfield ward. The Labour Group endorsed the ward, highlighting its similarities to the former Hatherton-Rushall ward that existed prior to the previous electoral review. Additionally, Rushall Parish Church and three local residents expressed support for this ward. The church and one of the residents favoured our Rushall-Shelfield ward because it would unite the entire Church of England Parish of Rushall within a single ward. The other two local residents supported the ward on the basis that they felt the community identity and interests of the Hatherton/Butts area would be best served in a Rushall-Shelfield ward.

However, Councillor Andrew and two local residents held an opposing view, broadly arguing that the Butts area shares closer links to Walsall town centre than to the Rushall area. Councillor Andrew proposed that we transfer the Butts area to either the St Matthew’s ward or the Blakenall ward, while placing the Hatherton area within Rushall-Shelfield ward, with Lichfield Road serving as the boundary. We chose not to adopt this proposal because it would result in our Rushall-Shelfield ward being over-represented and our St Matthew’s ward being under-represented. Overall, these changes would not provide for good electoral equality between the two wards.

Valerie Vaz MP expressed dissatisfaction with our Rushall-Shelfield ward, citing it as a negative consequence of the legal requirement to maintain a uniform pattern of three-councillor wards. However, on the basis that we are unable to deviate from a uniform pattern of three-councillor wards, Ms Vaz did not oppose our recommendations here, acknowledging that community links do somewhat exist within the ward. Ms Vaz did suggest renaming the ward to Arboretum in recognition of Walsall Arboretum, which was argued to be a shared geographical and cultural feature for communities within the ward. We carefully considered this proposed name change but have chosen not to adopt it in our final recommendations. Our concern lies in the fact that the Arboretum is situated in the southernmost part of the ward, making it less central and therefore, in our view, not fully representative of the constituent communities in the ward.

Consequently, we confirm our draft Rushall-Shelfield ward as final.