REVIEW OF PART OF THE BOUNDARY BETWEEN THE COUNTIES OF CEREDIGION AND PEMBROKESHIRE IN THE AREA OF THE COMMUNITY OF ST. DOGMAELS
REPORT AND PROPOSALS
Appendix 3
CARDIGAN TOWN COUNCIL’S OBSERVATIONS ON THE BOUNDARY COMMISSION DRAFT PROPOSALS FOR ST. DOGMAELS
12thFebruary 2001
Dear Mr Knight,
Re. Boundary Commission Draft Proposals on the boundary between St.Dogmaels and Cardigan Town
I would draw your attention to your presentation to the Town Council at the beginning of this process. You said that the only reason for change the Boundary Commission would consider was effective and efficient local government administration. You misled the town council, as we now know that the test was, or is, effective and convenient, quite different. The draft proposal by your commission would appear to have ignored this and made its decision based on how the residents feel their association should be. This is in our opinion a legal error. The Commission also do not appear to have given any legal reasons in their draft proposals. We would like a synopsis of the legal reasons you have used on which to base your draft proposals!
The Boundary Commission does not seem to have taken into account the opinion of the rest of the Town of Cardigan about the prospect of losing part of the Town and consequent detriment for services provided both by Ceredigion and the Town Council. This latter element will cause a reduction in effectiveness and convenience of the administration of the residual area. The Commission in paragraph 3.9 page 9 has NOT taken argument showing the loss of NET not GROSS revenue into account. Ceredigion is unlikely to decommission a rubbish-collecting lorry or make staff redundant so any savings are likely to be minimal and at the margins.
In response to the Boundary Commission’s proposed recommendation that St. Dogmaels be united and placed into Pembrokeshire the town council delivered a simple letter and questionnaire to all the residents of Cardigan (encl.1).
In all 2,300 questionnaires were delivered and only 121 were returned. From such a small number it is not possible to draw firm conclusions. The comments made were interesting and the analysis of the results is appended (encl. 2).
The Boundary Commission is well aware of the lack of appeal against the failure of cross border co-operation of County Councils and should take into account historically the almost total failure of Pembrokeshire to support both service provision and service development in Cardigan that have benefits for their residents.
It must be firmly stated that Cardigan town council did not request this Boundary review. On the whole the residents from Cardigan wards were very sympathetic to and supportive of the residents of St. Dogmaels, having lived together for generations this was refreshing to see. Cardigan Town council has no animosity towards St. Dogmaels, indeed it has always supported the village to the best of its ability. The Town Council is saddened to see the amount of animosity being orchestrated by St Dogmaels Community Council. It must be noted that it was they who initiated this boundary review and it is only natural that Cardigan must defend its interests; Cardigan residents would expect nothing less. The town council hopes that what ever the outcome of this boundary review we can all return to the normality of being friendly and supportive neighbours.
At paragraph 3.13 we would wish the Commission to provide the evidence of effective cross border co-operation. It is an almost total lack of this from Pembrokeshire in the past that has led to alarm if the proposed area is taken over by Pembrokeshire. Pembrokeshire will not contribute fairly, based on past experience. to the usage and that their residents place on Cardigan’s facilities or provide any capital for their development.
The Commission’s response to numbers of residents per community and county councillor is to say the least bizarre. The equivalent of 5 Cardigan community councillors would have the same workload as 12 St Dogmaels councillors, now that is really effective. The County councillor representation is only 0.086% from being within Government guidelines.
We would make detailed comment on the Commissions assessment and proposals as follows.
3.1 Accepted
3.2 How can they have taken them fully into account when the evidence is finely balanced? They have conceded to emotion and perception of the population. However laudable is this anything to do with effective and convenient government.
3.3 One authority agreed.
3.4 Accepted
3.5 How does ‘strong sense’ equate with effective and convenient. The Cardigan Town area of St Dogmaels is just as well served by Cardigan as the St Dogmaels Community Council serves its own area.
3.6 This is a convenient geographical argument not about effectiveness & convenience - which is the remit of the Boundaries Commission.
3.7 Accepted.
3.8 It is acceptable that Poppit remains in National Park--- Representations are not effective & convenient — Liberal - not to Pembrokeshire but just unification.
3.9 What savings? (evidence given indicates a great net loss to both the Ceredigion and Cardigan Councils — there is no mention of the potential loss of revenue to Charities and voluntary groups plus project money. See also 5.4 5.5 5.6. The residents of a combined St. Dogmaels would still use the facilities in Cardigan, and are welcome to do so, but there should be a fair contribution towards them. The rates in the rump of Cardigan and across Ceredigion would have to rise by some £10 compensate for this loss. Historically Pembrokeshire has not been willing to cross border fund anything.
What will be the effect of Care Trusts for the residents of St Dogmaels if they have to look to Haverfordwest (30 miles away) for the management of these services. What services do St Dogmaels give at present? — will they now fund a CAB, a swimming pool, Area 43, a youth club and provide a library? It is improbable and more effective and convenient for them to continue to use the facilities in Cardigan. Routine policing of this area of Pembrokeshire is going to be from Fishguard 17 miles away, not Cardigan 2 miles away.
There is the point of the Electoral Review of this area, last carried out by your committee in 1998. Then there was no mention of the present arrangements being untenable. Your committee will have to look at this boundary again after only two years, not very effective is it?
3.10 Where is the argument based on effective and convenient in this paragraph? 184 residents out of over 300 of St Dogmaels have agreed but what about the rest of the residents of Cardigan Town for it has been a single entity for well over 150 years. The rest of Cardigan Town’s residents (3,500) will wish to have a say in the matter- if that is what counts — especially if re-organisation means a loss for them.
3.11 Agreed the effectiveness and convenience of the St Dogmaels Area would be the same under either County; BUT the effect on the effectiveness and convenience of the administration of Cardigan would be disproportionate. The relative effect on the population and critical inertia of such a small County (in population terms) as Ceredigion would be significant by reducing the already small tax base. The united area of St Dogmaels should stay with Cardigan. The effective and convenient administration of the estuarial regions would be better served.
3.12 There would be the same improvement no matter under which Unitary authority — there is no mention of improvement schemes from Ceredigion i.e. the improved road and footpath to St Dogmaels for the whole of St. Dogmaels, the removal of the Cilmaenllwyd tip and the flood alleviation scheme for Cardigan. (NAW funding)
3.13 No evidence of cross border co-operation has been given. Indeed the lack of it and appropriate capital and revenue co-operation is one of the main reasons for Cardigan having a lack of appropriate infrastructure for the catchment area served by Cardigan town. If this had been forthcoming then the residents of both communities would be enjoying better and more facilities and infrastructure. What would happen if Ceredigion charged extra for Community services to residents of North Pemb? That would not be effective, convenient or acceptable.
3.14 They would not having been canvassed very heavily on the point by St Dogmaels Councillors.
3.15 Identity is not effective & convenient; strength of feeling has nothing to do with effective & convenient administration. Although the Town is very aware and sympathetic to the very close nature of the community of St. Dogmaels
3.16 The commission has ignored the river Teifi estuary. This has huge problems associated with lack of co-operation with both County Councils, evidence given to and in the TEEMI (Teifi Estuary Environmental Management Initiative) report. Indeed Pembrokeshire have refused to co-operate with TEEMI until it becomes an independent and freestanding body.
3.17 We should be looking to the inclusion of the whole of the Lower Teifi Valley into Ceredigion for effective & convenient administration. The small area now under consideration, St. Dogmaels, would just be part of the larger picture and should not be considered until the wider issues discussed. Look at Newcastle Emlyn and the recent press coverage of lack of infrastructure support from Carmarthen — look at the ASDL line to Haverfordwest, Carmarthen and Aberystwyth. No one advocated the needs of the 45,000 people living in the lower Teifi valley because they are divided and their needs diluted between different Counties.
5.4 890 voters per county councillor is only 50.086% of the national target and 67% of Ceredigion average. Can this be acceptable to the NAW? Is this effective and convenient? — definitely not.
5.5 1 councillor for 90 electors in St Dogmaels Community Council is only 40% of that proposed in Cardigan Community Council — is that justifiable on effective and convenient administration? Most definitely not.
5.6 Currently Teifi Ward has 1,198 electors, 223 per councillor. If it is effective and convenient to reduce the number of councillors to 4, still giving more than twice the number of voters per councillor as proposed in St. Dogmaels. The revised St. Dogmaels figures gives one councillor for 90 electors. To maintain faith with the Cardigan proposals that should give St. Dogmaels Community Council 5 (4.5) councillors in total. The size of Cardigan Community Council based on the figures acceptable to the Boundary Commission for St Dogmaels would be (3463 — 306= 3157/ 90 =) 35 councillors, patently absurd. If it is absurd for Cardigan then so it should be for St. Dogmaels.
Yours faithfully,
Trevor T Griffiths. 15.1.2001
Mayor of Cardigan
ENCLOSURE 1
1 Current situation Cardigan
2 Cardigan with both a united St. Dogmaels and Cilgerran — Pembrokeshire claim sited in Pembrokeshire
3 Convenient single administrative area
(St. Dogmaels united as separate community within it)
ENCLOSURE 2
REPORT OF TOWN COUNCIL QUESTIONNAIRE TO RESIDENTS OF CARDIGAN TOWN ABOUT ST. DOGMAELS UNIFICATION
In response to the Boundary Commission’s proposed recommendation that St. Dogmaels be united and placed into Pembrokeshire the town council delivered a simple letter and questionnaire to all the residents of Cardigan (end. 1). In all 2.300 questionnaires were delivered and only 121 were returned. From such a small number it is not possible to draw firm conclusions. The comments made were interesting and the analysis of the results is appended (end. 2). For analysis the returns were divided into St. Dogmaels wards and the rest of Cardigan (i.e. post codes SA43 3- and the rest of Cardigan).
On the whole the residents from Cardigan wards were very sympathetic to and supportive of the residents of St. Dogmaels, having lived together for generations this was refreshing to see. Cardigan Town council has no animosity towards St. Dogmaels; indeed it has always supported the village to the best of its ability. The Town Council is saddened to see the amount of animosity being generated by St Dogmaels Community Council. It must be noted that it was they who initiated this boundary review and it is only natural that Cardigan must defend its interests; Cardigan residents would expect nothing less. The town council hopes that what ever the outcome of this boundary review we can all return to the normality of being friendly and supportive neighbours. It would appear that, from this small sample the residents take the same position as Cardigan town council that St. Dogmaels should be united.
However the message was loud and clear - that residents in Pembrokeshire who use services in Cardigan/Ceredigion should contribute. This is also the stand of Cardigan Town council — because there is no mechanism to compel Pembrokeshire to contribute to services provided in Cardigan (and one should remember that refers to capital development funds as well as revenue costs) Cardigan Town council takes the view that the only way this capital and revenue support will be forthcoming is by bringing a united St. Dogmaels into Ceredigion.
The Boundary Commission is well aware of the lack of appeal against the failure of cross border co-operation of County Councils and should take into account the fact that historically the almost total failure of Pembrokeshire to support both service provision and service development in Cardigan that have mutual benefits.
Summary of analysis
Overall
74% of the returns wished to see St. Dogmaels united and 15% were against, with 59% wishing the united village to be in Pembrokeshire.
Returns post code Cardigan
70% wished to see a united St. Dogmaels and 14% did not with 32% wishing to see the united village in Pembrokeshire and 53% in Ceredigion.
Returns with no postcode
77% wished to see a united village and 15% did not with 62% wishing to see the united village in Pembrokeshire and 15% in Ceredigion.
Returns post codes ‘St Dogmaels’
78% wished to see a united village and 18% did not with 65% wishing to see a united village in Pembrokeshire and 29% in Ceredigion; 22% cited lower rates in Pembrokeshire.
Only 3% of the total returns, all from the ‘Cardigan’ wards wished the residents to decide for themselves, 6% wished status quo (2% from ‘St Dogmaels’ wards) and 2% were undecided.
It would appear that, from this small sample the residents take the same position as Cardigan town council that St. Dogmaels should be united. However the message was loud and clear - that there should be a fair contribution from Pembrokeshire towards mutually used and convenient services, both capital development and revenue costs. This is also the stand of Cardigan Town council — because there is no mechanism to compel Pembrokeshire to contribute to services provided in Cardigan Town council takes the view that the only way this capital and revenue support will be forthcoming is by bringing a united St. Dogmaels into Ceredigion.
The Boundary Commission is well aware of the lack of appeal against the failure of cross border co-operation of County Councils and should take this into account. That and historically the failure of Pembrokeshire to co-operate in mutually advantageous cross border issues.
Trevor T Griffiths
Mayor of Cardigan
12th February 2001
RESULTS OF A QUESTIONNAIRE DELIVERED TO THE RESIDENTS OF CARDIGAN TOWN JANUARY 2001 BY CARDIGAN TOWN COUNCIL
Question - should St Dogmaels be united and, if so, in which county?
|
Zone of Cardigan Town |
Total responses |
UNITE VILLAGE |
IN PEMBS |
STATUS QUO |
DON’T KNOW |
Res. To Decide |
|||
|
YES |
NO |
YES |
NO |
||||||
|
Cardigan |
Yes to unite |
40 |
40 |
17 |
20 |
1 |
2 |
||
|
No to unite |
11 |
8 |
7 |
3 |
|||||
|
Don’t know |
6 |
1 |
3 |
2 |
|||||
|
Total |
57 |
70% |
14% |
32% |
53% |
5% |
2% |
7% |
|
|
No post code |
13 |
10 |
2 |
8 |
2 |
2 |
|||
|
13 |
77% |
15% |
62% |
15% |
15% |
||||
|
St Dog. |
Yes to unite |
40 |
40 |
32 |
8 |
||||
|
No to unite |
9 |
9 |
7 |
2 |
|||||
|
Don’t know |
2 |
1 |
2 |
||||||
|
51 |
78% |
18% |
65% |
29% |
4% |
4% |
|||
|
Grand Total |
121 |
90 |
19 |
59 |
47 |
7 |
3 |
4 |
|
|
% of total returns |
74% |
15% |
49% |
39% |
6% |
2% |
3% |
||
2,300 questionnaires were delivered - 121 returned = just over 5%
No firm conclusions can be drawn from such a small number of returns that would need at least an 80% response rate.
ENCLOSURE 3
CYNGOR TREF ABERTEIFI
SWYDDFA’R CYNGOR, STRYD MORGAN, ABERTEIFI SA43 1DG
) 01239 612641
CARDIGAN TOWN COUNCIL
COUNCIL OFFICES, MORGAN STREET, CARDIGAN 5A43 1DG
) 01239 612641
C/erc y Cyngor / Clerk to the Council: J. Keith Bowen, Porthgerran, Brynhafod, Aberteifi ) 01239 612902
|
Dear householder, Re. Boundary Review St. Dogmaels, Cilgerran and Cardigan Town Cardigan Town Council would like to draw your attention to the attached map that shows the lands Pembrokeshire are claiming from Cardigan. Cilgerran and St. Dogmaels wish to take over almost everything south of the Teifi, leaving only Bridgend. Cardigan has been the commercial, social and cultural centre of south Ceredigion and much of north Pembrokeshire for generations. Many of the services provided in Cardigan are used by the people of north Pembrokeshire as well as the people of Ceredigion, such as: The Library, Citizens’ Advice Bureau Area 43, Swimming pool, Leisure Centre, Kinora and Jigso Family Support Group. The level of services depends directly on the population. If there are fewer people paying for them as ratepayers then these services are threatened. Although Pembrokeshire does provide some funding this does not cover the use made by its citizens. There could be a cut of a third in the services that are provided today. On past history it is unlikely that the differences will be made up by Pembrokeshire. If Ceredigion is to make up the differences it may mean a Council Tax increase of about £10 per household. |
Contrary to what has been claimed Ceredigion has supported Cardigan, including the area south of the river, to the tune of millions of pounds. This includes the clearing of the Council rubbish tip, the flood alleviation tunnel, the Town Heritage Scheme, the recent road improvements at Rhyd y Gwin, and others. The recent provision of the footpath and improvement to the road to St. Dogmaels are other notable examples. Cardigan Town Council provided a bus shelter and road lights along St. Dogmaels’ road as well as maintaining others. The Town Council regularly contributes towards St. Dogmaels’ voluntary organisations, such as the Football team, the School, the Rowing Club, the Surf Lifesaving Club and the Lifeboat. Our wards in St. Dogmaels and south of the river have always been equal to any other ward in our care. It is important for us all that these issues are resolved to get the best out of our County Councils so that Cardigan and St. Dogmaels can grow together in the future. WE WELCOME YOUR VIEWS AND INVITE YOU TO FORWARD THEM TO THE TOWN COUNCIL. PLEASE FILL IN THE QUESTIONNAIRE ON THE FORM AND RETURN IT. MAKE YOUR OPINION COUNT. Yours sincerely Trevor T. Griffiths, Mayor |
QUESTIONNAIRE HOLIADUR
Cardigan Town Council would be pleased to have your comments on the proposals to change the boundary.
Gwerthfawrogir eich sylwadau gan Gyngor Tref Aberteifi ar yr awgrymiadau i newid y ffin.
Should St. Dogmaels, as a village, be unified? Yes / No
A ddylai Llandudoch, fel pentref, fod yn unedig? Dylai / Na ddylai
Pam/Why …………………………………………………….…………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………………………………..
In which County? Pembrokeshire / Ceredigion
Ym mha Sir? Sir Benfro / Ceredigion
Pam/Why …………………………………………………….…………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………….……………………………………..
Do you wish to remain, as at present, in Ceredigion? Yes/No
A hoffech aros, fel yr ydym ar hyn o bryd, yng Ngheredigion? Hoffwn / Nac hoffwn
Pam/Why …………………………………………………….…………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………….…………………………………..
Other comments, please.
Unrhyw sylwadau eraill, os gwelwch yn dda.
…..……..…………………………………………………….…………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………….…………………………………..
Although the content of this questionnaire is confidential, we would appreciate noting your post code.
Er fod cynnwys yr holiadur yn gyfrinachol, gwerthfawrogwn nodi eich côd post.
Post Code / Côd Post ……………………
Please return this questionnaire with your comments by 9th February, 2001 to the Council Offices, Morgan Street, Cardigan SA43 1DG
Dychwelwch yr holiadur ynghyd â‘ch sylwadau i Swyddfa’r Cyngor, Stryd Morgan, Aberteifi SA43 1DG, erbyn 9fed Chwefror, 2001.