Forum topic: Concerns about proposed ward boundary changes voiced by Labour and Conservative councillors

[Original article]

Is does seem a little tough to have the Palmers Green Community Festival in Arnos Grove rather than in Palmers Green. This coming at a time when the Green Lanes high street traders, or at least those of them who won’t be in Winchmore Hill under these plans, are seeing Palmers Green’s Broomfield Park as a key asset in their plans to enhance local community and their part in it.
Boundaries are undoubtedly influential in the public realm and beyond and certainly help local community identities, or undermine same. One year, one consultation rips PG in two; the following year, another consultation, and it’s back together and more positively than currently but loses its premier asset in the process. The view from behind a desk, inevitably fascinating.

Broomfield Park could be moved into the new Palmers Green ward without changing the electoral arithmetic - after all, if anyone does live in the park, they won't be on the register of electors!

I don't think which ward the park is in is really relevant. People from the current wards of Palmers Green, Winchmore Hill, Southgate Green and Bowes use it, and no doubt some from further afield. If there's a problem, councillors from all of those would feel entitled to get involved.
Anyway it's not in Palmers Green ward now!

Bill rightly indicates that boundaries, particularly Ward location, shouldn’t matter in key decisions and I’ll agree, if only. A reorganisation, “reflecting community identities”, says to me it’s def PG. Where that becomes most useful is when PG councillors, assisting high street change activity are the same ones assisting Broomfield Park change activity and can leverage one on the other for mutual benefit – think eg of a PG Festival that also incorporated high street activity say the week before what to date happens annually in the park all under the same umbrella. And while councillors from several nearby wards may well get involved, and it might even work currently when most wear the same strip, I’ve seen too many key examples locally where party benefit to stamp on the other team has taken preference over what is sensible and best for actual residents. I’d stick it in PG and leave Arnos Grove to their own park; it’s even sensibly called Arnos Park.

If anyone is considering submitting comments on the proposals, they are advised to heed the advice given on the Enfield Society's website :

Should you be unhappy with the introduction of 2-councillor wards, I guess that to have much chance of changing the commissioners' minds you'd have to devise a complete new scheme for the entire borough!

Having thought about this i convinced myself Broomfield Park is sensibly seen as part of PG rather than Arnos Grove. This is what i sent in, and will be public at some stage:

I would wish to comment on one specific proposal, that of the new Palmers Green Ward. Palmers Green, as one of Enfield’s very few District Town Centres has been correctly identified as a coherent whole about its central high street; an administrative improvement both to the current position and particularly to the recent parliamentary boundary change proposal which saw the same area split between two adjacent constituencies.
There are certainly arguments about the sensible extent of the area commonly referred to as “Palmers Green”, one at least being raised in your own notes: that of the Bourne / Bourne Hill as a more natural boundary than one based on the current balancing electoral needs of a variable population; a population expected to be more dynamic in future under emerging London and local Core Plans. I wish however to raise and seek a reassignment of one particular area, that of Palmers Green’s Broomfield Park.
The park, some 21 hectares, has no residents and as MOL that position is unlikely to change. No electoral variance would thus follow from its reassignment to an alternative ward, now or in future.
The core issues would thus seem to be: is the park better identified as part of Palmers Green (rather than Arnos Grove); and would its move to the former ward enhance local government administration?
On the former matter, Arnos Grove does have its own well known and respected park at its heart, appropriately termed Arnos Park. They are clearly linked in the local lexicon. In my long and wide local experience, the terms “Broomfield Park” and “Arnos Grove” are however never used together other than in giving directions, as in pass through Broomfield Park to get to Arnos Grove, ie they are seen as distinct.
More particularly Broomfield Park is locally viewed as a Palmers Green facility:
No less than Wikipedia identifies it as being in PG https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broomfield_Park,_Palmers_Green
The Friends of Broomfield Park point it out it as one of the highlights of PG
https://www.friendsofbroomfieldpark.org/about
The café based in the park is called “The Palmers Greenery”, a clear play on the location. “The Arnos Grovery” was never one of the possible options when this facility was set up by many locals with the support of the Local Authority
https://en-gb.facebook.com/palmersgreeneryacommunitycafeforbroomfieldpark/
No less significantly, The Palmers Green Community Festival has been based in Palmers Green’s Broomfield Park for over a decade. This celebration of the local community draws many thousands of locals. Its advertising street banners and over 12,000 leaflets distributed in 2018 are faced with an overhead view of the host park.
https://www.palmersgreenfestival.org.uk
Broomfield Park’s links to PG is unquestionably locally acknowledged and supported by facts on the ground.
Looking to its superior position in PG rather than Arnos Grove for more effective local administration is best viewed through a high street offering lens. The District Town Centres retail offering extends east / west along the northern edge of the park, as well as its nearby north / south stretch. The interface between the east / west outlets and the park is effectively seamless, perhaps best highlighted by one outlet extending to the park boundary for an annual art display featuring up to 50 local artists, itself then linked to the wider Palmers Green Festival.
Looking wider, the main strands of a (very) wide portfolio of local community activity is centred on the park and also the high street. It has been increasingly acknowledged that the desired rejuvenation of the high street area is dependent upon the local community and then leveraging all related assets. A “Town Festival Week” linked to the park based Palmers Green Festival has been trialled and recent years has seen an increasing desire by local traders to have a temporary base in the park for promotion linked purposes. Links between resident based community groups in both key locations are frequently fungible and increasingly seeking and identifying cross fertilisation and leveraging opportunity.
What is - and in future can be - developed at voluntary / community level is easier and unquestionably more effectively understood and supported when both development centres fall under the administration of the same team of councillors. Boundaries do matter and can influence priorities; the relocation of Broomfield Park into Palmers Green removes that real risk at a stroke; conforms to local assumptions and has no effect on the electoral balance of any proposed ward. It is a sensible readjustment supported by facts on the ground and offers better future regeneration and community opportunities and is strongly recommended.

Makes lots of sense to me