Christopher Chope (Christchurch, Conservative)

With this it will be convenient to discuss Government amendments No. 130 to 135.

Robert Syms (Shadow Minister (Local Government), Communities and Local Government; Poole, Conservative)

Names are quite often important in politics, not least because there is usually a degree of history behind them. Wards are sometimes named after ancient parishes despite having been overcome by large housing estates. Nevertheless, I am nervous about changing names, because sometimes they can indicate also whether a seat is marginal, and a change of name can have an impact on that. Dare I say that the name “Basildon” has on occasion been totemic in people’s perceptions?

If I took over a local authority and worked out that it contained five marginal wards, the first thing that I would do would be to change all five names, because that might convey a different view of whether some of the wards were safe or marginal. Names are quite important in political competition. People who live in a constituency with a particular name may know that at a certain time it might not be marginal but that over many years it might become so. For that reason I am nervous about giving local authorities the right to change names of wards essentially at will, and without reference to anybody else. Subsection (3) says that that cannot happen

“If the name of an electoral area is protected”,

but will the Minister say what that means? I prefer to stick to names, so that people cannot change them at will until an overall boundary review.

Angela Smith (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Communities and Local Government; Basildon, Labour)

I am grateful for the hon. Gentleman’s contribution. I accept that names are important—that is the reason why the clause has been proposed.

I may have to disappoint the hon. Gentleman, because after the next general election the constituency of Basildon will be no more—it will become South Basildon and East Thurrock, and will be divided in two. So totemic election-night tears and joy around the country will be lost, although I am sure that another constituency will take on Basildon’s mantle.

I can give the hon. Gentleman some reassurance, however. Currently, the names of electoral areas—county divisions and wards in district councils—can be changed only on an electoral review by the Electoral Commission’s boundary committee. However, local authorities can change the names of their areas. They can change the name of the council, but not of wards, under section 74 of the Local Government Act 1972. That Act allows a district or county council to change its name by a resolution passed by two thirds of council members at a specially convened meeting of the council. That a local authority can resolve to change the name of its area but not of its wards seems to us a little daft. It can also change names of parishes, but not wards, if a parish council requests it. We believe that local authorities should be able to change the names of their wards.

Another point to consider is that there is no set timetable for when the electoral review takes place. Reviews can be between 10 and 15 years apart in some areas, which can result in the names of district wards or county divisions being out of step with real-world conditions. For example, a new development built in a ward may mean that the ward would be better identified by including the new settlement in its name.

There may be occasions when a local authority wishes to resolve issues arising from a ward name with which a community can no longer identify. In such a case the clause will allow a county council, district council or London borough council to change the name of the electoral area concerned. Any change would need to be agreed by the full council, which would need to pass a resolution at a special meeting held for the purpose. The council would then have to inform interested bodies including the Electoral Commission, the Office for National Statistics and Ordnance Survey.

It is worth considering the clause in connection with the previous clause. We are trying to ensure that local authority and ward boundaries reflect the communities there. The point made under the previous clause about two, three or one-member wards, alongside name changes, enhances the identity that the individual elector—[Interruption.] I hope that that is not for me.

Alistair Burt (Shadow Minister (Communities and Local Government), Communities and Local Government; North East Bedfordshire, Conservative)

It is—it says that you are doing very well.

Angela Smith (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Communities and Local Government; Basildon, Labour)

Thank you. The individual elector will therefore be able to have a relationship with their own electoral ward.

The hon. Member for Poole asked about protected areas. If the Electoral Commission has given the name within the past five years, it is protected, but if in the  protected period the commission agrees to the name change proposed by the council, it can then happen. I am sure that when that appears in Hansard it will make great sense. The commission’s power to amend the names of local authority electoral areas will remain unaffected, so when a council proposes to change an electoral area within five years of a change made by the commission, the council must seek the commission’s approval. With such permission it can override the protection.

Bob Neill (Bromley & Chislehurst, Conservative)

I rise to seek a little clarification. I do not disagree with what the Under-Secretary is saying, and from a localist point of view I see its logic. I wonder whether there is to be any requirement to consult. How will we deal with the situation of people being genuinely unhappy about a ward name being changed? In my constituency, when the Electoral Commission changed a particular ward boundary to create something called Mottingham and Chislehurst North, there was an outcry. It was partly because people did not want to go into Mottingham but more because everybody in Chislehurst North said, “We are actually called Chislehurst West—they have got it wrong.”

Christopher Chope (Christchurch, Conservative)

Order. This is turning into a speech.

Bob Neill (Bromley & Chislehurst, Conservative)

I would like to know if there are any means to deal with that without causing undue bureaucracy.

Angela Smith (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Communities and Local Government; Basildon, Labour)

The hon. Gentleman has a point, and that is one reason why we propose that the decision should be taken by local councils. The Electoral Commission’s boundary committee did the same in my constituency, misnaming it Basildon instead of Basildon and East Thurrock. By having decisions taken by local councillors we can remove that problem. The normal consultation process will apply, but having decisions taken by local authorities is the way forward.

In summary, the clause will give local authorities the power to make their own decisions about local names. That is part of the process through which we want to engage people with their electoral areas, to increase participation in local government elections and local government.