Boundary Commission: Stewarton and Cunninghame South 'merger'

Boundaries Scotland has proposed changes to two of Ayrshire’s constituencies to rebalance the voting population.

But East Ayrshire councillors have criticised the plan, which they say fails to take account of historic, geographical and cultural links between Annick and Kilmarnock.

Ayrshire has five Scottish Parliament  constituency seats – Cunninghame North and Cunninghame South in North Ayrshire, Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley, Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley and Ayr.

All but Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley, which straddles East and South Ayrshire, are entirely within local authority boundaries.

However, there are significant disparities in the number of voters in each seat.
Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley has an electorate of 65,742 voters (10 per cent higher than the national average electorate), which Cunninghame South has 51,298 (14 per cent lower).

Boundaries Scotland has proposed a change that would see Stewarton and the surrounding Annick area transferred from Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley to Cunninghame South.

However, the plan still falls short of rebalancing the electorate.

Instead it cuts Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley down to 54,297 (8.3 per cent under the ideal voting population) and increases Cunninghame South to 62,113 (3.7 per cent above).

Boundaries Scotland stated: “We believe we have proposed two constituencies which meet the legislative requirements of the review with as little change as possible.”

A second option had also been considered. but not taken forward. This option would have involved far greater disruption, significantly altering the boundaries of all five Ayrshire seats.

It would have seen Troon and Prestwick become part of Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley, while the Ayr seat would have taken over almost all of the southern part of South Ayrshire which is currently part the Carrick seat.

David Mitchell, East Ayrshire Council’s head of governance, outlined the proposals at a full council meeting last week.

He said that the focus of the proposal was the voter numbers in each seat, but that the review was also meant to pay regard to other aspects, such as existing council boundaries, ‘special geographical circumstances’ and local ties.

Mr Mitchell added: “We have a proposal from Boundaries Scotland and it doesn’t really seem to have regard for the established criteria other than the desire to get as close to the average electoral figure.

“I would also draw your attention to the fact that, if it is about slavish adherence to that figure, then they would actually do better if they left it.”

Council leader Douglas Reid  highlighted that the review would actually increase the electorate in an area that was already growing faster than others.

Conservative Group Leader John McFadzean, whose Annick ward would be affected, said that the idea was ‘ill-conceived, ill-thought out and pays no attention to local people and local ties’.

He added: “It is a really silly idea, and I’m surprised such a competent organisation put this forward.”

SNP Councillor David Richardson described the attempt to balance voting populations as ‘pie in the sky stuff” which did not work in the ‘real world’.

Annick Labour Councillor John McGhee said the at the only thing missing from the council’s response to Boundaries Scotland was the word ‘preposterous’.

He pointed out that developments from Irvine were expanding towards Cunninghamhead with similar growth in Stewarton.

SNP Councillor Elaine Cowan suggested the move would involve ‘dismantling cultural and heritage links’.

Labour group leader Maureen McKay said that it was important to get the message across that the opposition to the proposal was cross-party, ‘particularly given this issue is often used as a political football to gain advantage from one party over another’.

East Ayrshire Council agreed to write to Boundaries Scotland requesting that Annick remains in the Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley constituency.