The 2023 Review of Parliamentary Constituency Boundaries in England – Volume one: Report – South East
Oxfordshire
Initial proposals
All six existing constituencies in Oxfordshire are above the permitted electorate range, and therefore it is not possible to retain any constituency wholly unchanged. In our initial proposals, we were, however, able to propose two constituencies with only minor changes from their existing configurations. The boundaries of our proposed Henley and Oxford East constituencies were realigned to new local government boundaries: the former no longer included the Launton & Otmoor, and the Sandford & the Wittenhams wards, and the latter additionally no longer included the Holywell ward, but were otherwise unchanged in our initial proposals.
The size of the electorates in the towns of Banbury and Bicester are such that it is no longer possible to include both in the same constituency. We therefore proposed separate Banbury and Bicester constituencies, each containing parts of the District of Cherwell and District of West Oxfordshire. As a consequence, we proposed that the Witney constituency, which is currently coterminous with the District of West Oxfordshire, extend further south to include five wards from the District of Vale of White Horse.
As a result of the transfer of these wards, and some minor changes to realign to local government boundaries, the existing Wantage constituency could be brought within the permitted electorate range. We therefore proposed this constituency, although we proposed that it be called Didcot and Wantage to reflect the name of the larger settlement, and that the Marcham ward be transferred to our proposed Oxford West and Abingdon constituency, to balance the loss of the Kidlington wards in the north to the proposed Bicester constituency.
By far the greatest response to our initial proposals for Oxfordshire concerned our proposals for the Bicester constituency. Respondents from the West Oxfordshire component of this constituency, particularly the Eynsham and Cassington, Freeland and Hanborough, North Leigh, Stonesfield and Tackley, and Woodstock and Bladon wards, strongly opposed being included in this constituency, noting that these wards are much closer to Witney, which they currently share a constituency with, than to Bicester. Despite this opposition, we only received one counter proposal which sought to address this issue, though this was highly disruptive to constituencies in the rest of the county. As well as the exclusion of communities to the north, the extension of our proposed Witney constituency to include areas to the south was opposed by respondents who felt that wards in the District of Vale of White Horse have few ties to Witney. This point was made particularly by residents of the Stanford ward, and we received a counter proposal which suggested that this ward be included in the Didcot and Wantage constituency, which otherwise attracted few representations.
Our proposed Banbury constituency received a mixture of responses. As with the proposed Bicester constituency, there was opposition to including District of West Oxfordshire wards in this constituency; however, some respondents suggested that it was sensible to propose a constituency that included both Banbury and Chipping Norton. We received support for the proposed constituencies of Oxford East, and Oxford West and Abingdon, particularly our proposal to use the River Cherwell as a boundary between the two constituencies.
The majority of representations received concerning the proposed Henley constituency focused on the name rather than the boundaries of this constituency. A number of representations suggested, given that Thame is now the largest popular centre in this constituency, that Henley and Thame would be a more appropriate name.
In light of the representations received, our Assistant Commissioners recommended that we modify our initial proposals for Oxfordshire.
Our Assistant Commissioners considered whether changes could be made to the proposed Witney constituency in order to reflect concerns raised. Though they accepted that the Eynsham and Cassington, Freeland and Hanborough, and North Leigh wards are more closely connected to Witney than to Bicester, they noted that including these wards in the Witney constituency would necessitate substantial changes to the scheme of constituencies in the rest of Oxfordshire. Considering the evidence received, our Assistant Commissioners felt that no alternative would result in a better overall pattern of constituencies, and they therefore recommended we retain the boundaries of our initially proposed Bicester constituency. However, they also recommended the alternative name Bicester and Woodstock, in order to reflect the District of West Oxfordshire component of this constituency.
It was noted by our Assistant Commissioners that the Stanford ward could be included in the proposed Didcot and Wantage constituency without additional knock-on effects. Given the evidence we received on this point, they recommended that we make this change in our revised proposals.
Given the broad support for our initial proposals for the Banbury, Henley, Oxford East, and Oxford West and Abingdon constituencies, our Assistant Commissioners recommended we retain these constituencies in the revised proposals. While they did see merit in the proposal of renaming the proposed Henley constituency as Henley and Thame, they did not feel that the evidence received was sufficiently compelling to recommend a name change at this stage.
We agreed with all of the recommendations of the Assistant Commissioners. We therefore confirmed the initial proposals for the four constituencies listed above, and the proposed Bicester constituency with the new name Bicester and Woodstock. We also made changes to the boundaries of the proposed Witney, and Didcot and Wantage constituencies, with the inclusion of the Stanford ward in the Didcot and Wantage constituency.
We received a number of additional representations in opposition to including wards from the District of West Oxfordshire in the Banbury, and Bicester and Woodstock constituencies, although we received no new counter proposals which included more of these wards in the proposed Witney constituency. Some representations additionally opposed our proposed name for the proposed Bicester and Woodstock constituency, suggesting that, as Kidlington is larger than Woodstock, Bicester and Kidlington would be preferable.
The inclusion of the Stanford ward in the proposed Didcot and Wantage constituency was well received by the small number of representations we received concerning this constituency. We received a counter proposal which suggested including the Sandford & the Wittenhams ward, which we proposed in the Didcot and Wantage constituency, in the Oxford West and Abingdon constituency, and including the Holywell ward in the Oxford East constituency. This counter proposal did not receive any representations in support of it, and the general response to our proposed Oxford East, and Oxford West and Abingdon constituencies was again positive.
In our revised proposals report, we requested additional feedback on the question of whether or not to revise the name of the proposed Henley constituency to Henley and Thame. We received a small number of representations on this matter, but those that we did receive were nearly unanimous in their support for the proposed name of Henley and Thame.
Having considered the evidence, we are not recommending any changes to the boundaries of our revised proposals for Oxfordshire. Although we acknowledge the clear ties between Witney and the Eynsham and Cassington, Freeland and Hanborough, and North Leigh wards, we have not received any counter proposals which demonstrate how these wards could be included in the Witney constituency without considerable disruption to the rest of the county.
Similarly, we are not persuaded of the need to revise the name of the proposed Bicester and Woodstock constituency. While we accept that Kidlington has a greater population than Woodstock, we feel that it is important to recognise that this constituency contains parts of the District of Cherwell and District of West Oxfordshire. We are satisfied that Woodstock is the most recognisable settlement in the West Oxfordshire component of this constituency, and have therefore retained the name of the Bicester and Woodstock constituency in our final recommendations.
Having requested further submissions on the name of our proposed Henley constituency, we are persuaded that the name Henley and Thame would be more reflective of the balance of population in this constituency, and we have therefore adopted it as part of our final recommendations.
Our final recommendations in Oxfordshire are therefore for constituencies of: Banbury; Bicester and Woodstock; Didcot and Wantage; Henley and Thame; Oxford East; Oxford West and Abingdon; and Witney. These constituencies are composed of the areas listed in Volume two and shown on the maps in Volume three of this report.
