The 2023 Review of Parliamentary Constituency Boundaries in England – Volume one: Report – West Midlands
Birmingham and Solihull
Initial proposals
Of the 12 existing constituencies in this sub-region, five were within the permitted electorate range, five below (all in Birmingham), and both constituencies in the Borough of Solihull were above. Under our initial proposals, no constituencies were proposed as completely unchanged from the existing boundaries, though in the case of Sutton Coldfield there was only a very minor change proposed, to reflect a change of local government ward boundary that affected no actual electors. We could not avoid more significant changes elsewhere, due to the changes to the local government ward boundaries that have taken place across Birmingham, and both Solihull constituencies being above the permitted range.
Although Birmingham Perry Barr was within the permitted electorate range, neighbouring Birmingham Erdington was well below, particularly when realigning the Perry Barr constituency boundary with the new boundary of its component Kingstanding ward. We therefore proposed adding the Aston and Lozells wards to Erdington to bring both constituencies within the permitted range. We proposed that, having lost electors in the north and west, Birmingham Ladywood should include the wards of Alum Rock and Balsall Heath West. Birmingham Edgbaston was proposed to be changed essentially only to realign with new ward boundaries, though this did include taking in the whole of the North Edgbaston ward.
Significant realignment to changed ward boundaries in the west of Birmingham Yardley was balanced by transferring Garretts Green ward to Birmingham Hodge Hill. North East Birmingham, we also felt, was the best place for the necessary crossing of the local authority boundary with Solihull, in order to reduce the number of electors in the two purely Solihull constituencies: we therefore included the Solihull wards of Castle Bromwich and Smith’s Wood in the proposed Birmingham Hodge Hill constituency. Having lost its two northernmost wards, Meriden constituency was then proposed to include the wards of Elmdon and Silhill to leave both Meriden and Solihull constituencies within the permitted electorate range.
In order to avoid significant disruption across the existing Birmingham constituencies of Northfield, Selly Oak, and Hall Green, we felt there was sufficient widely spread benefit to justify splitting the Weoley & Selly Oak ward between Birmingham Selly Oak and Birmingham Northfield constituencies, and splitting the Brandwood & King’s Heath ward between Birmingham Selly Oak and Birmingham Hall Green constituencies.
In response to the consultation on our initial proposals, we received general support for our proposed Meriden and Solihull constituencies, though there was some concern at the inclusion of urban Solihull wards in the largely rural Meriden constituency: counter proposals were made to split wards to achieve constituency boundaries closer to the existing, and a change of name for both was suggested. We received a large number of responses opposing the inclusion of the two Solihull wards in Birmingham Hodge Hill constituency, asserting a lack of local ties with Birmingham.
The proposed constituencies of Selly Oak, Edgbaston, and Northfield were all largely supported, and those of Ladywood, Yardley, and Hall Green received few responses at all, though we received a counter proposal that would impact all those constituencies except Yardley. In respect of the proposed Birmingham Erdington and Birmingham Perry Barr, we received significant opposition grounded in the local ties connecting the Oscott and Kingstanding wards with the area of Erdington. We received support for maintaining the distinct boundaries of Sutton Coldfield, but a request to include ‘Royal’ in the constituency name, so as to match the town.
Our Assistant Commissioners considered the request to add ‘Royal’ to the constituency name of Sutton Coldfield, but felt that the existing name was in line with our naming policy, particularly as there had effectively been no change to the constituency boundaries. They also noted that the Order for the local government wards does not include the prefix. They considered the counter proposal covering the proposed constituencies of Ladywood, Hall Green, Selly Oak, Edgbaston, and Northfield, and recognised the benefit of avoiding any split wards, but did not endorse this alternative, as it would disrupt significantly a number of proposed constituencies that had been positively welcomed. They did not consider that any other counter proposals for these five constituencies or Yardley made a sufficiently persuasive case to amend the proposals.
The Assistant Commissioners felt that the evidence of local ties between Oscott and Kingstanding wards and the Erdington area was strong, and, having visited the area, felt internal connections to the south were better in the east of the existing Erdington constituency than in the west (though poor generally). They therefore recommended to us that the Oscott and Kingstanding wards be transferred to the Erdington constituency, and the Aston and Lozells wards be included in the Perry Barr constituency, along with three polling districts of the Stockland Green ward.
In respect of the Hodge Hill constituency, the Assistant Commissioners noted the strength of feeling in the two Solihull council wards that there were poor ties with the Birmingham wards of the proposed constituency, but they felt that no detailed or viable alternative had been identified that would not be more widely disruptive to surrounding areas. Similarly, they considered the alternatives put forward to split wards in Solihull to achieve boundaries for Solihull and Meriden constituencies that would be closer to existing, but did not feel that the case to do so was sufficiently strong. They also felt that the existing names for these constituencies complied with our naming policy, and the boundary changes were not significant enough to support the name changes requested.
We agreed with all the recommendations of our Assistant Commissioners in this sub-region and therefore revised our proposals only in respect of amended boundaries between the proposed Birmingham Erdington and Perry Barr constituencies.
In response to the consultation on our revised proposals, we received broad support for almost all the proposed constituencies.
We received further responses opposing the inclusion of Solihull council wards in the proposed Birmingham Hodge Hill constituency. We also received requests to at least recognise these Solihull wards in the constituency name, as well as further requests to amend the names of the proposed Solihull and Meriden constituencies, to reflect the division of Solihull town centre between the two.
We received a large number of responses opposing the newly proposed split of the Stockland Green ward between Birmingham Erdington and Perry Barr, evidencing strong ties between the Slade Road area and central Erdington, which would be broken by our revised proposals. This opposition proposed an alternative that would retain all of Stockland Green ward in Erdington constituency and instead split the Oscott ward, to retain four polling districts of that ward in the Birmingham Perry Barr constituency.
There were very few responses in respect of all the remaining seven proposed constituencies in the sub-region, which were generally accepted or actively supported. Specific alternatives that we were asked to consider were: two alternative configurations of wards between the proposed Birmingham Selly Oak and Hall Green constituencies; and a renaming of the Birmingham Hall Green constituency to reflect the large Moseley community.
In light of the general support for our revised proposals for the following constituencies, we make them our final recommendations: Birmingham Edgbaston; Birmingham Ladywood; Birmingham Northfield; Birmingham Yardley; and Sutton Coldfield.
We considered the alternative configurations of wards put forward during revised proposals consultation for the Birmingham Selly Oak and Hall Green constituencies. The first of these used whole wards, and would restore internal road connections between the east and west of the proposed Selly Oak constituency. It would achieve this, however, at the cost of a number of changes to proposed constituencies across the south and west of Birmingham that have been actively supported (in particular Edgbaston and Northfield). It would also split the King’s Heath and Moseley communities, ties between which we previously received evidence in support of, and result in a largely isolated Bournbrook & Selly Park ward at one end of an east–west orientated constituency spanning to Small Heath ward, when the main road links run north–south. We do not consider the benefits of this alternative outweigh these negative aspects. The second alternative put forward was more limited in scope: including Brandwood & King’s Heath ward wholly in Selly Oak constituency, and splitting instead the Billesley ward, to place all but two polling districts of that ward in the Hall Green constituency. While this would again address the narrow ‘bottleneck’ of the proposed Selly Oak constituency, it would – again – split the King’s Heath and Moseley communities, and also split the Billesley community, about which we received significant evidence in consultation, supporting the bringing together of the community into one constituency. We therefore do not consider this alternative to be an overall improvement to our revised proposals. Having considered the evidence put forward for recognition of the Moseley community in the constituency name, we agree, and therefore make a final recommendation for two constituencies: Birmingham Hall Green and Moseley; and Birmingham Selly Oak.
We recognise the continuing concerns of the residents of Castle Bromwich and Smith’s Wood wards about lack of ties to Birmingham. While we have not seen an alternative set of boundaries for this area that would produce a better pattern of constituencies overall, we agree that recognising Solihull wards in the constituency name would be appropriate to reflect the distinct identity of these wards, and consistent with our general approach in other constituencies that cross a local authority boundary. We therefore recommend a Birmingham Hodge Hill and Solihull North constituency. Similarly, we have reviewed again the request to rename the two constituencies wholly within the Solihull council area. As the main issue of concern in these proposals has been the division of the town centre of Solihull, while we have not seen a better alternative set of boundaries, it would be appropriate to recognise the existence of that central area in both constituencies in their names. We therefore recommend two constituencies of: Solihull West and Shirley; and Meriden and Solihull East (the ordering of the names in the latter reflecting the predominantly rural nature of the constituency).
We have considered very carefully the competing arguments in respect of the final two constituencies in the sub-region, and we again visited the areas concerned. Across all three consultations we have seen good evidence of the links of both Oscott/Kingstanding and the Slade Road area with the core area of Erdington. Unfortunately, the whole of both cannot be included in the Erdington constituency while still keeping it within the permitted electorate range, and our recommendations will inevitably disappoint one or other community. After considering all the evidence and the statutory factors, however, we recommend that the whole of Stockland Green ward, together with all of Kingstanding ward and polling districts 4,5,7 and 8 of the Oscott ward, be included in the proposed Birmingham Erdington constituency. The remaining four polling districts of the Oscott ward (1,2,3 and 6) we recommend remain in the Birmingham Perry Barr constituency. While the local ties with Erdington were demonstrated in both options, Oscott (and particularly these westernmost polling districts) is undeniably significantly further geographically; strictly ‘internal’ transport links south are poor at both the east and west ends of the area under consideration, but the western polling districts of Oscott adjoin the main A4041 Queslett Road, giving easy access into Perry Barr; and, finally, Oscott is already in the existing Perry Barr constituency, so to retain part of it there would see less disruption to the existing constituency.
Our final recommendations for Birmingham and Solihull are accordingly for constituencies of: Birmingham Edgbaston; Birmingham Erdington; Birmingham Hodge Hill and Solihull North; Birmingham Ladywood; Birmingham Hall Green and Moseley; Birmingham Northfield; Birmingham Perry Barr; Birmingham Selly Oak; Birmingham Yardley; Meriden and Solihull East; Solihull West and Shirley; and Sutton Coldfield. The areas covered by these constituencies are listed in Volume two and shown on the maps in Volume three of this report.
