Puzzled by proposals

editorial image

Having read Vicki Newman’s article on Wednesday, September 14, on the Boundary Commission’s plans to change the Parliamentary constituencies of South Shields and Jarrow, I am puzzled by the proposal to move part of the South Shields constituency to Jarrow in return for part of the Jarrow constituency being moved to South Shields.

As Councillor Ed Malcolm comments “we cannot see the logic in moving Boldon Colliery, which is already in Jarrow, into South Shields and moving Simonside and Rekendyke, which is in South Shields, into Jarrow”.

Like Councillor Malcolm, I can’t see the logic either.

To ‘swap’ these two areas results in South Shields acquiring approximately an extra 550 votes.

It is understandable that in order to reduce the number of MPs from 650 to 600 that it is inevitable that there must be some reorganising of parliamentary boundaries, but the plans for South Tyneside published thus far make no sense to me or to those that I have spoken to.

I have nothing against Jarrow or Stephen Hepburn, nor do I have anything against Cleadon and East Boldon, but the notion of moving Simonside and Rekendyke strikes me as being a ludicrous proposal and one that must be objected to.

Tyne Dock and Chichester are intrinsic to South Shields and should remain so.

I have to own up to being biased. I am proud to be a born and bred “Sima” lad and equally proud to be a Shields lad.

My hope is that all the residents of the Simonside and Rekendyke ward put pen to paper, or on the Boundary Commission website, to add their objection to these Boundary Commission proposals.

Public consultation will be in Newcastle on November 14 and 15.

John Terence Haram