Here’s what Eastbourne thinks of suggested Parliamentary boundary review changes

The Boundary Commission for England (BCE) consulted on proposed changes last summer, with comments published on its website.

The commission is required to ensure the number of electors in each constituency is roughly the same.

As part of its boundary review, a secondary consultation is due to start next week (Tuesday February 22).

The initial proposals would see Eastbourne lose areas to Lewes, which already includes Polegate.

Stone Cross and Hankham, part of Bexhill and Battle, would also be represented by Lewes’ MP instead.

Meanwhile Wealden is set to be split up into two different seats East Grinstead & Uckfield and Hailsham & Crowborough

One Eastbourne resident responding to the first consultation wrote: “Eastbourne should include the likes of Polegate, Pevensey & Westham, East Dean, Jevington, Willingdon as all are linked to the town and therefore must have a bearing on local needs, transport links for instance.”

Another added: “Eastbourne CC should extend to include Polegate, Upper Willingdon, to meet the south boundary of Hailsham and Crowborough.

“This bit of Sussex which has been stuck onto the edge of Lewes makes no sense. It has more of an Eastbourne connection in many areas, local services, transport links, planning etc.”

Several respondents were unhappy with Willingdon and Jevington being severed from Eastbourne.

One said: “In our view it is to be very much regretted that the Government’s diktat about constituency size means that the recent extra development in Eastbourne apparently results in it no longer be acceptable for Willingdon and Jevington to be part of the Eastbourne constituency despite all the strong ties that exist.”

Another respondent wrote: “Willingdon has and will always be an integral part of the Eastbourne area and has no connection to Lewes.”

Another added: “The proposed Lewes constituency is far removed from my home area and I have little interest in it.”

Another argued: “Whilst I understand the need to try and balance up constituent numbers per MP, neither does it well serve democracy to move representation of the electorate from a part of an existing constituency with established well-working links, to the margins of another constituency that has little or no links in reality.

On the other side of the town, one Pevensey Bay resident argued for the settlement to be part of Eastbourne.”

They said: “Whether it’s shopping facilities and the arts, treatment in hospital or local mental health facilities and many other commercial, social and transport venues, the town of which we are in reality a suburb, is not the town our current MP can represent.”

And when it came to Polegate, one respondent said: “I would have thought Polegate and Stone Cross would be better served by being incorporated in Eastbourne, as it’s geographically and socially closer.”

Meanwhile a Wealden resident suggested Hailsham had more in common with Polegate and Eastbourne than Crowborough.

They said: “Hailsham should be in a common constituency with Polegate. The town is part of the greater Eastbourne area, to which residents look for shopping, entertainment, newspapers and local radio. Crowborough is within the influence of Tunbridge Wells, which Hailsham is not.”