The Great Divide? (19 March 1976)

It is now nearly two years since local government reorganisation.  During that time we have become just a little more used to living in a city within a borough, both of which are named after a tiny constituent village – a village which otherwise never did anybody any harm and would never have dreamed of asking for the greatness that has been so rudely thrust upon it.

But as we survey the would-be sylvan scene, I wonder how many of us recall that North Bucks, instead of being divided more or less down the middle, might have been divided more or less across the middle, or even diagonally, with the Watling Street as the great divide?

Those possibilities were mentioned as far back as 1948 when the Boundaries Commission, in undertaking a periodic review, asked local councils to put forward suggestions for the reorganisation of local government boundaries.

Winslow RDC took the first snap at this carrot.  They had always been afraid of being carved up sooner or later.  So, choosing attack as the best form of defence, they announced a bid for expansion into a vast local government area stretching practically from Buckingham to the Shenleys on the Watling Street and also involving the dissolution of the Wing RDC.

But Buckingham RDC said “Oh no you don’t” and put up their own plate to take over Buckingham Borough and most of the Winslow RDC, including Winslow parish itself and as far east as the Horwoods and Whaddon.

Newport Pagnell RDC, led by the redoubtable Col Wyness, stepped in smartly to deny the right of Winslow – who they said had no water of their own – to add Shenley Church End to Shenley Brook End.  They also denied Wolverton UDC’s right to Haversham.

They then said that if the Commission wanted a strong unit at this end of North Bucks all they had to do was to combine Newport UDC with the RDC, which would give a population of 20,000, with a good old English town from which to administer it.

Bletchley UDC, however, put the cat among these pigeons in no uncertain fashion by claiming everything within a four-mile radius of the main line railway junction, thus biting into no fewer than three rural council areas.  It involved taking over Newton Longville, Drayton Parslow, Mursley, Whaddon, both Shenleys, Loughton, Woughton, Milton Keynes, Walton, Wavendon, Woburn Sands, the three Brickhills and Stoke Hammond.

They estimated that this would increase their area from 4,466 acres to 32,180 acres and the population from 9,063 to 15,000.

They pointed out that while the Minister of Town and Country Planning had been compelled to abandon his ideas for a new town at Bletchley, he had intimated that he would be pleased for the town to expand under its own steam, a figure of 20,000 having been mentioned as a suitable target.

They listed all the services which already had their North Bucks headquarters in Bletchley – postal, police, county court, etc – and claimed that it was the main magnet for industry.  Then came the solemn, but possibly tongue-in-cheek remark:

“It is felt that without any shadow of doubt the people of Bletchley will be willing to accept within the confines of this area the people of the surrounding area, with whom they have the greatest possible community of interest, and by so doing permit those people to enjoy the advantages which can accrue by being governed by a keen, efficient and ambitious local authority – for such a name has Bletchley Urban District Council earned for itself over the last decade.”

Surrounding councillors were astonished by Bletchley’s temerity.  Bletchley had made a similar offer to neighbouring parishes before the war and had been roundly rejected and now they were at it again.

Some surrounding councillors were also furious and none more so than Col Wyness who lived at Little Brickhill and who, under this plan, could see himself being captured by the enemy and not exactly enjoying any advantages which could accrue therefrom.

Subsequently there was a meeting between the commissioners and representatives of the various councils.  It seems to have been an interesting session.

Col Wyness, reporting to his council afterwards, said:  “Then we came to the piéce de resistance, or comic relief, furnished by our friends at Bletchley, who are still suffering from that idea of 70,000 population they would get as a satellite town of London.  If they cannot blow it up with Mr Silkin, they try to blow it up on us.

“They put in a claim that started with Woughton, Milton Keynes, Brickhill, Stoke Goldington –

(Mr S.W. Lord:  They missed Olney, sir).

“Half a minute, I am coming to that – and it led me to remark that they had only left out two parishes that I could notice – Aylesbury and Bedford.

“There was a general guffaw at this.  But I thought it absurd that a little group of parishes like Bletchley, which have no supply of water at present and are dependent on us to get what they can to wash the back of their necks, should try to pinch our area.”

(Bletchley’s water well had recently collapsed and they were being helped out from Newport’s reservoir at Ampthill).

A general criticism of Bletchley’s claim was that they had ample room within the area for 20,000 people without needing an acre anywhere else.

But from all the reports, it came out that the commissioners had asked what today can be seen as highly significant questions.  To wit:

What did they think of the idea that all councils north of the Watling street might form one?

How about all parishes west of Winslow going to Buckingham and all parishes east going to Linslade (a separate UDC at that time)?

How about Whaddon, Shenley Brook End and Newton Longville going to Bletchley and everything to the south of Mursley to Linslade?

Much water has oozed under the Ouzel bridges since those days, of course.  But it can here be seen that the wind which fused many districts and town and country places together in 1974 were already blowing 26 years earlier.

The dear old Winslow councillors were right about one thing however.  They told the Commissioners that whatever rearrangements were made, no administrative costs would be saved.