Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 12, 2018 20:42:30 GMT
Contrariwise Cotswolds constituency is eponymous with Cotswold District Council but quite a bit bigger. Yes but there are scores of constituencies like that (or ones which are eponymous with a local authority but cover a slightly smaller area. There are two other examples similar to Cotswold in Gloucestershire alone - Forest of Dean and Tewkesbury and three others which take the name of a district but don;t include all of it (Cheltenham, Gloucester and Stroud). The Chiltern/Chesham & Amersham and west Oxfordshire/Witney kind of scenarios are quite rare though. I am struggling to think of any others a the moment. Tandridge district and the East Surrey constituency used to have the same boundaries but have not done so for some time. Rushmoor and Aldershot are very close now but not exact The best I can think of is (Hinckley and) Bosworth
|
|
Richard Allen
Banned
Four time loser in VUKPOTY finals
Posts: 19,052
|
Post by Richard Allen on May 12, 2018 21:23:19 GMT
In Worcestershire you have three constituencies; Bromsgrove, Worcester and Wyre Forest which all have the same boundaries as the districts of the same name.
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on May 12, 2018 21:55:46 GMT
I can't see any historical justification for the -barf pronunciation of Langbaurgh. I think this erroneous pronunciation probably developed from confusion about how to pronounce the name. There are plenty of English words ending in -gh where that is pronounced "f". There's also a Lake District fell - one of Wainwright's Northwestern group - called Barf. Same dog, more hair on it, as my old maths teacher used to say. You have got to laugh haven't you?
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on May 12, 2018 22:04:18 GMT
Barrow-in-Furness would be fine. It's the largest settlement and people would know where you mean. But it’s inaccurate. It implies that the constituency boundaries are identical to the town boundaries which they are not. The constituency is the town plus most of the Peninsula. Should we go back to calling Staffordshire Moorlands just Leek despite the town only being the largest population settlement in the constituency, but ignore Horton, Rudyard, Biddulph, Knypersley, Endon etc., all of which are part of the wider Moorlands constituency? Yes. Undoubtedly. Big improvement.
|
|
timmullen1
Labour
Closing account as BossMan declines to respond to messages seeking support.
Posts: 11,823
|
Post by timmullen1 on May 12, 2018 23:02:43 GMT
But it’s inaccurate. It implies that the constituency boundaries are identical to the town boundaries which they are not. The constituency is the town plus most of the Peninsula. Should we go back to calling Staffordshire Moorlands just Leek despite the town only being the largest population settlement in the constituency, but ignore Horton, Rudyard, Biddulph, Knypersley, Endon etc., all of which are part of the wider Moorlands constituency? Yes. Undoubtedly. Big improvement. So in actual fact it should be called Biddulph because when you add Knypersley, the border of which is indistinguishable even to people who live there, it’s at least an equal population to the actual town of Leek.
|
|
iain
Lib Dem
Posts: 10,783
|
Post by iain on May 12, 2018 23:44:30 GMT
Contrariwise Cotswolds constituency is eponymous with Cotswold District Council but quite a bit bigger. Yes but there are scores of constituencies like that (or ones which are eponymous with a local authority but cover a slightly smaller area. There are two other examples similar to Cotswold in Gloucestershire alone - Forest of Dean and Tewkesbury and three others which take the name of a district but don;t include all of it (Cheltenham, Gloucester and Stroud). The Chiltern/Chesham & Amersham and west Oxfordshire/Witney kind of scenarios are quite rare though. I am struggling to think of any others a the moment. Tandridge district and the East Surrey constituency used to have the same boundaries but have not done so for some time. Rushmoor and Aldershot are very close now but not exact Indeed - the six constituencies of Gloucestershire share names with the six council areas, yet none is coterminous.
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on May 13, 2018 5:47:32 GMT
Yes. Undoubtedly. Big improvement. So in actual fact it should be called Biddulph because when you add Knypersley, the border of which is indistinguishable even to people who live there, it’s at least an equal population to the actual town of Leek. So what? Mere nit-picking trivia. One name....Leek....Job done. Move on.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 13, 2018 5:56:06 GMT
So in actual fact it should be called Biddulph because when you add Knypersley, the border of which is indistinguishable even to people who live there, it’s at least an equal population to the actual town of Leek. So what? Mere nit-picking trivia. One name....Leek....Job done. Move on. But the seat covers more than just Leek. A seat with that name could cover just the town, rather than the wider Moorlands. A seat name should be accurate. If that means four different names in a string, do that. Single names rarely represent the entire seat.
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on May 13, 2018 6:32:16 GMT
So what? Mere nit-picking trivia. One name....Leek....Job done. Move on. But the seat covers more than just Leek. A seat with that name could cover just the town, rather than the wider Moorlands. A seat name should be accurate. If that means four different names in a string, do that. Single names rarely represent the entire seat. Single names are always best. Clear, concise, historic, simple. They suit the purpose. Nothing could better describe the differences between people like me and mullen and yourself than this subject. As I see it the name is important in a completely different manner to the way you see it. I am a broad picture simplifier and I think most people are the same. We require a simple signifier that points to and describes in broad simple terms. As a local voter within or an intelligent observer from without we require a term to identify where we are/it is. That is all. An enduring old name with historic baggage is best. An Eye, Sandwich, Leek, Berwick is quite enough. Not some tedious list of minor places or complicated reference to parts of a county or some long discarded former name known only to historians and nerds like Langbaurgh, Wychavon or Eddisbury. You are of the nit-picking variety seeing importance in precision and concerned with the weighing of sizes of population in constituent communities, the inclusion of detail and thus the creation of cumbersome obscurity leading to the horrors of Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey instead of the obvious and simple Inverness. Or the absurdity of Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East! No doubt you agonise over connectivity and not having a major road throughout or being split by a river or not containing neatly all parts of a town? No ordinary voter or observer gives a toss for any of that. The voter does not need to be able to travel easily to all parts of the constituency and would have no cause to do so. what he desires is to know what general community he is in and that his vote is 'equal' with that of a vote somewhere else. He can live with being in a Reading or a Reading East, a Middlesbrough or a Middlesbrough East or a Cleveland, but does not wish to be dumped in a moronic Langbaurgh because it is difficult to spell, to pronounce and means bloody nothing to anybody.
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on May 13, 2018 6:53:41 GMT
"Barrow in Furness" is the town. How far beyond the town does the constituency go? It includes nine Wards of South Lakeland DC (five of which comprise Ulverston). According to Google Maps Barrow and Ulverston are 10.5 miles apart, but some of the other Wards are beyond Ulverston, so probably getting for 12+ miles outside the town itself. Even better, just call it Barrow. There are no other well known large places called Barrow. Like calling Hull Hull. Not Kingston-upon-Hull...........but Hull. And forget bloody Hessle whilst about it. Nice town, know it well, but of no significance at all in the general signifier Hull West.
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on May 13, 2018 7:05:36 GMT
I think I could give a single word name to the majority of constituencies and cover virtually all others with two words (+ an and in places). That should be a prime requirement.
|
|
timmullen1
Labour
Closing account as BossMan declines to respond to messages seeking support.
Posts: 11,823
|
Post by timmullen1 on May 13, 2018 7:11:32 GMT
I think I could give a single word name to the majority of constituencies and cover virtually all others with two words (+ an and in places). That should be a prime requirement. In which case try it, in a town centre, with a loudspeaker. After you’ve finished a national tour you could then publish your own ratings of A&E Departments based on the level of care you received after being publicly lynched in most, if not all, areas. Though I’d suggest leaving Stoke-on-Trent until last on your tour as the ratings would be published posthumously.
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on May 13, 2018 7:27:27 GMT
I think I could give a single word name to the majority of constituencies and cover virtually all others with two words (+ an and in places). That should be a prime requirement. In which case try it, in a town centre, with a loudspeaker. After you’ve finished a national tour you could then publish your own ratings of A&E Departments based on the level of care you received after being publicly lynched in most, if not all, areas. Though I’d suggest leaving Stoke-on-Trent until last on your tour as the ratings would be published posthumously. Hyperbole reigns supreme. Stoke South, Stoke Central and Stoke North would be my names. Look very similar to now? So why the problem to my safety? If people did not run amok on being placed in Langbaurgh why would they wish me harm over Leek, Barrow and Hull West? Methinks you do protest too much!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 13, 2018 7:52:43 GMT
So what? Mere nit-picking trivia. One name....Leek....Job done. Move on. But the seat covers more than just Leek. A seat with that name could cover just the town, rather than the wider Moorlands. A seat name should be accurate. If that means four different names in a string, do that. Single names rarely represent the entire seat. The name of an electoral division is simply a signifier or symbol, the purpose of which is to distinguish it from others. Keep it short.
|
|
timmullen1
Labour
Closing account as BossMan declines to respond to messages seeking support.
Posts: 11,823
|
Post by timmullen1 on May 13, 2018 8:04:05 GMT
In which case try it, in a town centre, with a loudspeaker. After you’ve finished a national tour you could then publish your own ratings of A&E Departments based on the level of care you received after being publicly lynched in most, if not all, areas. Though I’d suggest leaving Stoke-on-Trent until last on your tour as the ratings would be published posthumously. Hyperbole reigns supreme. Stoke South, Stoke Central and Stoke North would be my names. Look very similar to now? So why the problem to my safety? If people did not run amok on being placed in Langbaurgh why would they wish me harm over Leek, Barrow and Hull West? Methinks you do protest too much! Because: Stoke North includes the town of Kidsgrove that still resents being subsumed into Newcastle-under-Lyme half a century ago (was enough to get their Independent group a seat on the Borough Council this month, which wasn’t bad for a group only formed in December and running in most cases without the benefit of incumbency). The BCE proposals lump Stoke South in with Stone, which is completely detached from the City, has been an independent settlement for centuries before the Federation creating Stoke-on-Trent, and no-one in their right minds would know that the new Stoke South included Stone unless it was specifically stated. Langbaurgh is different from all your other examples in that it was a name that nobody identified with (probably like Wychavon). As has been pointed out to you Leek is not an accurate description for the seat - it isn’t central and will likely soon cease to be the largest area of population, whereas Staffordshire Moorlands is easy for anyone looking at a map to identify (and it’s also the name of the District Council thus providing clarity). For some reason you don’t appear to subscribe to the principle that a constituency name should accurately represent the area it covers, and/or fail to grasp local pride and accuracy. Hessle is, like Kidsgrove, an area distinctly separate from Hull (and Kingston-upon-Hull is merely using the correct name for the City). You accuse me of hyperbole and protesting too much, whilst you purport, with no evidence, like a Sun leader writer, to be the voice of the people and, without evidence, know what the average voter wants. So I’ll see your hyperbole and protesting too much and raise you arrogance and lack of proof of your mind reading capabilities.
|
|
|
Post by Adam in Stroud on May 13, 2018 8:21:56 GMT
But the seat covers more than just Leek. A seat with that name could cover just the town, rather than the wider Moorlands. A seat name should be accurate. If that means four different names in a string, do that. Single names rarely represent the entire seat. The name of an electoral division is simply a signifier or symbol, the purpose of which is to distinguish it from others. Keep it short. Absolutely. Finicking around so the name describes the boundaries of the seat is unnecessary. If I hear a reference to the MP for Leek or any other decent sized town I know where it is and have a bit of context. "Moorlands" could be a range of places from Devon to Northumberland. And including a number of small towns no-one outside of the district has heard of doesn't help either.
|
|
|
Post by swanarcadian on May 13, 2018 8:26:41 GMT
The name of an electoral division is simply a signifier or symbol, the purpose of which is to distinguish it from others. Keep it short. Absolutely. Finicking around so the name describes the boundaries of the seat is unnecessary. If I hear a reference to the MP for Leek or any other decent sized town I know where it is and have a bit of context. "Moorlands" could be a range of places from Devon to Northumberland. And including a number of small towns no-one outside of the district has heard of doesn't help either. There used to be an Urban District called St. Mary's Church. It only lasted six years, then in 1900 it was absorbed by Torquay Municipal Borough.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 13, 2018 8:28:20 GMT
Of course we're not going to agree, though I have the Boundary Commission on my side, as they always look at ensuring that constituencies have decent road links, natural shapes, and accurate names. Everything you hate, they look at doing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 13, 2018 8:29:03 GMT
The name of an electoral division is simply a signifier or symbol, the purpose of which is to distinguish it from others. Keep it short. Absolutely. Finicking around so the name describes the boundaries of the seat is unnecessary. If I hear a reference to the MP for Leek or any other decent sized town I know where it is and have a bit of context. "Moorlands" could be a range of places from Devon to Northumberland. And including a number of small towns no-one outside of the district has heard of doesn't help either. The seat is called "Staffordshire Moorlands", what more do you want?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 13, 2018 8:30:44 GMT
But the seat covers more than just Leek. A seat with that name could cover just the town, rather than the wider Moorlands. A seat name should be accurate. If that means four different names in a string, do that. Single names rarely represent the entire seat. The name of an electoral division is simply a signifier or symbol, the purpose of which is to distinguish it from others. Keep it short. So "Leek" is fine even if that confuses voters who might think the seat only covers that one specific town? So you want to potentially stop voters going to the polls because they might think they don't live in a specific constituency. Interesting.
|
|