Crimson King
Lib Dem
Be nice to each other and sing in tune
Posts: 9,380
|
Post by Crimson King on May 9, 2015 10:49:08 GMT
There must at least be a chance of getting the silly 5% variation limit changed this time? I would hope so, iirc the independent research showed that it only needed to be relaxed to 7-8% to make a huge difference to the ease of creating sensible boundaries
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on May 9, 2015 12:00:47 GMT
There must at least be a chance of getting the silly 5% variation limit changed this time? Why would there be? What Tories are on the record as suggesting that that was a problem?
|
|
carlton43
Non-Aligned
Posts: 48,365
Member is Online
|
Post by carlton43 on May 9, 2015 12:17:08 GMT
I want to maintain 650-seats and see no gain at all in reducing that figure.
Whilst we retain the FPTP system and current size constituencies I want them to be of equal size. The Commission should be charged with attempting coherence as a unit but not at expense of equal sizing.
The Commission should be charged with basing initial map drawing on historic census figures but should indulge in effective short term estimates of population change to guide the map making as its imperative...not historic population.
|
|
Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 15,279
Member is Online
|
Post by Sibboleth on May 9, 2015 15:02:00 GMT
Not sure if a two term government facing re-election should be all that keen on boundaries that would exaggerate the impact of national swing. But politicians can be very ritualistic over electoral system issues.
|
|
|
Post by No Offence Alan on May 9, 2015 15:04:09 GMT
I suspect the Welsh Tories will be among the biggest critics of any proposed boundary changes.
|
|
iain
Lib Dem
Posts: 10,704
|
Post by iain on May 9, 2015 18:35:05 GMT
How many MPs would we now have, had the boundary proposals gone through? 4?
|
|
Harry Hayfield
Green
Cavalier Gentleman (as in 17th century Cavalier)
Posts: 2,757
|
Post by Harry Hayfield on May 9, 2015 18:42:29 GMT
How many MPs would we now have, had the boundary proposals gone through? 4? That is what I am in the middle of doing (but it's a question of imputing all the data for this election and then recalculating the boundaries)
|
|
Harry Hayfield
Green
Cavalier Gentleman (as in 17th century Cavalier)
Posts: 2,757
|
Post by Harry Hayfield on May 9, 2015 22:37:12 GMT
BREAKING NEWS It's NOT 600 seats, it's 650 seats
According to an article in tomorrow's newspapers, the plan is for 650 "reformed" constituencies and not 600 constituencies.
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on May 9, 2015 22:43:19 GMT
Yes, still on the statute book, implementation was just delayed for 5 years. So I believe the process will begin again next spring, presumably with the same criteria and hence with the same inherent problems. The biggest "inherent problem" is something which came not from the statute law but from the unilateral warped imagination of the Boundary Commission for England: the decision not to split wards except in exceptional circumstances.
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 13,605
|
Post by J.G.Harston on May 9, 2015 22:48:50 GMT
Yes, still on the statute book, implementation was just delayed for 5 years. So I believe the process will begin again next spring, presumably with the same criteria and hence with the same inherent problems. The biggest "inherent problem" is something which came not from the statute law but from the unilateral warped imagination of the Boundary Commission for England: the decision not to split wards except in exceptional circumstances. Indeed, there were multiple submissions for Yorkshire that would have drawn sensible constituencies with a few split wards split appropriately by people with local knowledge. Utterly bizaire for the BC to insist that wards are inviolate unitary communities when they are formed from the same inviolate numeric rules as constituencies are.
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 13,605
|
Post by J.G.Harston on May 9, 2015 22:50:17 GMT
BREAKING NEWSIt's NOT 600 seats, it's 650 seatsAccording to an article in tomorrow's newspapers, the plan is for 650 "reformed" constituencies and not 600 constituencies. I was just about to post this myself, it's just been on News 24 about 19 minutes ago. That'll be (essentially) no change for Sheffield, one extra seat for North Yorkshire (ish). 54 in total for the whole of Yorkshire, no change from now.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2015 22:51:59 GMT
What does "reformed" mean in this context?
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 13,605
|
Post by J.G.Harston on May 9, 2015 23:01:58 GMT
What does "reformed" mean in this context? I think it means, do the review as though a normal periodic review but with the tighter quota. I hope it doesn't mean: do a review every five years. The only objection I have to the rules are: zombie: reviews every five years, 5% requirement, BC deciding to make wards sacroscant periodic: electoral data woefully out of date I would be happy with: decqinennial reviews, using electoral data of similar vintage to local reviews (start of review year, projection to five years ahead), quota set to "target 5%, require 10%" instead of "require 5%", presumption of whole number of constituencies in large council areas, large wards dividable.
|
|
Richard Allen
Banned
Four time loser in VUKPOTY finals
Posts: 19,052
|
Post by Richard Allen on May 9, 2015 23:09:17 GMT
There must at least be a chance of getting the silly 5% variation limit changed this time? I would like to think that all parties recognise that what was produced by the boundary commission last time was laughable and that the Tories will therefore be interested in making some amendments to the criteria. To that end it would be helpful if your party could avoid screaming gerrymander at every opportunity.
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on May 9, 2015 23:29:34 GMT
Must be a reasonable chance that the 5% limit will be relaxed. There was the Select Committee report recommending it, which the Conservatives on the committee had no problem signing up to.
(And it also said the reduction from 650 to 600 hadn't been justified.)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2015 3:12:14 GMT
Is there a link to the 650 story? Any change would of course require primary legislation and sharpish, as a new review would otherwise kick off early next year based on the current rules.
|
|
Harry Hayfield
Green
Cavalier Gentleman (as in 17th century Cavalier)
Posts: 2,757
|
Post by Harry Hayfield on May 10, 2015 9:25:27 GMT
(Source: Daily Telegraph, May 8th 2015) "Redrawing constituency boundaries to lock Labour out of power for a decades is at the top of the agenda for the new Conservative government, senior Tories have said. The changes to parliamentary boundaries, blocked in the last Parliament, could be confirmed quickly and take effect at the 2020 general election, party sources suggested"
|
|
|
Post by No Offence Alan on May 10, 2015 9:39:24 GMT
How many MPs would we now have, had the boundary proposals gone through? 4? Well, yeah, though obviously our targeting strategy would have, hopefully, been different.
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 36,531
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on May 10, 2015 9:52:16 GMT
Well if it is still 650 seats and the 5% limit is relaxed, it won't "lock Labour out of power" any more than previous boundary revisions did.
|
|
Richard Allen
Banned
Four time loser in VUKPOTY finals
Posts: 19,052
|
Post by Richard Allen on May 10, 2015 10:52:01 GMT
Well if it is still 650 seats and the 5% limit is relaxed, it won't "lock Labour out of power" any more than previous boundary revisions did. 650 seats and say a 7.5% tolerance should be enough to allow sensible seats to be drawn while also dealing with the excessive disparity in the size of seats which is something that should be dealt with. If such a proposal, or something similar, were put forward I would hope that Labour would react sensibly and help get legislation through in a timely fashion. If the Boundary Commission are to start work early next year a bill really needs to go through by the end of this year and that will require some support from opposition parties in the Lords.
|
|