|
Post by greenhert on Jun 28, 2016 15:44:46 GMT
Regarding the regions that are being used as the basis for constituency plans, there is no longer any use for the current regions now that we are leaving the European Union and that the regional committees and ministers have been abolished.
|
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,726
|
Post by Adrian on Jun 28, 2016 16:25:00 GMT
Other govt departments use the regions, and the Commission wants to use them - there's nothing to stop them.
|
|
|
Post by John Chanin on Jun 28, 2016 18:34:21 GMT
I am assuming that the Boundary Commission will continue to use the regions as the basis for its cascade downwards. Last time I crossed regional boundaries. This time I have stuck with them. I have not contributed to the various threads as I have been working out my own solutions before seeing what everyone else has come up with. It has taken me months but I have finally finished. Some areas like South London, Berkshire and Hampshire, West Midlands/Warwickshire and Merseyside have proved really difficult. Others have been easier than I expected (West Yorkshire, North London, Greater Manchester once Stockport has been resolved). Scotland because of its large PR wards requires multiple ward splits, which are difficult for someone with limited local knowledge. In England ward splits are needed only in Birmingham and Sheffield (and of course the Forest of Dean). Wales really isn't too difficult.
|
|
Harry Hayfield
Green
Cavalier Gentleman (as in 17th century Cavalier)
Posts: 2,735
|
Post by Harry Hayfield on Jun 28, 2016 18:41:02 GMT
I am assuming that the Boundary Commission will continue to use the regions as the basis for its cascade downwards. Last time I crossed regional boundaries. This time I have stuck with them. I have not contributed to the various threads as I have been working out my own solutions before seeing what everyone else has come up with. It has taken me months but I have finally finished. Some areas like South London, Berkshire and Hampshire, West Midlands/Warwickshire and Merseyside have proved really difficult. Others have been easier than I expected (West Yorkshire, North London, Greater Manchester once Stockport has been resolved). Scotland because of its large PR wards requires multiple ward splits, which are difficult for someone with limited local knowledge. In England ward splits are needed only in Birmingham and Sheffield (and of course the Forest of Dean). Wales really isn't too difficult. I agree. I have come up with 29 Welsh suggestions without too many problems. Warwickshire I have done as well (and Surrey as well). I think I have done Northern Ireland as well (but have decided to keep those to myself in case I upset people)
|
|
|
Post by andrewteale on Jun 28, 2016 19:20:49 GMT
This is something of a random query, but I've been wondering about it - Does anyone know whether the good folks at the BCE (or the other Commissions) ever look in at these pages to see what we're cooking up? I suspect they do.
|
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Long may it rain
Posts: 5,501
|
Post by Foggy on Jun 28, 2016 22:28:05 GMT
Regarding the regions that are being used as the basis for constituency plans, there is no longer any use for the current regions now that we are leaving the European Union and that the regional committees and ministers have been abolished. The ONS uses them for various purposes, including periodic updates on unemployment figures. The Euro-constituencies are not coterminous anyway, because the review area I live in is the South West, but my MEPs represent (for the time being) South West England and Gibraltar.
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Jun 29, 2016 8:53:41 GMT
In the House of Lords: †Monday 18 July at 2.30pm †*Lord Tyler to ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they will take to ensure that constituency boundary revisions take full account of the actual electoral registers on 23 June. The question has now been moved to this Thursday.
|
|
|
Post by greatkingrat on Jun 29, 2016 9:06:01 GMT
Answer: None.
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Jun 29, 2016 9:31:53 GMT
That is indeed going to be the answer. But the point of a question in Parliament is also to "press for action".
Incidentally, woman of the moment Pat Glass MP was one of the winners of the PMB ballot and is introducing a "Bill to amend the Parliamentary Constituencies Act 1986 to make provision about the number and size of parliamentary constituencies in the United Kingdom; to specify how the size of a constituency is to be calculated; and for connected purposes."
|
|
|
Post by islington on Jun 29, 2016 9:45:18 GMT
And it's the right answer. It could be enlarged upon to the effect that:
"It is essential to have a clear closing date for an exercise of this kind. That date was set at 1 December 2015 and this fact was well publicized; any qualified person absent from the electoral roll had ample opportunity to register before the closing date."
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Jun 29, 2016 9:48:39 GMT
|
|
|
Post by greecelove on Jun 29, 2016 10:26:37 GMT
interesting...
|
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,726
|
Post by Adrian on Jun 29, 2016 15:42:51 GMT
And it's the right answer. It could be enlarged upon to the effect that: "It is essential to have a clear closing date for an exercise of this kind. That date was set at 1 December 2015 and this fact was well publicized; any qualified person absent from the electoral roll had ample opportunity to register before the closing date." That's rather a silly statement. First of all, the idea that any individual in the UK frets about their inclusion in the parliamentary boundary review is nonsensical. Secondly, what is most essential for an exercise of this kind is correct data, i.e. electorates and boundaries. I continue to advocate for a rolling review, which would eliminate the perversities of the current system.
|
|
|
Post by islington on Jun 29, 2016 18:00:25 GMT
Adrian, I'm not sure how a 'rolling review' would look very different to what we have now.
You can register to vote at any time of year; and as for constituency boundary, as the law stands* there will be a review during each Parliament - I'm not sure how you could get much more 'rolling' than that.
All I meant was that a review of boundaries needs to be based on the numbers as at a definite cut-off date - in this case, 1 Dec 2015 - and having set it, we should stick to it.
* The law may change, of course.
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Jun 29, 2016 18:25:35 GMT
You could easily run a rolling review on the Australian basis - assign a whole number of seats to your highest units (in their case, states; we could use counties or European regions according to taste.) When electorate changes such that one seat would be moved from one unit and assigned to another, you review boundaries in both units.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2016 10:38:42 GMT
From the minutes of a meeting held between the Welsh Commission and political parties in February of this year (can't remember if we've mentioned this on here yet)
|
|
Crimson King
Lib Dem
Be nice to each other and sing in tune
Posts: 9,341
|
Post by Crimson King on Jun 30, 2016 19:56:57 GMT
I presume as it hasn't been mentioned, that there is no issue from a possible early GE and the boundary review, i.e. the commission would report to the new parliament (if there is one) who would act (or not) on the recommendations
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Jul 3, 2016 23:58:15 GMT
Maybe we should adopt the Australian practice of naming some constituencies after important political figures. For example Old Bexley and Sidcup could be re-named "Heath". Knowsley would become "Wilson".
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jul 4, 2016 7:16:09 GMT
Maybe we should adopt the Australian practice of naming some constituencies after important political figures. For example Old Bexley and Sidcup could be re-named "Heath". Knowsley would become "Wilson". Only over the cold stiff dead bodies of some of us here!
|
|
Crimson King
Lib Dem
Be nice to each other and sing in tune
Posts: 9,341
|
Post by Crimson King on Jul 4, 2016 8:37:29 GMT
could we have a 'Poulson' somewhere in Bradford
|
|