Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2016 20:06:45 GMT
Interesting to hear how the parties have responded. I think maybe Lancashire Will survive unchanged, those Tory proposals don't seem passable
I haven't seen the Tory proposals but Ribble Valley going in with Oswaldtwistle makes sense (I suspect the residents of Oswaldtwistle will be very pleased with such an idea) especially if it avoids splitting up Pendle (does it?).
If they've gone for a Lancaster & Preston North style seat, that also avoids that ridiculous North Lancs seat surely?
Anything not detailed here already that is absurd/unpassable?
Edit: This is just a Lancashire question. The Bury North & Bolton North seat must look awful on a map.
If they've gone for "Wyre, Preston North and other bits" it's because they've taken one look at Ben Wallace losing Preston and/or Nigel Evans refusing to take a peerage and thought "bugger this for a laugh"
|
|
|
Post by gwynthegriff on Oct 11, 2016 20:09:04 GMT
Ms Qureshi was followed by a woman from a historical association in Cheshire who proposed changing four constituency names to promote tourism in Cheshire. What on earth is she proposing to promote tourism - "Historical and glorious City of Chester"; "Beautiful, natural countryside of the Weaver Vale" etc. ? "Nantwich and Crewe" instead of "Crewe and Nantwich"?
|
|
|
Post by Lord Twaddleford on Oct 11, 2016 20:19:53 GMT
"Beautiful, natural countryside of the Weaver Vale" etc. ? Come to Helsby! Visit Frodsham! Enjoy the view! Just try not to pay too much attention to the chemical works at Runcorn.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2016 20:50:51 GMT
Seaforth, it puts the sea forth!
|
|
|
Post by AustralianSwingVoter on Oct 11, 2016 22:02:07 GMT
Liverpool! Whatever you've heard it isn't true!
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Oct 11, 2016 22:08:45 GMT
I know the boundary commission in this region famously have problems acknowledging the natural boundary that is the River Mersey, but I'm still fairly certain that Seaforth and Liverpool are not in Cheshire
|
|
Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 11,565
|
Post by Khunanup on Oct 11, 2016 22:33:34 GMT
The Lib Dems essentially endorse the BCE proposals but will be looking further into East Lancashire and Mid Cheshire in their written submission. They propose keeping the Bebington/Heswall seat but renaming it Bromborough and Heswall. I take it the North West Lib Dems haven't been talking to Khunanup ? Clearly not.
|
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Inactivist
Posts: 5,551
|
Post by Foggy on Oct 12, 2016 0:27:09 GMT
Aside from reuniting Bamber Bridge (and they haven't even found the neatest way to do that), that sounds awful. Well, both of my attempts at Droylsden did end up combining it with part of the city proper, but not the Gorton area. I can't see how that ended up being necessary. Those don't sound too bad, aside from the first one. There's no need to alter Stalybridge and Hyde too radically. That's almost impressive in how spectacularly wrong it is. No wonder they then proceeded to argue against themselves! Come again? Ouch, my eyes! Make it stop, please!
|
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,726
|
Post by Adrian on Oct 12, 2016 2:22:48 GMT
There were always a lot of people in Congleton borough who disliked the name and wanted it called 'Dane Valley'. My preference was "Dane and Wheelock DC" Thanks to those who were there for the hearing notes. I did have a look on Twitter but apart from a couple of photos from the BCE the silence was deafening.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2016 8:50:07 GMT
There were always a lot of people in Congleton borough who disliked the name and wanted it called 'Dane Valley'. My preference was "Dane and Wheelock DC" Thanks to those who were there for the hearing notes. I did have a look on Twitter but apart from a couple of photos from the BCE the silence was deafening. It's very different to last time when I was live-tweeting the Manchester meeting alongside andrewteale, tricky and linders
|
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,726
|
Post by Adrian on Oct 12, 2016 22:24:33 GMT
Apart from the other bizarro aspects of the process, we have to add in the fact that we did all this five years ago, to no effect, so it's not surprising really that the being-arsedness is a lot lower this time.
One of the many daft things about the new law is that there has to be a review every five years. A good example of not learning from history - the last time five-yearly reviews were tried (just after WW2) it was rightly concluded that it was a crazy idea.
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Oct 13, 2016 21:00:54 GMT
Well, both of my attempts at Droylsden did end up combining it with part of the city proper, but not the Gorton area. I can't see how that ended up being necessary.
If it is the below configuration, it's not a bad seat:
Manchester wards: Gorton North, Gorton South Tameside wards: Audenshaw, Denton North East, Denton South, Denton West, Droylsden East, Droylsden West
Makes for a nice compact seat. Also allows you to avoid splitting Stockport town in half like the BCE proposal. But I wouldn't call it Gorton, Denton & Droylsden. Gorton & Denton is a decent name, taking the two places previously named in parliamentary seats.
Any word on how the Chester hearings have gone?
Droylesden also gave its name to a parliamentary seat from 1950 to 1955. This does though sound slightly similar to the Manchester Gorton seat which existed before 1983 which included Denton (or indeed the 1885-1918 Gorton county division)
|
|
|
Post by lancastrian on Oct 15, 2016 0:27:30 GMT
I haven't seen the Tory proposals but Ribble Valley going in with Oswaldtwistle makes sense (I suspect the residents of Oswaldtwistle will be very pleased with such an idea) especially if it avoids splitting up Pendle (does it?). It does avoid splitting up Pendle: the other seats are a Pendle including the three eastern wards of Burnley, and Burnley and Accrington. Three eastern wards of Burnley? Briercliffe, Cliviger and ?? I'm not sure if Oswaldtwistle will like it- they get out of the Accrington-dominated seat into the posher constituency, but the two places merge together, the local ties are as strong as anywhere. Plus the bits of Accrington you inevitably chop off won't like it (Church is essentially part of Accrington, as is a sizeable chunk of Altham ward)
|
|
iain
Lib Dem
Posts: 10,819
|
Post by iain on Oct 16, 2016 12:11:24 GMT
Another option for East Lancashire
Pendle - as the zombie review
Burnley & Clitheroe - the remainder of Burnley district, Clitheroe and the four Ribble Valley wards in between
Hyndburn - Hyndburn district plus the three eastern Blackburn wards
Blackburn - the remainder of the town, plus the five SW Ribble Valley wards and Samlesbury & Walton. The latter ward could be swapped with Earcroft from Rossendale & Darwen to keep it within two districts.
Though it has the obvious disadvantage of splitting Blackburn, it has the advantage that the seats are actually coherently connected.
|
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,726
|
Post by Adrian on Oct 16, 2016 17:48:55 GMT
Here's my Cheshire & Lancashire map. Has split wards in Stockport, Manchester, Wigan and Knowsley. I think this is the best plan I can manage from the point of view of not splitting towns, and keeps the number of cross-border seats pretty low too. www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=151J57rymQOIvBqyYkcXO-045fyU
|
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Inactivist
Posts: 5,551
|
Post by Foggy on Oct 16, 2016 23:55:49 GMT
Another option for East Lancashire Hyndburn - Hyndburn district plus the three eastern Blackburn wards Anything that reverses the proposal to rename that seat 'Accrington' cannot possibly be a good idea. Why would you want or need to split wards in that Borough? Otherwise not bad at all.
|
|
iain
Lib Dem
Posts: 10,819
|
Post by iain on Oct 17, 2016 0:28:17 GMT
Another option for East Lancashire Hyndburn - Hyndburn district plus the three eastern Blackburn wards Anything that reverses the proposal to rename that seat 'Accrington' cannot possibly be a good idea. I really couldn't care less what it's called.
|
|
|
Post by andrewteale on Oct 17, 2016 17:45:47 GMT
Another option for East Lancashire Hyndburn - Hyndburn district plus the three eastern Blackburn wards Anything that reverses the proposal to rename that seat 'Accrington' cannot possibly be a good idea. Why would you want or need to split wards in that Borough? Otherwise not bad at all. Probably in order to give it three whole seats. I had a similar idea.
|
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,726
|
Post by Adrian on Oct 17, 2016 21:35:43 GMT
Why would you want or need to split wards in that Borough? Otherwise not bad at all. Ta. Wigan is the right size for three seats but I don't think it's possible to make three seats wholly in Wigan without splitting a ward.
|
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Inactivist
Posts: 5,551
|
Post by Foggy on Oct 18, 2016 1:24:19 GMT
You're welcome. For some reason I'd been under the mistaken impression this whole time that the current 3 seats covered the whole MB, so ignore what I said in my previous post. I'd somehow missed that Atherton ward was excluded. A split ward or two might be the way to go after all, although it's still not as desirable as in Sheffield or Birmingham.
|
|