J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 13,620
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Sept 6, 2017 9:00:59 GMT
The reduction in seats was never the least bit justified (especially whilst busily stuffing the HOL) so I'm glad about that. We can now get around to a new set of boundary reviews which may have already been passed were they less contentious. Any reduction in seats needs to be done seperately from the normal cyclical standard electorate equalisation review. Doing both tasks in one go is one of the things that made it such a mess. Edit: and I think I got general approval around here some time ago when I suggested the fugures used should be those of the immediately preceding general election.
|
|
cibwr
Plaid Cymru
Posts: 3,558
|
Post by cibwr on Sept 6, 2017 9:10:17 GMT
And base it on population and not registered voters!
|
|
mattb
Lib Dem
Posts: 935
Member is Online
|
Post by mattb on Sept 6, 2017 9:10:25 GMT
I can provide figures broken down by county (or by groups of boroughs in London and the mets) if that's of interest to anybody. Please :-)
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 13,620
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Sept 6, 2017 9:19:56 GMT
And base it on population and not registered voters! Yes, base it on a count that is up to ten years out of date instead of a count that is up to eleven months out of date.
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Sept 6, 2017 9:26:32 GMT
I can provide figures broken down by county (or by groups of boroughs in London and the mets) if that's of interest to anybody. Please :-) I haven't got time to put the entire spreadsheet on here this morning, so I'll start with eastern England: Essex: 18.38 Suffolk: 7.67 Norfolk: 9.31 Cambridgeshire: 8.06 Hertfordshire: 11.61 Bedfordshire: 6.28 Cambridgeshire easily stands alone, and there are enough seats in Essex that it can stand alone without too much difficulty. Mathematically you could 8 to Suffolk and 9 to Norfolk, but it's a little tight and it may not be possible by the time the new freeze date comes, so pairing them for 17 is probably more realistic. The maths is even tighter with Herts and Beds, so a pairing for 18 there is logical on the numbers. The new seat in Cambridgeshire is likely to appear somewhere along the A14 corridor between Cambridge and Huntingdon. If you consider Suffolk alone then you've got a lot of leeway about where the extra seat appears, but if you combine it with Norfolk then your cross-border seat either needs to cross around Thetford or around Diss. Ideally I'd cross the Beds-Herts border south of Luton, but if you're short of electors then it may have to be done north of Hitchin instead.
|
|
iain
Lib Dem
Posts: 10,709
Member is Online
|
Post by iain on Sept 6, 2017 9:33:10 GMT
What's the number you're using to get these?
|
|
|
Post by mrpastelito on Sept 6, 2017 9:34:01 GMT
Can't be bothered to dig it up now, but I think Arthur Figgis once suggested the BC should be allowed to use the most current ward boundaries even if there haven't yet been local elections on these boundaries.
|
|
Harry Hayfield
Green
Cavalier Gentleman (as in 17th century Cavalier)
Posts: 2,759
|
Post by Harry Hayfield on Sept 6, 2017 9:37:26 GMT
In the copy of the Times I have just read in my local shop, the electoral quota will be 75,000 (74,6 something) with a 5% variance (71,250 low to 78,750 high), what is interesting however is that that gives a total UK electorate of 48,750,000 and the total for the 2018 review base was just 46 million, therefore have Labour got their wish?
|
|
jamie
Top Poster
Posts: 6,842
|
Post by jamie on Sept 6, 2017 9:58:27 GMT
I believe all the ward registration figures are on electoral calculus' 'notionals' section of the website btw, for those who are interested in starting looking at ramifications straight away. Sadly it is the December 2015 figures. Got my hopes up as well
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Sept 6, 2017 10:08:38 GMT
What's the number you're using to get these? Excluding the Western Isles, Northern Isles and Isle of Wight, I got an approximate UK electorate of 46,641,729 (could be out by a few tens of thousands either way - electorates were worked out from Wikipedia's turnout figures, which look pretty ropey to me.) That gives a target figure of 72201 electors per seat. Which, incidentally, is almost exactly the electorate of the Rugby constituency.
|
|
|
Post by Adam in Stroud on Sept 6, 2017 10:14:59 GMT
The reduction to 600 was arbitrary in two ways. There was the obvious one of the number chosen. However rather more concerning was the unwillingness to place any change in the context of both the wider governance of the UK and a proper definition of what an MP was for in that governance. The role has changed radically through my 60 odd years. Those changes have seldom been based on any debate or public engagement - the exception perhaps was the establishment of select committees. The workload of a reasonably assiduous MP now is utterly unrecognisable when compared to a similar person elected, say, in the 1950s. The vast growth in constituency work, the increasing party responsibilities, the technology-enabled lobbying of constituents to press MPs on particular topics have dramatically altered the balance of a typical MP's time. There was no "golden age" of parliament. Laziness and occasionally venal behaviour have been present throughout, and probably far more than now. I have no desire to return to some past parliamentary model. However while having keen caseworking MPs with high local public profiles fits the job specification that most people now expect and prefer with their votes that shift has had constitutional (in terms of weaker executive challenge and ineffective scrutiny of swathes of legislation) and other consequences which are not properly discussed. It has also produced the arguably unwelcome inclusion of MPs in the model of state provision. For example MP helplines with far better resources than those provided for the ordinary citizen encourage knowledgeable citizens to contact their MPs with their concerns (and indeed public servants even directly urge that step on those who don't know). Thus diligent MPs end up performing a quality control function almost discouraging better quality original service design. And of course diligence (or resource choice by MPs) isn't evenly distributed. I'd therefore hope, almost certainly in vain, for a wider debate than just whether 600 or 650 MPs is right. That's a damn good post for your fourth one. At any rate, I agree with all of it, so it's good as far as I'm concerned! The lack of thought is even more damning when you remember the historical context of all this i.e. the aftermath of the expenses scandal, and the relation of that scandal to such issues as public engagement with politics and the professionalisation of MPs (and remuneration issues that go with that.)
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 36,546
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Sept 6, 2017 10:28:11 GMT
Hopefully this will will lead to the requirement for a review every 5 years being scrapped and replaced with a requirement to review every 10 years which is more sustainable. That was one of the three things - along with reducing MPs to 600 and imposing the rigid 5% rule - which convinced nearly all opposition MPs that this boundary review was a partisan exercise in a way no previous ones had been (and of course pretty much the same package was proposed by Policy Exchange, a shamelessly pro-Tory think tank) And the totally cynical and dishonest use by our former PM of the soundbite "cutting the cost of politics" (when in reality any cash saving would be negligible, not that such a thing should be the foremost consideration in how we are governed anyway) was one of several black marks again him, even if a more minor one. Hopefully going back to 650 MPs with more flexibility in electorate sizes and a 10 year cycle can win cross-party support and get changes passed before a 2022 GE. (though if one comes significantly earlier all bets are off, of course)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2017 10:42:45 GMT
If it is scrapped, I genuinely can't be bothered to find any interest in whatever comes after. Maybe its scrapping will kill off my interest in boundaries because two aborted reviews have been quite enough. I don't care any more.
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 36,546
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Sept 6, 2017 10:47:59 GMT
If it is scrapped, I genuinely can't be bothered to find any interest in whatever comes after. Maybe its scrapping will kill off my interest in boundaries because two aborted reviews have been quite enough. I don't care any more. Maybe its just a sign you are losing interest in politics more generally? (I've noticed you don't post here much now, though of course that could be for other reasons) My own view is that there was never any need to fiddle around with a system that overall worked pretty well, especially in a way that aroused suspicions of partisanship. "If it ain't broke don't fix it", remember?
|
|
|
Post by justin124 on Sept 6, 2017 11:04:31 GMT
Primary legislation will be needed to change the Terms of Reference of the Boundary Commission, and given that a Review can be expected to take 3 years to complete we can be pretty confident that any General Election called before 2021 will be on current boundaries.
|
|
Harry Hayfield
Green
Cavalier Gentleman (as in 17th century Cavalier)
Posts: 2,759
|
Post by Harry Hayfield on Sept 6, 2017 11:31:09 GMT
Primary legislation will be needed to change the Terms of Reference of the Boundary Commission, and given that a Review can be expected to take 3 years to complete we can be pretty confident that any General Election called before 2021 will be on current boundaries. The Northern Ireland and English Boundary Commission on Twitter (where I asked what they would do) replied "At the moment, ignore it" as they both said they intend to present to Parliament recommendations next September.
|
|
|
Post by justin124 on Sept 6, 2017 11:37:28 GMT
Primary legislation will be needed to change the Terms of Reference of the Boundary Commission, and given that a Review can be expected to take 3 years to complete we can be pretty confident that any General Election called before 2021 will be on current boundaries. The Northern Ireland and English Boundary Commission on Twitter (where I asked what they would do) replied "At the moment, ignore it" as they both said they intend to present to Parliament recommendations next September. Indeed. They have no choice until ordered to do otherwise by Parliament!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2017 13:07:20 GMT
Hopefully this will will lead to the requirement for a review every 5 years being scrapped and replaced with a requirement to review every 10 years which is more sustainable. That was one of the three things - along with reducing MPs to 600 and imposing the rigid 5% rule - which convinced nearly all opposition MPs that this boundary review was a partisan exercise in a way no previous ones had been (and of course pretty much the same package was proposed by Policy Exchange, a shamelessly pro-Tory think tank) Indeed. The current rules were a partisan imposition from day one, and only endorsed by the Lib Dems in return for the AV referendum. As the bill passed through parliament the government was absolutely determined not to make any concessions to the opposition, except on very minor matters like separating the Isle of Wight from the mainland. So they can hardly object to the opposition being partisan in response. The ensuing Act must be one of the most ineffectual in history, as AV of course never happened and it looks like the boundary review now won't either!
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Sept 6, 2017 13:35:17 GMT
If it is scrapped, I genuinely can't be bothered to find any interest in whatever comes after. Maybe its scrapping will kill off my interest in boundaries because two aborted reviews have been quite enough. I don't care any more. My goodness. How faint-hearted. Your work life must be very bliss if a mere two scrappings can daunt you?
I can remember at least three projects I had invested many months of my life in each time being completely junked and many being sawn off at the legs, short-funded or butchered. It is what one does and lives with. It is part of the rich pattern of 'life'. Only in parts of quiet public service do things continue in an orderly progression without hurts, hiatus and wholesale slaughter.
I have twice come back from part of my annual leave to find my office a bare room, and the room of the team bare save a few flexes! On wandering other departments I learned that 'project junked', team dispersed, furnishings re-allocated, all my personalty lost yet again, including notes, lists and treasured Smith and Ouzman set of rules and projectors! The more senior manager relieved of duties!! The following year it happened again and the whole floor was vacant and let to a different company. It took me all morning to relocate my team.....And I lost another set of Smith and Ouzman.
A second set of lost boundary changes for an 'outsider' is a mere nothing mate!
|
|
Harry Hayfield
Green
Cavalier Gentleman (as in 17th century Cavalier)
Posts: 2,759
|
Post by Harry Hayfield on Sept 6, 2017 16:51:51 GMT
Could I ask the following? What would be the effect of regional electoral quotas based on that regions population as a percentage of the UK population? For instance Wales has a population of 3.063 million out of a UK population of 65.64 million (4.66%) and therefore the electoral quota for Wales should be 4.66% lower than the UK as a whole (67,930 to 75,080)
|
|