timmullen1
Labour
Closing account as BossMan declines to respond to messages seeking support.
Posts: 11,823
|
Post by timmullen1 on May 13, 2018 11:15:00 GMT
The seat is called "Staffordshire Moorlands", what more do you want? Well, fair enough, but its still not as helpful to me as "Leek". If I'm looking at a road atlas, or driving across the country, or putting a name into AA routefinder/satnav or whatever, "Leek" means something, "Staffordshire Moorlands" doesn't. Which means that Leek sits in my consciousness as a place that I know of and I've a rough idea of what's near it - I wouldn't know for sure Biddulph was in the constituency but it wouldn't surprise me; but "Staffordshire Moorlands" is just somewhere in Staffs and without looking it up I wouldn't know which towns are in it. Regarding connections such as roads, I agree with you, as an MP representing a community you need there to be a community, some sense that there is a common interest which is hard to sustain if people don't even visit the rest of the constituency and even harder if they actively dislike each other. But that's about boundaries rather than names. I don't know if people in Biddulph are so consumed with resentment at Leek that they would object to being in a constituency s called, but I really don't think they are saying to themselves "ah yes, we are the folk of the Staffordshire Moorlands and none shall rend us asunder" either. Actually they probably would as there is already a strong feeling that, because they elect Labour or Lib Dem councillors to both Conservative controlled District and County councils they are deliberately overlooked when it comes to investment in their towns. FWIW they also objected to being partnered with Endon at the last County Council re-warding. The Moorlands name is also long-standing, although prior to 1997 the Parliamentary seat was merely Leek, the council has been either Leek and Moorlands or Staffordshire Moorlands since I was a pupil at Horton Lodge School in the early 1970’s as I still have a number of certificates signed by various Mayors for winning swimming competitions.
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on May 13, 2018 11:16:23 GMT
What about the people who live in parts of Hutton CP but are in the Penwortham West CC division? Do you think it would be better called Penwortham West and Hutton West or might not that exclude and confuse people in various other hamlets? Perhaps better to call it South Ribble North West ?
|
|
|
Post by Adam in Stroud on May 13, 2018 11:21:40 GMT
Historically of course we had MPs for shires and for boroughs with the latter eventually being very much the majority. All across the midlands and north shires were named after a single town and no-one cared if there were other towns in the shire, you were just allocating a territory to a central point.
I don't think its trampling on tradition to have most of the country divided up into constituencies based on "borough towns" as a short-hand for "significant town plus area and towns in vicinity". No-one in my constituency gives a damn that it is called "Stroud" but includes Dursley and Cam and Berkeley. It's just shorthand.
Occasionally you may have to resort to the county name or other feature where there just isn't a significant town - e.g. Forest of Dean. But I could live with Cirencester in place of Cotswolds or Cromer instead of North Norfolk (both of which are better than "Pastonacres" which was apparently going to be the name of the district council before sense prevailed)
Local authorities are slightly different I think, you want to avoid the idea that only the administrative centre matters.
|
|
|
Post by Adam in Stroud on May 13, 2018 11:27:58 GMT
Well, fair enough, but its still not as helpful to me as "Leek". If I'm looking at a road atlas, or driving across the country, or putting a name into AA routefinder/satnav or whatever, "Leek" means something, "Staffordshire Moorlands" doesn't. Which means that Leek sits in my consciousness as a place that I know of and I've a rough idea of what's near it - I wouldn't know for sure Biddulph was in the constituency but it wouldn't surprise me; but "Staffordshire Moorlands" is just somewhere in Staffs and without looking it up I wouldn't know which towns are in it. Regarding connections such as roads, I agree with you, as an MP representing a community you need there to be a community, some sense that there is a common interest which is hard to sustain if people don't even visit the rest of the constituency and even harder if they actively dislike each other. But that's about boundaries rather than names. I don't know if people in Biddulph are so consumed with resentment at Leek that they would object to being in a constituency s called, but I really don't think they are saying to themselves "ah yes, we are the folk of the Staffordshire Moorlands and none shall rend us asunder" either. Actually they probably would as there is already a strong feeling that, because they elect Labour or Lib Dem councillors to both Conservative controlled District and County councils they are deliberately overlooked when it comes to investment in their towns. FWIW they also objected to being partnered with Endon at the last County Council re-warding. The Moorlands name is also long-standing, although prior to 1997 the Parliamentary seat was merely Leek, the council has been either Leek and Moorlands or Staffordshire Moorlands since I was a pupil at Horton Lodge School in the early 1970’s as I still have a number of certificates signed by various Mayors for winning swimming competitions. I think what you are saying is that there's resentment of Leek from the neighbouring areas, which is a problem, but I still doubt that calling the place "Staffs Moorlands" resolves that otherwise there wouldn't be the phenomenon you cite. But that's essentially a matter of local government (hence I can see the reason for a different approach to LA names.) We're talking here about representation to the national Parliament; they're in the same constituency as Leek whether they like it or not, and the rest of the country wants to know roughly where an MP represents, not get caught up in petty local disputes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 13, 2018 11:30:51 GMT
I might start a thread for best constituency names.
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Figgis on May 13, 2018 11:34:38 GMT
I might start a thread for best constituency names. Barkston Ash.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 13, 2018 14:13:47 GMT
If a local government district shares its name with the main settlement, the constituency names should be based on the settlement. You. Outside. Now. I meant to respond earlier but I would like to know why you disagree. It would avoid ludicrous names like 'Bury South' where Whitefield would suffice as a much better name. Similarly Durham North, and Durham North West.
|
|
goose
Conservative & Unionist
Posts: 610
|
Post by goose on May 13, 2018 15:09:32 GMT
I meant to respond earlier but I would like to know why you disagree. It would avoid ludicrous names like 'Bury South' where Whitefield would suffice as a much better name. Similarly Durham North, and Durham North West. I think you mean Prestwich & Radcliffe.
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on May 13, 2018 15:52:06 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. Do you not remember Mersey Banks? 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. No one is confused. No one thinks Southampton Test only covers the river. Or that Brighton Pavilion only covers a single building.
|
|
|
Post by andrewteale on May 13, 2018 16:20:51 GMT
I meant to respond earlier but I would like to know why you disagree. It would avoid ludicrous names like 'Bury South' where Whitefield would suffice as a much better name. Similarly Durham North, and Durham North West. I think you mean Prestwich & Radcliffe. This.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 13, 2018 17:40:16 GMT
I think you mean Prestwich & Radcliffe. This. goose is perhaps right on the better name, but my point about 'Bury South' as a name still stands. Similarly bad is the Scottish Parliament seat of 'East Falkirk' when Grangemouth is a better name. There's also the ridiculous 'Ilford North.'
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on May 13, 2018 19:04:42 GMT
goose is perhaps right on the better name, but my point about 'Bury South' as a name still stands. Similarly bad is the Scottish Parliament seat of 'East Falkirk' when Grangemouth is a better name. There's also the ridiculous 'Ilford North.' Ilford North isn't so bad - it does still mostly contain areas that were in the pre-64 borough of Ilford and I'm not sure of what other name would be more appropriate? Gants Hill is the only name I can think of that would be vaguely appropriate for the area but it wouldn't be an improvement IMO
|
|
middyman
Conservative
"The problem with socialism is that, sooner or later, you run out of other people's money."
Posts: 8,050
|
Post by middyman on May 13, 2018 19:22:06 GMT
Having thought about this I think that the following guidelines should be followed in deciding constituency names:
1. Short as reasonably possible. 2. Wherever possible, should refer only to counties or to the principal settlement. 3. Should make clear the location e.g. “Erewash” sounds as if it should be by the Solent rather than in Leicestershire. 4. Should be comprehensible to and pronounceable by people from all parts of the UK. I am sure many don’t know in which country even some constituencies are found.
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on May 13, 2018 19:57:15 GMT
Erewash is not in Leicestershire.
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on May 13, 2018 19:58:31 GMT
Having thought about this I think that the following guidelines should be followed in deciding constituency names: 1. Short as reasonably possible. 2. Wherever possible, should refer only to counties or to the principal settlement. 3. Should make clear the location e.g. “Erewash” sounds as if it should be by the Solent rather than in Leicestershire. 4. Should be comprehensible to and pronounceable by people from all parts of the UK. I am sure many don’t know in which country even some constituencies are found. I don't know if this was a deliberate error in order to prove the point but either way it does it well and especially if it was not. I agree with all of this. There are a few county constituencies where the county+compass point formulation is most appropriate either because there simply is no significant main town (some of the Norfolk seats fall into this category, though not all do) or where there is clearly a largest settlement but where this is in a corner or a peripheral part of the seat and would lack resonance in other areas (both NE Hertfordshire (Letchworth) and SW Hertfordshire (Rickmansworth) come into this category (though the latter should be called West Hertfordshire). I think the majority of county seats with compass point names currently could easily be renamed after a single settlement
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 13, 2018 20:08:22 GMT
Having thought about this I think that the following guidelines should be followed in deciding constituency names: 1. Short as reasonably possible. 2. Wherever possible, should refer only to counties or to the principal settlement. 3. Should make clear the location e.g. “Erewash” sounds as if it should be by the Solent rather than in Leicestershire. 4. Should be comprehensible to and pronounceable by people from all parts of the UK. I am sure many don’t know in which country even some constituencies are found. Agree with the first three but I'm not sure about the fourth. I think "Na h-Eileanan an Iar" is a far more suitable name than the rather generic "Western Isles" for instance. Having said that, I don't find it hard to pronounce and may struggle more with "Dwyfor Meirionnydd" for instance!
|
|
|
Post by pragmaticidealist on May 13, 2018 20:16:38 GMT
I don't dislike the name 'West Bromwich West', but it does sound like something out of a Monty Python sketch.
|
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Long may it rain
Posts: 5,507
|
Post by Foggy on May 13, 2018 20:23:02 GMT
I might start a thread for best constituency names. Eye.
|
|
sirbenjamin
IFP
True fame is reading your name written in graffiti, but without the words 'is a wanker' after it.
Posts: 4,979
|
Post by sirbenjamin on May 13, 2018 20:34:19 GMT
I meant to respond earlier but I would like to know why you disagree. It would avoid ludicrous names like 'Bury South' where Whitefield would suffice as a much better name. Similarly Durham North, and Durham North West.
I feel very strongly that constituencies should be described in terms of local authorities, as neatly and consistently as possible.
Consequently, Bury is one of the relatively few areas that I absolutely wouldn't complain about at the moment!
The borough of Bury is divided into Bury North and Bury South. These two seats contain the entirety of the borough, with nothing else added and nothing left over. Perfect. Not ludicrous at all. About as elegant as it could possibly be, in fact.
There aren't that many parts of the country where this happens as cleanly as this. (I'd also be happy if each seat within the borough had a unique name, like Putney, Battersea and Tooting do within Wandsworth, for example, but Wandsworth NE, NW and S would be OK in that instance.)
Now, if you think that the Bury local authority should perhaps have a different name, or have different boundaries, I might agree, but that's a problem with the name of the underlying authority, not the constituencies. For example, if the local authority were to be called 'Irwell', and the two seats were called 'Bury' and 'Radcliffe & Prestwich' or something, I'd be fine with that.
It's the inconsistency of the way in which names are used that I particularly despise. Bury, Wigan, Ipswich, Leeds, Hackney, all handling the local authority name differently from one another.
|
|
sirbenjamin
IFP
True fame is reading your name written in graffiti, but without the words 'is a wanker' after it.
Posts: 4,979
|
Post by sirbenjamin on May 13, 2018 20:38:59 GMT
goose is perhaps right on the better name, but my point about 'Bury South' as a name still stands. Similarly bad is the Scottish Parliament seat of 'East Falkirk' when Grangemouth is a better name. There's also the ridiculous 'Ilford North.' Ilford North isn't so bad - it does still mostly contain areas that were in the pre-64 borough of Ilford and I'm not sure of what other name would be more appropriate? Gants Hill is the only name I can think of that would be vaguely appropriate for the area but it wouldn't be an improvement IMO
Clearly it should be Redbridge North. There is no one settlement dominating and it contains solely wards from the northern part of the borough of Redbridge.
|
|