Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,726 
|
Post by Adrian on May 16, 2019 12:13:49 GMT
Sleaford seat is oversize.
|
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,726
|
Post by Adrian on May 16, 2019 12:16:02 GMT
The Middlesbrough seat is undersize.
|
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on May 16, 2019 12:16:44 GMT
Sleaford seat is oversize. Do your boundaries look big in this? |
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,726
|
Post by Adrian on May 16, 2019 12:56:27 GMT
Buckinghamshire. The MK seats and Aylesbury are oversize. The county gains a seat.
|
|
|
|
Post by John Chanin on May 16, 2019 14:38:48 GMT
Buckinghamshire. The MK seats and Aylesbury are oversize. The county gains a seat. "Mid-Bucks" would surely be a candidate for the safest Conservative seat in the country. |
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,726
|
Post by Adrian on May 16, 2019 20:13:14 GMT
One thing I haven't quite settled my opinion on yet is, when a seat needs changing, how wide-ranging the change should be in the county as a whole. Sometimes moving one ward is all that is required to bring a seat within range, but it may be that if the whole county was reviewed it would lose/gain a seat. I think there'd need to be a threshold eg. if a county has 5 seats but is entitled to 5.6 or more it gets the extra seat. Not 5.51 because next year it might be down to 5.49 so the changes were a waste of time. The threshold might be slightly higher for gaining a seat than for losing one, to avoid the ratchet effect. I did think about trying to ensure there are always 642 MPs, but I don't think that's practical or necessary.
Additionally, I think a whole-county review is warranted if there have been ward boundary changes.
|
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,726
|
Post by Adrian on May 17, 2019 15:48:04 GMT
Somerset. Several oversize seats here. On 2018 data, 409884 (excl N/NE area) gives an entitlement to 5.69. Adding a seat without using N Somerset wards is hard.
|
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,726
|
Post by Adrian on May 19, 2019 0:57:08 GMT
East Devon - simply put St Loyes ward into Exeter.
|
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,726
|
Post by Adrian on May 19, 2019 12:02:06 GMT
West Sussex gains a seat.
|
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,726
|
Post by Adrian on May 19, 2019 15:09:53 GMT
The simplest solution to Croydon's oversized seats is to pair it with Bromley. I think the new Croydon Central makes more sense than its shape might suggest.
|
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,726
|
Post by Adrian on May 20, 2019 17:46:16 GMT
Bristol. Swap a ward.
|
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,726
|
Post by Adrian on May 20, 2019 20:06:06 GMT
Kent. Folkestone and Ashford seats are too big. Under the data I'm using, Kent is entitled to 17.68 seats so I've done a complete redraw with 18 seats.
|
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,726
|
Post by Adrian on May 20, 2019 20:49:46 GMT
Oxfordshire. Banbury and Wantage are oversize. Some new ward boundaries that don't show on Plan Builder, so for example the boundary north/west of Banbury would be different than shown here, and the electorates somewhat different too. I think it's still true though that it's not possible to construct a Banbury-Bicester seat with an electorate under 80,000.
|
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,726
|
Post by Adrian on May 20, 2019 20:51:01 GMT
Kent. Folkestone and Ashford seats are too big. Under the data I'm using, Kent is entitled to 17.68 seats so I've done a complete redraw with 18 seats. I'm twitching at some of those compass point names... Okay then, West Thanet for the one and Malling for the other.  |
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,726
|
Post by Adrian on May 20, 2019 21:18:50 GMT
Southwark & Bermondsey is too big.
|
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,726
|
Post by Adrian on May 20, 2019 21:27:43 GMT
South Norfolk is too big. Just needs to donate a ward to Great Yarmouth.
|
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,726
|
Post by Adrian on May 20, 2019 22:00:07 GMT
Cumbria. Entitlement is 5.35 so loses a seat. As usual, I've taken the opportunity to reuse the traditional boundaries.
|
|
carlton43
Non-Aligned
Posts: 48,254
Member is Online
|
Post by carlton43 on May 20, 2019 23:56:56 GMT
Kent. Folkestone and Ashford seats are too big. Under the data I'm using, Kent is entitled to 17.68 seats so I've done a complete redraw with 18 seats. I'm twitching at some of those compass point names... I like nearly all those names. Three odd baggy seats. But not bad at all. |
|
|
|
Post by pepperminttea on May 21, 2019 13:29:50 GMT
Kent. Folkestone and Ashford seats are too big. Under the data I'm using, Kent is entitled to 17.68 seats so I've done a complete redraw with 18 seats. I don't know if it still works due to shifting electorate numbers but when I had a go at Kent for 18 seats I put the boroughs into groups and allocated a number of seats to each group and I came up with: Dartford (1 seat)
-Dartford (72,180) Gravesham (1 seat)-Gravesend (70,477) - I think 'Gravesham' is a stupid name. Medway, Tonbridge and Malling (4 seats)-Rochester and Strood (69,576) -Gillingham and Rainham (68,890) -Chatham and Aylesford (65,492) -Tonbridge and Malling (68,399) Sevenoaks, Tunbridge Wells, Maidstone (4 seats)-Sevenoaks (70,735) -Tunbridge Wells (67,635) -Paddock Wood and Mid Kent (65,551) - Open for a name change -Maidstone (66,758) Swale, Canterbury, Ashford (4 seats)
-Sittingbourne and Sheppey (69,577) -Faversham and Whitstable (71,153) -Canterbury (69,463) -Ashford (72,879) Thanet, Dover, Folkestone and Hythe (4 seats)
-Isle of Thanet (67,102) - Or 'Margate and Broadstairs' if you'd prefer -Ramsgate and Deal (64,595) -Dover (62,604) -Folkestone and Hythe (64,022) |
|
carlton43
Non-Aligned
Posts: 48,254
Member is Online
|
Post by carlton43 on May 21, 2019 13:57:49 GMT
Kent. Folkestone and Ashford seats are too big. Under the data I'm using, Kent is entitled to 17.68 seats so I've done a complete redraw with 18 seats. I don't know if it still works due to shifting electorate numbers but when I had a go at Kent for 18 seats I put the boroughs into groups and allocated a number of seats to each group and I came up with: Dartford (1 seat)
-Dartford (72,180) Gravesham (1 seat)-Gravesend (70,477) - I think 'Gravesham' is a stupid name. Medway, Tonbridge and Malling (4 seats)-Rochester and Strood (69,576) -Gillingham and Rainham (68,890) -Chatham and Aylesford (65,492) -Tonbridge and Malling (68,399) Sevenoaks, Tunbridge Wells, Maidstone (4 seats)-Sevenoaks (70,735) -Tunbridge Wells (67,635) -Paddock Wood and Mid Kent (65,551) - Open for a name change -Maidstone (66,758) Swale, Canterbury, Ashford (4 seats)
-Sittingbourne and Sheppey (69,577) -Faversham and Whitstable (71,153) -Canterbury (69,463) -Ashford (72,879) Thanet, Dover, Folkestone and Hythe (4 seats)
-Isle of Thanet (67,102) - Or 'Margate and Broadstairs' if you'd prefer -Ramsgate and Deal (64,595) -Dover (62,604) -Folkestone and Hythe (64,022) I prefer names to be easy direct and simple Dartford Gravesend (Gravesham is very silly indeed and cinfusing) Rochester (no one needs to know about Strood) Gillingham (Rainham is of no consequence) Chatham (no one has heard of Aylesford) Tonbridge (the Mallings are of no consequence) Sevenoaks Tunbridge Wells Mid Kent (not ideal but no one knows insignificant Paddock Wood) Maidstone Sittingbourne (drop the unknown Sheppey) Faversham (don't confuse with other place names) Canterbury Ashford Margate (don't confuse with Thanet or other places) Ramsgate (don't confuse with Thanet or other places) Dover Folkestone (don't confuse with other places) Faverham is really the 'Mid Kent' but that long low straggle could be named Tenterden or after another ancient village of substance? Perhaps Upper Weald or North Weald? Then perhaps not? In fact these difficulties suggest it is not right in structure? That Faversham, Maidstone, Ashford and Tonbridge should be re-drawn to leave a more central Mid-Kent? |
|
