Harry Hayfield
Green
Cavalier Gentleman (as in 17th century Cavalier)
Posts: 2,826
|
Post by Harry Hayfield on Aug 4, 2023 19:22:25 GMT
By my reckoning this means that North Warwickshire, being the only council not to have a review of late, is probably going to be next, therefore when should we expect that to start to be in place by May 2027?
|
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,371
|
Post by YL on Aug 12, 2023 6:29:59 GMT
|
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,371
|
Post by YL on Aug 23, 2023 16:26:17 GMT
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Aug 29, 2023 15:18:55 GMT
Final recommendations for Worcester now available: www.lgbce.org.uk/all-reviews/worcester13 2-member wards, 3 3-member wards, and henceforth Worcester will switch to full council elections every 4 years starting from next year.
|
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,371
|
Post by YL on Sept 26, 2023 9:22:30 GMT
|
|
|
Post by tedbark on Oct 3, 2023 10:32:59 GMT
Final recommendations for Northumberland. All single member divisions, removing the Alnwick two member seat. Changes to the much disliked New Delaval and New Hartley proposed in the original draft. Largely appear to have adopted the Conservative suggestions www.lgbce.org.uk/all-reviews/northumberland
|
|
WJ
Non-Aligned
Posts: 3,137
|
Post by WJ on Oct 3, 2023 20:21:17 GMT
Final recommendations for Shropshire. A major change has been to give Bayston Hill it's own division, rather than lumping it with Burnell (or with some urban Shrewsbury areas as it is now). The proposed split of Wem proper and Wem rural has been removed, returning this to a 2 member division. There has been some pretty substantial shifting of boundaries to the south and west of Shrewsbury, with the village of Bicton moving from Longden into Loton. www.lgbce.org.uk/all-reviews/shropshireMore detailed summary on the Shropshire Star website: www.shropshirestar.com/news/politics/2023/10/03/boundary-changes-agreed-for-shropshire-council-after-totally-inappropriate-plans-dropped/On the whole, these seem like pretty sensible revisions on the draft proposal. The Shifnal area doesn't look very aesthetically pleasing, but I guess it makes sense. While not perfect, Tern and Loton divisions are vastly better now than the existing boundaries. There's at least one silly name- Stottesdon, Kinlet & Hopton Wafers, but we'll survive.
|
|
|
Post by andrewteale on Oct 6, 2023 14:45:04 GMT
The Welsh Government have made amendments to the Welsh local elections rules to support single transferable vote elections. Welsh councils can now resolve to introduce STV themselves within the first year of a council term; as far as I am aware no council has actually done that yet, but I suppose these amendments may prove useful at some point in the future. The counting rules implemented are the rules used in Northern Ireland. www.legislation.gov.uk/wsi/2023/1064/made
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Oct 6, 2023 18:47:00 GMT
The Welsh Government have made amendments to the Welsh local elections rules to support single transferable vote elections. Welsh councils can now resolve to introduce STV themselves within the first year of a council term; as far as I am aware no council has actually done that yet, but I suppose these amendments may prove useful at some point in the future. The counting rules implemented are the rules used in Northern Ireland. www.legislation.gov.uk/wsi/2023/1064/madeThe council likely to adopt this system first will be Cardiff, since it is frequently under NOC and counting votes will not take that long.
|
|
Harry Hayfield
Green
Cavalier Gentleman (as in 17th century Cavalier)
Posts: 2,826
|
Post by Harry Hayfield on Oct 7, 2023 17:51:45 GMT
The Welsh Government have made amendments to the Welsh local elections rules to support single transferable vote elections. Welsh councils can now resolve to introduce STV themselves within the first year of a council term; as far as I am aware no council has actually done that yet, but I suppose these amendments may prove useful at some point in the future. The counting rules implemented are the rules used in Northern Ireland. www.legislation.gov.uk/wsi/2023/1064/madeThe council likely to adopt this system first will be Cardiff, since it is frequently under NOC and counting votes will not take that long. Cardiff has already said "NO" www.walesonline.co.uk/news/attempt-alter-voting-system-cardiff-24566774 as has Rhondda Cynon Taff and although it is being planned by a Green in Neath Port Talbot that will also fail. The only councils it could work in are Plaid councils (such as here in Ceredigion) however the council leader doesn't seen very keen despite already having the numbers
|
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,371
|
Post by YL on Oct 31, 2023 19:58:00 GMT
|
|
|
Post by doktorb🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️ on Oct 31, 2023 20:22:35 GMT
I hope they keep "People’s Park" and "Salterhebble" for Calderdale. Those could win any future ward name poll.
|
|
|
Post by bluelabour on Oct 31, 2023 20:26:51 GMT
I hope they keep "People’s Park" and "Salterhebble" for Calderdale. Those could win any future ward name poll. Those are some cracking names and generally good proposals. Coventry on the other hand…
|
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,371
|
Post by YL on Oct 31, 2023 20:26:54 GMT
I hope they keep "People’s Park" and "Salterhebble" for Calderdale. Those could win any future ward name poll. Glad you like them
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Oct 31, 2023 21:12:17 GMT
I hope they keep "People’s Park" and "Salterhebble" for Calderdale. Those could win any future ward name poll. Those are some cracking names and generally good proposals. Coventry on the other hand… There isn't a way to do Coventry that isn't problematic. I'd obviously say that the Green Party submission is as unproblematic as you can get (I ended up splitting Cheylesmore in the least problematic way possible in order to reunite Earlsdon). But yes, paragraph 63 "In addition, we considered that the proposals from the Conservatives and Green Party would split the Sherbourne community" hows that the commission haven't understood the city's neighborhoods at all.
I'm mildly irritated that the Labour Group seem to have gained some capital with the commission by submitting their proposal as both the Labour Party and as Coventry City Council (why does a council submission written and voted through by a single party get counted as a separate submission from the identical submission from the party itself?) Labour's approach was basically minimal change. I was looking at uniting as many communities as possible (in particular, uniting Earlsdon, uniting Canley, and uniting Tile Hill). The Tories were doing much the same as me, but with more of an eye on the electoral consequences (my only electoral concern was preventing an expected Labour attempt to remove our best areas from Holbrooks which didn't actually materialise).
Incidentally I'd been talking to the Lib Dems and Coventry Citizens parties about the submission (since I had access to council mapping software and they didn't). I'd put together a plan for the Lib Dems to submit which was a variation of the Green Party plan, but due to a combination of me taking longer than expected to finalise what they'd asked for (because it proved to be very awkward) and them not quite agreeing with themselves on the final version by the deadline it never got submitted, whilst the Coventry Citizens were going to endorse both plans. I'm probably always going to wonder if the initial proposals would have been different if those submissions had gone in.
|
|
carolus
Lib Dem
Posts: 4,829
Member is Online
|
Post by carolus on Nov 9, 2023 21:29:25 GMT
It's very annoying that in their grand website redesign earlier this year, the LGBCE destroyed their mapping tool. It's now shinier, and worse in every way. Slower, clunkier, can't easily compare different sets of boundaries, less informative. Who can have thought this was an improvement?
|
|
|
Post by bjornhattan on Nov 9, 2023 21:41:58 GMT
I hope they keep "People’s Park" and "Salterhebble" for Calderdale. Those could win any future ward name poll. "Halifax Town" is not only a good footballing ward name but seems to have been purposefully drawn to just include the Shay at its southernmost end!
|
|
|
Post by John Chanin on Nov 10, 2023 8:04:27 GMT
It's very annoying that in their grand website redesign earlier this year, the LGBCE destroyed their mapping tool. It's now shinier, and worse in every way. Slower, clunkier, can't easily compare different sets of boundaries, less informative. Who can have thought this was an improvement? This sort of thing has happened to lots of websites over the last 3 years or so. My understanding is that it is due to sites being redesigned for the tiny screens of smartphones, for which the original format is "too cluttered". It is indeed very annoying for those of us who continue to use large screens, and want all the function and information included on them.
|
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,371
|
Post by YL on Nov 10, 2023 17:45:04 GMT
It's very annoying that in their grand website redesign earlier this year, the LGBCE destroyed their mapping tool. It's now shinier, and worse in every way. Slower, clunkier, can't easily compare different sets of boundaries, less informative. Who can have thought this was an improvement? Their Barnsley page doesn't even have the mapping tool at all. Nor does it have the electorate figures yet, and this for a consultation which supposedly started on Tuesday. Speaking of Barnsley, does anybody ( ilerda?) know what has happened about the proposal, which the LGBCE produced recommendations for, to re-align the Barnsley/Sheffield boundary in the Oughtibridge Mill area?
|
|
ilerda
Conservative
Posts: 1,042
|
Post by ilerda on Nov 11, 2023 10:09:11 GMT
It's very annoying that in their grand website redesign earlier this year, the LGBCE destroyed their mapping tool. It's now shinier, and worse in every way. Slower, clunkier, can't easily compare different sets of boundaries, less informative. Who can have thought this was an improvement? Their Barnsley page doesn't even have the mapping tool at all. Nor does it have the electorate figures yet, and this for a consultation which supposedly started on Tuesday. Speaking of Barnsley, does anybody ( ilerda ?) know what has happened about the proposal, which the LGBCE produced recommendations for, to re-align the Barnsley/Sheffield boundary in the Oughtibridge Mill area? I was also very confused by the Barnsley page. Totally useless to anyone trying to participate, so not sure why they’ve done it. Although I do know the Council and councillors have been aware it’s coming for some time now. As for the principal area boundary review, I’ve heard nothing since the LGBCE published their final recommendations. It may be that it’s slipped out as an SI without anyone noticing, but I’ll certainly do some digging.
|
|