|
|
Post by andrewteale on Dec 20, 2012 21:24:06 GMT
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 39,067
|
Post by The Bishop on Dec 20, 2012 21:41:10 GMT
Would be interested in the boundaries for the new CC divisions......
|
|
|
|
Post by andrewteale on Dec 21, 2012 0:26:00 GMT
Bad form for the LGBCE not putting up the map. This is the final recommendations map (warning: 22MB). |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 39,067
|
Post by The Bishop on Dec 21, 2012 11:05:07 GMT
That map is somewhat.........sub-optimal  |
|
|
|
Post by greatkingrat on Dec 21, 2012 11:16:03 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Dec 21, 2012 11:38:35 GMT
Warwick District Council draft report: www.lgbce.org.uk/all-reviews/west-midlands/warwickshire/warwick-ferIt looks like the council was wanting to move towards a biennial electoral cycle, as in the north of the county. But they didn't make this explicit, so the LGBCE have created some one and three member wards. Some of the suggestions seem sensible, others are pitchfork bait. I can't imagine Bishop's Tachbrook will be happy to be paired with the southern end of the Warwick conurbation and whilst Whitnash will happily be rid of the eastern bit of the parish, there might be some limited unhappiness about losing the western end of the parish and there definitely will be about the name. |
|
|
|
Post by stepney on Dec 21, 2012 15:27:43 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Dec 21, 2012 15:41:02 GMT
Glad to see they've dropped that name. The boundaries look pretty good generally. How do you think those three new wards on the Isle of Dogs will pan out?
|
|
baloo
Conservative
Posts: 760
|
Post by baloo on Dec 21, 2012 15:50:53 GMT
Is there a fixed time period after which a review has to be held for an area, or is it just when there is a specific reason for one?
|
|
|
|
Post by greatkingrat on Dec 21, 2012 17:07:47 GMT
Interesting that they have gone for a mixture of 1, 2 and 3 seat wards. I wonder if this is a sign of a new policy as London is almost uniformly 3 seat wards currently (apart from the more remote parts of Bromley and Croydon). It also has the side effect of making any future parliamentary boundary reviews easier.
|
|
|
|
Post by stepney on Dec 21, 2012 17:57:25 GMT
Interesting that they have gone for a mixture of 1, 2 and 3 seat wards. I wonder if this is a sign of a new policy as London is almost uniformly 3 seat wards currently (apart from the more remote parts of Bromley and Croydon). It also has the side effect of making any future parliamentary boundary reviews easier. London is (roughly) uniformly three member wards because when the predecessors to the LGBCE reviewed all 32 boroughs in 1999/2000, Prescott was about to turn them all over to election by thirds. That didn't happen, so no reason to stick with three member wards. |
|
piperdave
SNP
Dalkeith; Midlothian/North & Musselburgh
Posts: 911
|
Post by piperdave on Dec 22, 2012 10:47:05 GMT
Is there a fixed time period after which a review has to be held for an area, or is it just when there is a specific reason for one? They used to be on a roughly 10 yearly cycle for reviews but about a decade ago I think they changed it so that there only needed to be a review if electoral parity was seriously lacking. The criteria are: More than 30% of the wards vary from the councillor:elector ration by more than 10%, or One ward varies by more than 30%, and The imbalances are unlikely to be corrected naturally within a reasonable timescale Councils can request the LGBCE undertakes a review particularly if they want to alter the size of the council. The technical guidance on the LGBCE website explains in further detail. The LGBC for Scotland still does roughly 10 yearly reviews (the next round is expected to begin in the second quarter of 2013). It did some interim reviews of particular wards that had fairly big deviations but in the end made no boundary changes, only allocating an extra member to Bathgate ward of West Lothian in time for the 2012 elections. |
|
|
|
Post by iainbhx on Dec 23, 2012 1:08:05 GMT
One of the few which actually works well. There's a lot of bad Downfall parodies around. |
|
tricky
Lib Dem
Building a stronger economy and a fairer society so everyone can get on in life
Posts: 1,420
|
Post by tricky on Dec 23, 2012 21:35:10 GMT
Some of the suggestions seem sensible, others are pitchfork bait. We got 'orphan ward' in as accepted nomenclature in the 2013 review. Pitchfork bait has to be the aim for 2018. |
|
|
|
Post by innocentabroad on Dec 24, 2012 11:06:18 GMT
Would be interested in the boundaries for the new CC divisions...... Here's your Xmas Quiz, Bish: find the county ward the commission has misnamed  |
|
|
|
Post by andrewteale on Dec 24, 2012 18:24:32 GMT
Would be interested in the boundaries for the new CC divisions...... Here's your Xmas Quiz, Bish: find the county ward the commission has misnamed Yes, I noticed that. |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Dec 24, 2012 19:31:01 GMT
I can't spot it. I thought maybe Ulverston was mispelled but it seems not
|
|
|
|
Post by greatkingrat on Dec 24, 2012 20:17:07 GMT
Apastria :-)
|
|
|
|
Post by andrewteale on Dec 24, 2012 21:51:52 GMT
Not the one I spotted.
Daltson and Burgh.
|
|
tricky
Lib Dem
Building a stronger economy and a fairer society so everyone can get on in life
Posts: 1,420
|
Post by tricky on Dec 27, 2012 18:30:27 GMT
I can't quite tell from the map but have they put Kendal Nether South Lakeland ward in Kendal Castle ED and Kendal Castle South Lakeland ward in Kendal Nether ED?
|
|
