|
Post by andrewteale on Nov 10, 2020 10:04:00 GMT
|
|
|
Post by evergreenadam on Nov 10, 2020 10:40:48 GMT
That’s good in preparation for the parliamentary boundary review.
|
|
|
Post by John Chanin on Nov 10, 2020 11:07:11 GMT
That’s the lot I think. I was expecting these 5 to make it on time. ONS can now start producing the data for the boundary review, although as discussed previously they probably won’t until the bill becomes law. Dependent on how incompetent local authorities are at providing March 2020 data (and not just for councils with new wards) we can expect figures to be published in February I think.
|
|
|
Post by Peter Wilkinson on Nov 10, 2020 11:13:38 GMT
I'm losing track - a very few London boroughs had had reviews recently enough that the LGBCE was not reviewing them again for 2022, we had a batch of five electoral changes orders last month and now have a batch of another five, I am fairly sure that several other boroughs (but I'm not certain which or even how many) had electoral changes orders published (and presumably made without Parliamentary objections) several months ago at least, and the reviews for other boroughs are at various earlier stages, through from publication of LGBCE final recommendations right back (ISTR) to being in enough confusion that it is doubtful that they will be completed (or even certain that they will not?) in time for the 2022 elections. But which are which? Is a list showing the current situation available anywhere?
|
|
|
Post by John Chanin on Nov 10, 2020 11:34:56 GMT
Reviews completed prior to 2020
Bexley (2017) Croydon (2017) Hackney (2013) Kensington (2014) Redbridge (2017) Southwark (2016) Tower Hamlets (2013)
Reviews completed in 2020
Barnet Brent Camden Ealing Enfield Hammersmith Haringey Harrow Hillingdon Hounslow Islington Lewisham Richmond Sutton Westminster
Reviews currently under way
Bromley (final recommendations) Havering (consultation on draft recommendations) Kingston (final recommendations) Lambeth (draft recommendations) Merton (final recommendations) Newham (revised draft recommendations) Waltham Forest (revised draft recommendations) Wandsworth (final recommendations0
Reviews not yet started
Barking & Dagenham Greenwich
|
|
|
Post by John Chanin on Nov 10, 2020 11:43:51 GMT
Reviews not yet started
Barking & Dagenham Greenwich Perhaps I should add that submissions have been invited for these two, but they have not reached the stage of draft recommendations.
|
|
|
Post by evergreenadam on Nov 10, 2020 11:55:36 GMT
Reviews completed prior to 2020
Bexley (2017) Croydon (2017) Hackney (2013) Kensington (2014) Redbridge (2017) Southwark (2016) Tower Hamlets (2013) Reviews completed in 2020
Barnet Brent Camden Ealing Enfield Hammersmith Haringey Harrow Hillingdon Hounslow Islington Lewisham Richmond Sutton Westminster Reviews currently under way
Bromley (final recommendations) Havering (consultation on draft recommendations) Kingston (final recommendations) Lambeth (draft recommendations) Merton (final recommendations) Newham (revised draft recommendations) Waltham Forest (revised draft recommendations) Wandsworth (final recommendations0 Reviews not yet started
Barking & Dagenham Greenwich A shame that Wandsworth will probably not make it through Parliament in time. The final recommendations produce much better ward boundaries than the existing.
|
|
iain
Lib Dem
Posts: 10,823
|
Post by iain on Nov 10, 2020 12:06:54 GMT
I seem to remember there being a provision in the bill for the commission to use final recommendations that had not yet made their way through parliament. Or have I completely made that up?
|
|
|
Post by John Chanin on Nov 10, 2020 12:18:10 GMT
I seem to remember there being a provision in the bill for the commission to use final recommendations that had not yet made their way through parliament. Or have I completely made that up? Here's the relevant text from the bill “(3A) A local government boundary is “prospective” on a particular date if, on that date— (a) it is specified in a provision of primary or secondary legislation, but (b) that provision is not yet in force for all purposes. My interpretation is that it isn't "specified" until the SI is made. But I am of course open to correction.
|
|
Harry Hayfield
Green
Cavalier Gentleman (as in 17th century Cavalier)
Posts: 2,824
|
Post by Harry Hayfield on Nov 10, 2020 12:45:06 GMT
So does this mean that, like Wales, the next set of London local elections (2022) will be held on entirely new boundaries?
|
|
|
Post by Peter Wilkinson on Nov 10, 2020 13:13:29 GMT
So does this mean that, like Wales, the next set of London local elections (2022) will be held on entirely new boundaries? Some (possibly all) of the boroughs listed as "Reviews completed prior to 2020" had their ward boundaries revised in time to be used for the 2014 or 2018 elections. The reviews for Barking and Dagenham and Greenwich seem to be starting late enough that it will be difficult or impossible to have the review completed and the electoral changes orders completed in time for use in 2022 - and one or two others, which should be able to complete in time, have run into procedural foul-ups which may delay them long enough to force the continued use of the old wards in 2022 (Havering, for instance). Otherwise, yes.
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Nov 10, 2020 18:19:36 GMT
It's annoying how this has come so far our of synch. This means that five consecutive sets of London borough elections will have been held on different maps. Ahead of the 2002 elections all of London was reviewed simultaneously and the wards which were replaced then had been in place everywhere since 1978 (with the exception of Enfield which had got into a mess). This also causes problems with Census figures (in 1981 those for Enfield were all on the old boundaries which ceased to exist the following year)
|
|
|
Post by bjornhattan on Nov 10, 2020 18:29:56 GMT
It's annoying how this has come so far our of synch. This means that five consecutive sets of London borough elections will have been held on different maps. Ahead of the 2002 elections all of London was reviewed simultaneously and the wards which were replaced then had been in place everywhere since 1978 (with the exception of Enfield which had got into a mess). This also causes problems with Census figures (in 1981 those for Enfield were all on the old boundaries which ceased to exist the following year)That's a good point - which boundaries will the upcoming Census figures use when publishing results by ward? Will it be the ones fought at the most recent elections before the census (i.e. 2018), or will it be the new boundaries where those have gone through?
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Nov 10, 2020 19:22:05 GMT
It's annoying how this has come so far our of synch. This means that five consecutive sets of London borough elections will have been held on different maps. Ahead of the 2002 elections all of London was reviewed simultaneously and the wards which were replaced then had been in place everywhere since 1978 (with the exception of Enfield which had got into a mess). This also causes problems with Census figures (in 1981 those for Enfield were all on the old boundaries which ceased to exist the following year)That's a good point - which boundaries will the upcoming Census figures use when publishing results by ward? Will it be the ones fought at the most recent elections before the census (i.e. 2018), or will it be the new boundaries where those have gone through? 2001 census used the new wards in London which were not used for electoral purposes until 2002. So I guess the next census will use those boundaries that have gone through, but many won't have done.
|
|
|
Post by andrewteale on Nov 10, 2020 19:43:48 GMT
It's annoying how this has come so far our of synch. This means that five consecutive sets of London borough elections will have been held on different maps. Ahead of the 2002 elections all of London was reviewed simultaneously and the wards which were replaced then had been in place everywhere since 1978 (with the exception of Enfield which had got into a mess). This also causes problems with Census figures (in 1981 those for Enfield were all on the old boundaries which ceased to exist the following year) There's no real reason why every borough should be reviewed at the same time. The LGBCE have intervened in boroughs where they (or the council) think there is a problem, and left alone until now the areas where the boundaries are holding up relatively well. That seems to me to be a sensible arrangement - there are limited boundary-drawing resources, so focus them where they are needed.
|
|
|
Post by andrewteale on Nov 12, 2020 16:41:29 GMT
A new electoral changes order has been published: The Scottish Parliament (Constituencies and Regions) Order 2020 (S.S.I. 2020/375). Introduces new constituency and region boundaries for the Scottish Parliament to come into effect at the next Holyrood general election. Although the order revokes all the old boundaries and replaces them with new ones, the only actual change is to realign the boundaries between the Coatbridge and Chryston, and Glasgow Provan constituencies; and between the Central Scotland and Glasgow regions, following a recent change to the Glasgow city boundary at Cardowan by Stepps.
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Nov 18, 2020 11:49:19 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Disgusted Of Tunbridge Wells on Nov 19, 2020 1:21:47 GMT
Does the new Stratford Olympic Park ward has potential of having a strong Conservative or LD vote, given all the new housing built there, in your opinion?
|
|
|
Post by evergreenadam on Nov 19, 2020 12:55:06 GMT
Does the new Stratford Olympic Park ward has potential of having a strong Conservative or LD vote, given all the new housing built there, in your opinion? The full slate of Labour Members at Newham might come to an end. I doubt it would lean Tory though. Probably more like Penninsula or Greenwich West wards in LB of Greenwich where there has been substantial new housing development. Significant non Labour vote perhaps coalescing around Lib Dems or Greens.
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Nov 19, 2020 13:26:14 GMT
Does the new Stratford Olympic Park ward has potential of having a strong Conservative or LD vote, given all the new housing built there, in your opinion? Yes, given that it is being created out of the boundaries of the soon to be abolished Stratford & New Town ward, which is the least safe Labour ward in Newham; the Liberal Democrats finished second there in 2018. It is likely to be a Lib Dem gain in 2022, given that graduates will likely form at least half the electorate of said new Stratford Olympic Park ward.
|
|