Eastwood
Non-Aligned
Politically restricted post
Posts: 2,087
|
Post by Eastwood on Feb 23, 2021 10:54:10 GMT
I'd say Somerset will be two unitaries as all the districts have united in common cause, Cumbria's a mess as though councils have buddied up they've all come up with something different (but it does give options for the SiS to choose from) do I'd say that's up in the air All County v smaller unitaries & North Yorkshire will be full county as City of York is included by the districts plan, clearly without their consent. I mostly agree, but North Yorkshire is way too big to have just one unitary. Just split into a Yorkshire Dales and Yorkshire Wolds unitary with a York unitary in the middle. Give most of Selby to East Yorks. Simple. The Morecambe Bay unitary + most of Cumbria unitary makes for an oversized unitary for the rest of Cumbria, but population numbers force this and it also makes the unitarisation of Lancs easier. Morecambe Bay is certainly the best of the Cumbria plans. I've relatives on both sides of the Lancaster / South Lakeland boundary here and they all seem to like the idea.
|
|
|
Post by Disgusted Of Tunbridge Wells on Feb 23, 2021 19:47:03 GMT
If districts must be merged then why not just pair them off? York & Selby; Ryedale & Scarborough; Hambleton & Richmondshire; Craven & Harrogate. All still rather large and diverse geographically, but nowhere near as bad as what is being suggested. And population wise the smallest would be about equivalent to Middlesbrough or the Isle of Wight so definitely not too small to stand alone and especially not if placed alongside some sort of combined authority. As per the 2003/2007 proposals. They should have gone ahead with those or something similar, the idea of a regional assembly would have been a great thing for Yorkshire, but apparently some people were against it.
|
|
|
Post by Disgusted Of Tunbridge Wells on Feb 23, 2021 19:49:07 GMT
I mostly agree, but North Yorkshire is way too big to have just one unitary. Just split into a Yorkshire Dales and Yorkshire Wolds unitary with a York unitary in the middle. Give most of Selby to East Yorks. Simple. The Morecambe Bay unitary + most of Cumbria unitary makes for an oversized unitary for the rest of Cumbria, but population numbers force this and it also makes the unitarisation of Lancs easier. Morecambe Bay is certainly the best of the Cumbria plans. I've relatives on both sides of the Lancaster / South Lakeland boundary here and they all seem to like the idea. It makes historical sense as well because the Furness and Cartmel peninsulas used to be in Lancs anyway and the South Lakeland part is all pretty closely connected to Lancaster.
|
|
|
Post by Disgusted Of Tunbridge Wells on Feb 23, 2021 19:51:47 GMT
I'd say Somerset will be two unitaries as all the districts have united in common cause, Cumbria's a mess as though councils have buddied up they've all come up with something different (but it does give options for the SiS to choose from) do I'd say that's up in the air All County v smaller unitaries & North Yorkshire will be full county as City of York is included by the districts plan, clearly without their consent. I hate whole-county unitaries for something as large as North Yorkshire, but the districts' proposal is such a dogs' dinner, and destroying York's long-fought-for regaining of their independence, that of the two options I can only support the North Yorkshire plan. I would prefer my Banham Plan Redux, but that's not an option. I generally like it, except what have you done to Hull's boundaries?
|
|
|
Post by Disgusted Of Tunbridge Wells on Feb 23, 2021 19:54:42 GMT
Or why not Richmondshire,Craven and Harrogate, York on it's own, Hambleton,Ryedale and Scarborough. Give most of Selby to East Riding, with Leeds getting the Tadcaster area and Wakefield another chunk of western Selby District. Since when did Wakefield have any of Selby district in the first place? Apologies, I think remaining would be a less misleading word there. Will edit.
|
|
|
Post by Wisconsin on Feb 23, 2021 20:05:05 GMT
|
|
ilerda
Conservative
Posts: 1,042
|
Post by ilerda on Feb 23, 2021 20:41:08 GMT
Strange how some districts seem to have very frequent reviews, and others haven’t had one since the dawn of time (or the LGBCE, whichever came first).
It seems like only yesterday’s that Stratford had its last review. I appreciate there are some areas with higher or more uneven population growth than others, but surely that’s something the forecasting at the last review was supposed to pick up on? It’s just weird that some districts must have had essentially uniform population growth across wards for decades, whereas others have grown very unevenly in just a few years.
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 13,719
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Feb 23, 2021 20:52:49 GMT
I hate whole-county unitaries for something as large as North Yorkshire, but the districts' proposal is such a dogs' dinner, and destroying York's long-fought-for regaining of their independence, that of the two options I can only support the North Yorkshire plan. I would prefer my Banham Plan Redux, but that's not an option. I generally like it, except what have you done to Hull's boundaries? The Humber Bridge really should be in Hull, and the western boundary of Hull is a mess and needs tidying up, it runs through people's gardens and slices through bits of roads.
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 13,719
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Feb 23, 2021 20:58:13 GMT
(I wonder if the Cumbria/N. Yorkshire/Somerset consultation is big enough to warrant its own thread?) I think we did the country restructuring in Devon, Buckinghamshire and Northamptonshire here. So I really should put this here: Wiki updated.
|
|
maxque
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,117
|
Post by maxque on Feb 23, 2021 21:59:27 GMT
Strange how some districts seem to have very frequent reviews, and others haven’t had one since the dawn of time (or the LGBCE, whichever came first). It seems like only yesterday’s that Stratford had its last review. I appreciate there are some areas with higher or more uneven population growth than others, but surely that’s something the forecasting at the last review was supposed to pick up on? It’s just weird that some districts must have had essentially uniform population growth across wards for decades, whereas others have grown very unevenly in just a few years. Every authority was reviewed around 2000 (give or take 5 years) and since then it's on need only (new authority, 30% of the wards being more than 10% away, 1 ward being more than 30% away or autority requesting it).
|
|
European Lefty
Labour
Can be bribed with salted liquorice
Posts: 5,666
|
Post by European Lefty on Feb 23, 2021 22:03:40 GMT
I hate whole-county unitaries for something as large as North Yorkshire, but the districts' proposal is such a dogs' dinner, and destroying York's long-fought-for regaining of their independence, that of the two options I can only support the North Yorkshire plan. I would prefer my Banham Plan Redux, but that's not an option. I generally like it, except what have you done to Hull's boundaries? Looks like he's added the rest of Hull to Hull
|
|
European Lefty
Labour
Can be bribed with salted liquorice
Posts: 5,666
|
Post by European Lefty on Feb 23, 2021 22:04:54 GMT
Strange how some districts seem to have very frequent reviews, and others haven’t had one since the dawn of time (or the LGBCE, whichever came first). It seems like only yesterday’s that Stratford had its last review. I appreciate there are some areas with higher or more uneven population growth than others, but surely that’s something the forecasting at the last review was supposed to pick up on? It’s just weird that some districts must have had essentially uniform population growth across wards for decades, whereas others have grown very unevenly in just a few years. Didn't Warwick have new boundaries in place for two consecutive elections?
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Feb 23, 2021 22:13:22 GMT
(I wonder if the Cumbria/N. Yorkshire/Somerset consultation is big enough to warrant its own thread?) I think we did the country restructuring in Devon, Buckinghamshire and Northamptonshire here. So I really should put this here: Wiki updated. You mean Dorset. Devon has not undergone any major restructuring since 1974 (discounting Plymouth and Torbay becoming unitary authorities in 1996).
|
|
|
Post by jm on Feb 23, 2021 22:29:36 GMT
Eden was last reviewed by the LGBCE 23 years ago in 1997 although the new boundaries didn't come into effect until the 1999 election, I believe that is the longest period since a review of any district in England. East Hertfordshire is a close second, they last had a review in 1998.
|
|
|
Post by andrewteale on Feb 23, 2021 22:47:37 GMT
Strange how some districts seem to have very frequent reviews, and others haven’t had one since the dawn of time (or the LGBCE, whichever came first). It seems like only yesterday’s that Stratford had its last review. I appreciate there are some areas with higher or more uneven population growth than others, but surely that’s something the forecasting at the last review was supposed to pick up on? It’s just weird that some districts must have had essentially uniform population growth across wards for decades, whereas others have grown very unevenly in just a few years. Didn't Warwick have new boundaries in place for two consecutive elections? Yes, 2015 and 2019. Newark and Sherwood had two consecutive elections with new boundaries in 2003 and 2007.
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Feb 23, 2021 23:03:11 GMT
Eden was last reviewed by the LGBCE 23 years ago in 1997 although the new boundaries didn't come into effect until the 1999 election, I believe that is the longest period since a review of any district in England. East Hertfordshire is a close second, they last had a review in 1998. There are good reasons for both of these long periods. Eden is the most sparsely populated district in England and has no noticeable population growth, which accounts for it being the lowest-populated district-level authority in Britain. As for East Hertfordshire, it has not experienced significant population growth and is not expected to either, given how protective its residents are of its Green Belt.
|
|
pl
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,568
|
Post by pl on Feb 24, 2021 7:45:41 GMT
Eden was last reviewed by the LGBCE 23 years ago in 1997 although the new boundaries didn't come into effect until the 1999 election, I believe that is the longest period since a review of any district in England. East Hertfordshire is a close second, they last had a review in 1998. There are good reasons for both of these long periods. Eden is the most sparsely populated district in England and has no noticeable population growth, which accounts for it being the lowest-populated district-level authority in Britain. As for East Hertfordshire, it has not experienced significant population growth and is not expected to either, given how protective its residents are of its Green Belt. Ermmm... no growth in East Herts? I wouldn't say that too loudly in Buntingford (up 30%), Bishop's Stortford (set to grow even more) or Hunsdon. And that's before you talk about the new developments East of Stevenage or in Wareside.
|
|
|
Post by andrewteale on Feb 24, 2021 10:27:11 GMT
It's useful to look at the electorate figures here. The LGBCE's trigger is to start a review if 30% of wards are over 10% from quota or any ward is over 30% from quota, and sufficient time has passed since the last review.
According to the December 2018 register:
In the case of Amber Valley, South West Parishes ward is 31% too large.
In the case of Lancaster, Castle ward is 37% too large (new developments in Lancaster city centre) and University and Scotforth Rural ward is 31% too small (issues caused by individual electoral registration in a ward that is 90%+ students).
In the case of Stratford-on-Avon, Clopton ward is 33% too small (this is in Stratford town centre and appears to include the site of a new development which never happened).
Mansfield hadn't hit the trigger on the 2018 figures, but may well have now: in December 2018 11 out of 40 wards were over 10% from quota, with the largest imbalance in Warsop Carrs ward (26% too large).
Stratford-on-Avon and Mansfield have entirely single-member wards, which are more different to keep in quota because of the small sizes involved.
Luton is nowhere near hitting the trigger, there must be other reasons for that one.
Eden has actually hit the trigger, with Appleby (Bongate) ward being 34% too large. The LGBCE may well be holding off on that one given the uncertainty over future local government in Cumbria.
East Hertfordshire has 7 out of 30 wards over 10% from quota, with the largest imbalance in, as stated, Buntingford ward (20% too large).
|
|
|
Post by martinwhelton on Feb 24, 2021 12:02:41 GMT
The full list of councils that haven't had reviews since 2000 - some of them technically have triggered automatic reviews. I suspect some of the delay was due to potential local government reorganistation though some councils do have relatively stable electorates.
Authority_Name Electoral Balance? No_wards_over_30% %_wards_over_10% Date_of_last_review Amber Valley Yes 1 21.7% 24/11/1998 Basildon No 0 12.5% 28/11/2000 Bassetlaw Yes 0 32.0% 16/05/2000 Brentwood No 0 20.0% 28/11/2000 Burnley No 0 6.7% 05/09/2000 Cannock Chase Yes 1 20.0% 10/10/2000 Castle Point No 0 14.3% 28/11/2000 Chelmsford Yes 1 33.3% 28/11/2000 Cheltenham No 0 20.0% 28/11/2000 Chesterfield No 0 21.1% 24/11/1998 Craven No 0 26.3% 25/05/1999 East Hertfordshire No 0 26.7% 03/02/1998 Eden Yes 2 33.3% 04/11/1997 Epping Forest No 0 12.5% 28/11/2000 Epsom and Ewell Yes 0 30.8% 01/09/1998 Fareham No 0 6.7% 25/07/2000 Harlow Yes 0 45.5% 28/11/2000 Havant No 0 0.0% 25/07/2000 Hyndburn No 0 18.8% 05/09/2000 Maldon No 0 11.8% 28/11/2000 Mole Valley No 0 19.0% 01/09/1998 North Warwickshire No 0 17.6% 01/11/1999 Nuneaton and Bedworth No 0 17.6% 01/11/1999 Portsmouth No 0 14.3% 25/07/2000 Rossendale No 0 0.0% 05/09/2000 Ryedale No 0 15.0% 25/05/1999 South Staffordshire No 0 24.0% 10/10/2000 Southampton Yes 1 18.8% 25/07/2000 Southend-on-Sea No 0 5.9% 02/11/1999 Spelthorne No 0 23.1% 01/09/1998 Staffordshire Moorlands No 0 14.8% 10/10/2000 STEVENAGE Yes 0 30.8% 03/02/1998 Tamworth No 0 10.0% 10/10/2000 Tandridge No 0 10.0% 01/09/1998 Thurrock No 0 20.0% 04/12/2000 Waverley No 0 20.7% 01/09/1998 West Lancashire No 0 20.0% 05/09/2000
|
|
Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 11,565
|
Post by Khunanup on Feb 24, 2021 12:43:32 GMT
It's useful to look at the electorate figures here. The LGBCE's trigger is to start a review if 30% of wards are over 10% from quota or any ward is over 30% from quota, and sufficient time has passed since the last review. According to the December 2018 register: In the case of Amber Valley, South West Parishes ward is 31% too large. In the case of Lancaster, Castle ward is 37% too large (new developments in Lancaster city centre) and University and Scotforth Rural ward is 31% too small (issues caused by individual electoral registration in a ward that is 90%+ students). In the case of Stratford-on-Avon, Clopton ward is 33% too small (this is in Stratford town centre and appears to include the site of a new development which never happened). Mansfield hadn't hit the trigger on the 2018 figures, but may well have now: in December 2018 11 out of 40 wards were over 10% from quota, with the largest imbalance in Warsop Carrs ward (26% too large). Stratford-on-Avon and Mansfield have entirely single-member wards, which are more different to keep in quota because of the small sizes involved. Luton is nowhere near hitting the trigger, there must be other reasons for that one. Eden has actually hit the trigger, with Appleby (Bongate) ward being 34% too large. The LGBCE may well be holding off on that one given the uncertainty over future local government in Cumbria. East Hertfordshire has 7 out of 30 wards over 10% from quota, with the largest imbalance in, as stated, Buntingford ward (20% too large). The LGBCE can offer you a review if either trigger may be projected to be hit in the next couple of years, or just if there hasn't been a review for some considerable time. Unless trigger is reached though you can decline (happened in Portsmouth in 2013). In Portsmouth we have the very volatile electorate of Charles Dickens ward that has come very close (within tens at one point and may have actually just, by a handful, breached it officially briefly) of breaching the 30% variance trigger on a few occasions but then it's electorate drops again, sometimes rather substantially. Baffins ward is likely to be the one that finally does it though (if Charles Dickens doesn't finally clearly breach 30% variance) due to being a higher electorate and a big development, in the old gaol, currently underway.
|
|