|
|
Post by andrewteale on May 28, 2020 13:21:43 GMT
Damn you! I'm going to have to come up with a NW plan now! |
|
|
|
Post by kevinlarkin on May 28, 2020 13:35:13 GMT
Do you have any plans to put this data into Boundary Assistant? I know that if all goes as the Government want it to with the bill going through Parliament, the new boundaries will be based on the electorates for the end of this year, but I would have thought those figures would be closer to the latest set on this than 2015, so would be better for people to play around with between now and then? Yes, in due course. |
|
|
|
Post by evergreenadam on Jun 1, 2020 17:53:55 GMT
Damn you! I'm going to have to come up with a NW plan now! Would be interesting to know which wards have the greatest disparity between local government and parliamentary electorates. |
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,903
|
Post by YL on Jun 2, 2020 17:58:15 GMT
Using these numbers, we can have a look at how places with new ward boundaries, in particular certain big cities where using whole wards has given problems in the zombie reviews, might be affected. I will start with Sheffield. I have some concerns about the figures given for December 2019 here, in that they are so close to those for December 2018 that I suspect they are in fact very closely based on them. (In particular no general election surge shows up, although we know that there was one.) Realigning to the new ward boundaries gives: Brightside & Hillsborough 68,722 (slightly too small) Central 75,186 (OK) Hallam 72,536 (OK) Heeley 66,980 (too small) South East 65,623 (too small) There is also a problem with the new Richmond ward being in Heeley, in that the Handsworth area becomes split between Heeley and South East. I would probably prefer an approach which treats the south and east of the city as an 11 ward block for two constituencies, with one ward split between them. Transfer Manor Castle from Central to Heeley, and then split Richmond between Heeley and South East. Two wards in the north of the city still have to be excluded from the city seats. It could be (a) the Ecclesfields, it could I suppose be (b) Stocksbridge & Upper Don and West Ecclesfield although I would prefer not to split Ecclesfield, or it could be (c) S & UD and Stannington. (a) leaves the problem of how to fix Brightside & Hillsborough. A legal solution is Hallam (73,139): Crookes & Crosspool, Dore & Totley, Ecclesall, Fulwood, Nether Edge & Sharrow Hillsborough (72,020): Hillsborough, Southey, Stannington, Stocksbridge & Upper Don, Walkley Brightside & Broomhill (72,451): Broomhill & Sharrow Vale, Burngreave, City, Firth Park, Shiregreen & Brightside (but, yes, Brightside & Broomhill) (b) isn't too bad apart from splitting Ecclesfield: Hallam (72,536): unchanged except for new wards Central (75,128): Broomhill & Sharrow Vale, Burngreave, City, Nether Edge & Sharrow, Walkley Brightside & Hillsborough (69,545): East Ecclesfield, Firth Park, Hillsborough, Shiregreen & Brightside, Southey (c) is probably the best pair of wards to leave out IMO (Stocksbridge being the most detached from the city, and Stannington being its most natural partner). I got it to work, but with some more Brightside weirdness: Hallam (73,139): as in (a) Hillsborough (69,399): East Ecclesfield, Firth Park, Hillsborough, Southey, West Ecclesfield Central (73,678): Broomhill & Sharrow Vale, Burngreave, City, Shiregreen & Brightside, Walkley. If you don't want to split a ward between Heeley & South East, then I fear we're back to tacking on single Rotherham wards (new ones, which we don't have the actual figures for) to make the numbers up. We can also use the large electorate of Broomhill & Sharrow Vale with some of the small wards to get things to work. E.g.: Hallam (72,536): unchanged except for new wards Heeley (74,031): Beauchief & Greenhill, Broomhill & Sharrow Vale (sic), Gleadless Valley, Graves Park, Nether Edge & Sharrow Hillsborough (70,292): Burngreave, Firth Park, Hillsborough, Southey, Walkley South East (66,988+): Beighton, Birley, Mosborough, Richmond, Woodhouse, Rother Vale. Park & Attercliffe (65,200+): City, Darnall, Manor Castle, Park & Arbourthorne, Shiregreen & Brightside, Brinsworth. I don't like the tacking, and that last seat is rather cobbled together, but I've seen worse actually proposed by the BCE... |
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,903
|
Post by YL on Jun 2, 2020 18:44:46 GMT
Birmingham's ward boundary changes were more radical than Sheffield's, and so the re-alignment to the new wards moves more areas around. In particular, if each ward goes with its largest part, it removes Selly Oak from Selly Oak constituency. Birmingham's figures also show a general election surge, unlike Sheffield's, so presumably the two councils handled their data differently.
For the electorates after re-alignment, I get
Northfield 77,725
Hall Green 75,127
"Selly Oak" 84,242
Edgbaston 58,604
Ladywood 79,703
Yardley 66,607
Hodge Hill 80,637
Perry Barr 68,681
Erdington 68,902
Sutton Coldfield 75,215
with only Hall Green and Sutton Coldfield within 5% of quota. (Erdington is only just too small.)
However, after a bit of pushing things around, I believe I have ten constituencies within 5% of quota based on the new wards with no crossings of the city boundary and no split wards:
Northfield (76,205): Allens Cross, Bournville & Cotteridge, Frankley Great Park, King's Norton North, King's Norton South, Longbridge & West Heath, Northfield, Rubery & Rednal
Moseley (70,520): Balsall Heath West, Bournbrook & Selly Park, Moseley, Sparkbrook & Balsall Heath East, Sparkhill
Hall Green (74,678): Billesley, Brandwood & King's Heath, Druids Heath & Monyhull, Hall Green North, Hall Green South, Highter's Heath, Stirchley
Edgbaston (74,295): Bartley Green, Edgbaston, Harborne, Quinton, Weoley & Selly Oak can it be called this if it doesn't contain the ward called North Edgbaston?
Ladywood (72,147): Bordesley & Highgate, Bordesley Green, Ladywood, Nechells, North Edgbaston, Small Heath, Soho & Jewellery Quarter
Yardley (73,809): Acocks Green, Garretts Green, Heartlands, Sheldon, South Yardley, Tyseley & Hay Mills, Yardley East, Yardley West & Stechford
Hodge Hill (74,873): Alum Rock, Bromford & Hodge Hill, Castle Vale, Glebe Farm & Tile Cross, Pype Hayes, Shard End, Ward End yes, crosses the M6
Perry Barr (74,581): Aston, Birchfield, Handsworth, Handsworth Wood, Holyhead, Lozells, Newtown, Perry Barr
Erdington (69,120): Erdington, Gravelly Hill, Kingstanding, Oscott, Perry Common, Stockland Green
Sutton Coldfield: completely broken up and divided between adjoining constituencies unchanged
Now I await Brummies telling me why this is terrible...
|
|
|
|
Post by John Chanin on Jun 2, 2020 19:16:54 GMT
Birmingham's ward boundary changes were more radical than Sheffield's, and so the re-alignment to the new wards moves more areas around. In particular, if each ward goes with its largest part, it removes Selly Oak from Selly Oak constituency. Birmingham's figures also show a general election surge, unlike Sheffield's, so presumably the two councils handled their data differently. For the electorates after re-alignment, I get Northfield 77,725 Hall Green 75,127 "Selly Oak" 84,242 Edgbaston 58,604 Ladywood 79,703 Yardley 66,607 Hodge Hill 80,637 Perry Barr 68,681 Erdington 68,902 Sutton Coldfield 75,215 with only Hall Green and Sutton Coldfield within 5% of quota. (Erdington is only just too small.) However, after a bit of pushing things around, I believe I have ten constituencies within 5% of quota based on the new wards with no crossings of the city boundary and no split wards: Northfield (76,205): Allens Cross, Bournville & Cotteridge, Frankley Great Park, King's Norton North, King's Norton South, Longbridge & West Heath, Northfield, Rubery & Rednal Moseley (70,520): Balsall Heath West, Bournbrook & Selly Park, Moseley, Sparkbrook & Balsall Heath East, Sparkhill Hall Green (74,678): Billesley, Brandwood & King's Heath, Druids Heath & Monyhull, Hall Green North, Hall Green South, Highter's Heath, Stirchley Edgbaston (74,295): Bartley Green, Edgbaston, Harborne, Quinton, Weoley & Selly Oak can it be called this if it doesn't contain the ward called North Edgbaston?Ladywood (72,147): Bordesley & Highgate, Bordesley Green, Ladywood, Nechells, North Edgbaston, Small Heath, Soho & Jewellery Quarter Yardley (73,809): Acocks Green, Garretts Green, Heartlands, Sheldon, South Yardley, Tyseley & Hay Mills, Yardley East, Yardley West & Stechford Hodge Hill (74,873): Alum Rock, Bromford & Hodge Hill, Castle Vale, Glebe Farm & Tile Cross, Pype Hayes, Shard End, Ward End yes, crosses the M6Perry Barr (74,581): Aston, Birchfield, Handsworth, Handsworth Wood, Holyhead, Lozells, Newtown, Perry Barr Erdington (69,120): Erdington, Gravelly Hill, Kingstanding, Oscott, Perry Common, Stockland Green Sutton Coldfield: completely broken up and divided between adjoining constituencies unchanged Now I await Brummies telling me why this is terrible... I’m going to wait for the operative electorates, but to answer your two questions: (a) North Edgbaston isn’t Edgbaston so no this isn’t a problem. It belongs in Ladywood (b) Crossing the M6 is a big problem. There really aren’t any links. We will see. Your seat here would better be called Tame Valley. But it is horrible. The Moseley seat is pretty awful too. I’m not wedded, despite my submission to the last Boundary Commission, to 10 seats wholly within the city boundaries. The 5% tolerance means we really must await the operative figures. |
|
Richard Allen
Banned
Four time loser in VUKPOTY finals
Posts: 19,052
|
Post by Richard Allen on Jun 2, 2020 22:11:04 GMT
(b) Crossing the M6 is a big problem. There really aren’t any links. We will see. Your seat here would better be called Tame Valley. But it is horrible. It is far from ideal but I don't think crossing the M6 in the Bromford area is completely unacceptable. While the areas either side of the Fort are clearly separated there are significant similarities and there are transports connections between them. Given the tolerance levels we are likely going to have a least a couple of dubious seats. |
|
|
|
Post by emidsanorak on Jun 3, 2020 17:04:43 GMT
Birmingham's ward boundary changes were more radical than Sheffield's, and so the re-alignment to the new wards moves more areas around. In particular, if each ward goes with its largest part, it removes Selly Oak from Selly Oak constituency. Birmingham's figures also show a general election surge, unlike Sheffield's, so presumably the two councils handled their data differently. For the electorates after re-alignment, I get Northfield 77,725 Hall Green 75,127 "Selly Oak" 84,242 Edgbaston 58,604 Ladywood 79,703 Yardley 66,607 Hodge Hill 80,637 Perry Barr 68,681 Erdington 68,902 Sutton Coldfield 75,215 with only Hall Green and Sutton Coldfield within 5% of quota. (Erdington is only just too small.) However, after a bit of pushing things around, I believe I have ten constituencies within 5% of quota based on the new wards with no crossings of the city boundary and no split wards: Northfield (76,205): Allens Cross, Bournville & Cotteridge, Frankley Great Park, King's Norton North, King's Norton South, Longbridge & West Heath, Northfield, Rubery & Rednal Moseley (70,520): Balsall Heath West, Bournbrook & Selly Park, Moseley, Sparkbrook & Balsall Heath East, Sparkhill Hall Green (74,678): Billesley, Brandwood & King's Heath, Druids Heath & Monyhull, Hall Green North, Hall Green South, Highter's Heath, Stirchley Edgbaston (74,295): Bartley Green, Edgbaston, Harborne, Quinton, Weoley & Selly Oak can it be called this if it doesn't contain the ward called North Edgbaston?Ladywood (72,147): Bordesley & Highgate, Bordesley Green, Ladywood, Nechells, North Edgbaston, Small Heath, Soho & Jewellery Quarter Yardley (73,809): Acocks Green, Garretts Green, Heartlands, Sheldon, South Yardley, Tyseley & Hay Mills, Yardley East, Yardley West & Stechford Hodge Hill (74,873): Alum Rock, Bromford & Hodge Hill, Castle Vale, Glebe Farm & Tile Cross, Pype Hayes, Shard End, Ward End yes, crosses the M6Perry Barr (74,581): Aston, Birchfield, Handsworth, Handsworth Wood, Holyhead, Lozells, Newtown, Perry Barr Erdington (69,120): Erdington, Gravelly Hill, Kingstanding, Oscott, Perry Common, Stockland Green Sutton Coldfield: completely broken up and divided between adjoining constituencies unchanged Now I await Brummies telling me why this is terrible... A better Birmingham would be: Brandwood (70071) Billesley, Bournbrook & Selly Park, Brandwood & Kings Heath, Druids Heath & Monyhull, Highters Heath, Stirchley Edgbaston (74296) as YL’s Erdington (69666) Castle Vale, Erdington, Gravelly Hill, Kingstanding, Oscott, Perry Common, Pype Hayes Hall Green (75127) Balsall Heath West, Hall Green North, Hall Green South, Moseley, Sparkbrook & Balsall Heath East, Sparkhill Hodge Hill (74871) Alum Rock, Bromford & Hodge Hill, Garretts Green, Glebe Farm & Tile Cross, Heartlands, Shard End, Ward End Ladywood (72888) Bordesley & Highgate, Bordesley Green, Ladywood, Lozells, Nechells, Newtown, North Edgbaston, Soho & Jewellery Quarter Northfield (76205) as YL’s Perry Barr (74732) Aston, Birchfield, Handsworth, Handsworth Wood, Holyhead, Perry Barr, Stockland Green Yardley (72373) Acocks Green, Sheldon, Small Heath, South Yardley, Tyseley & Hay Mills, Yardley East, Yardley West & Stechford Sutton Coldfield (no change)
|
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,903
|
Post by YL on Jun 7, 2020 10:01:52 GMT
In Leeds, like Sheffield, the ward boundary changes are fairly minor, and it's easy to re-align the existing constituencies to the new ward boundaries, with Headingley & Hyde Park being assigned to NW. The electorates after doing that for the constituencies wholly within the city boundaries are
Central 76,003
East 65,837
NE 68,023
NW 66,873
W 63,556
Elmet & Rothwell 79,176
Pudsey 72,029
Pudsey and Central are within range, Elmet & Rothwell is too big, and the rest are too small. The city's total entitlement is 7.5 constituencies, which is close to what it has now.
The basic problem here is that groups of four wards tend to be too small, and groups of five wards tend to be too big, though there's enough variation in the ward sizes that this isn't always the case. Exactly what happens depends on the overall pattern of seats in Yorkshire, and where it makes sense to cross the border. Note that all five Bradford seats are (on these figures) within tolerance, as is Pudsey, so trying to avoid ward splits in the west of Leeds proper by nibbling at Bradford is going to cause knock on problems.
There are some four ward combinations which work, as well as the existing Pudsey. One is the two Morley wards plus any two of Farnley & Wortley, Middleton Park and Ardsley & Robin Hood. Another is modifying the existing Leeds NE by adding Headingley & Hyde Park instead of Alwoodley. Five ward combinations involving the wards around the city centre often work too. But I think some ward splits or multiple border crossings towards the east and north are likely to be necessary...
|
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,903
|
Post by YL on Jun 7, 2020 11:53:40 GMT
Cambridgeshire needs an extra seat. Re-aligning the existing seats to the new ward boundaries gives
Peterborough 72094
NW Cambridgeshire 92721
Huntingdon 89207
S Cambridgeshire 86854
Cambridge 78165
SE Cambridgeshire 87025
NE Cambridgeshire 83958
There is a weird feature of the new ward boundaries in Peterborough. The new Fletton & Woodston ward crosses the Nene, and if included in NW Cambridgeshire would leave a small area north of the Nene isolated in that constituency. One solution could be to include both Fletton wards and Stanground South in Peterborough instead, and move Bretton, Ravensthorpe and West to NW Cambridgeshire. The plan below incorporates this, but will work (except for the names) if the simple re-alignment is preferred.
1. Peterborough East (75,147) as described above
2. Peterborough West & Ramsey (70,433) rest of Peterborough district; Ramsey, Stilton et al and Yaxley from Huntingdonshire
3. Huntingdon (75,801) Huntingdonshire district except the wards listed in seats 2 and 4.
4. SW Cambridgeshire (72,867) From Huntingdonshire, the St Neots wards, Great Paxton and Fenstanton; western parts of South Cambridgeshire district: Swavesey, Bar Hill, Caldecote, Hardwick, Barrington, Melbourn and everything to their west.
5. NE Cambridgeshire (75,139) All of Fenland district plus Sutton ward of East Cambridgeshire.
6. Ely (72,672) East Cambridgeshire district except Sutton; from South Cambridgeshire Cottenham, Longstanton, Over & Willingham.
7. Cambridge (71,746) The city without Queen Edith's and Trumpington.
8. Cambridge OuterS Cambridgeshire (76,219) Queen Edith's, Trumpington, the rest of South Cambridgeshire district.
Not intended as a Lib Dem gerrymander, honest.
|
|
|
|
Post by mattb on Jun 7, 2020 15:17:00 GMT
Cambridgeshire needs an extra seat. Re-aligning the existing seats to the new ward boundaries gives Peterborough 72094 NW Cambridgeshire 92721 Huntingdon 89207 S Cambridgeshire 86854 Cambridge 78165 SE Cambridgeshire 87025 NE Cambridgeshire 83958 There is a weird feature of the new ward boundaries in Peterborough. The new Fletton & Woodston ward crosses the Nene, and if included in NW Cambridgeshire would leave a small area north of the Nene isolated in that constituency. One solution could be to include both Fletton wards and Stanground South in Peterborough instead, and move Bretton, Ravensthorpe and West to NW Cambridgeshire. The plan below incorporates this, but will work (except for the names) if the simple re-alignment is preferred. 1. Peterborough East (75,147) as described above 2. Peterborough West & Ramsey (70,433) rest of Peterborough district; Ramsey, Stilton et al and Yaxley from Huntingdonshire 3. Huntingdon (75,801) Huntingdonshire district except the wards listed in seats 2 and 4. 4. SW Cambridgeshire (72,867) From Huntingdonshire, the St Neots wards, Great Paxton and Fenstanton; western parts of South Cambridgeshire district: Swavesey, Bar Hill, Caldecote, Hardwick, Barrington, Melbourn and everything to their west. 5. NE Cambridgeshire (75,139) All of Fenland district plus Sutton ward of East Cambridgeshire. 6. Ely (72,672) East Cambridgeshire district except Sutton; from South Cambridgeshire Cottenham, Longstanton, Over & Willingham. 7. Cambridge (71,746) The city without Queen Edith's and Trumpington. 8. Cambridge OuterS Cambridgeshire (76,219) Queen Edith's, Trumpington, the rest of South Cambridgeshire district. Not intended as a Lib Dem gerrymander, honest. Very similar to what I had. I suspect there aren't many plausible alternatives to this general scheme assuming the final numbers don't require a cross-county seat. In fact I left Cambridge unchanged and you don't need to keep any E Cambs wards in NE Cambs, thereby re-uniting E Cambs district in a single seat. As a result I called those seats 'Fenland' and 'East Cambs' and I didn't move Longstanton into E Cambs. I also had 'St Neots' as the name for the new seat. Belated edit (sorry) - realised Cambridge of course too big to leave unchanged - but even so, you can leave Fenland coterminous with the district and avoid splitting E Cambs district. I also suspect, having looked in more detail across the region, it may well make sense to have a cross-county seat with Cambs even though it is not needed if looking at Cambs in isolation. |
|
bsjmcr
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,591 
|
Post by bsjmcr on Jun 7, 2020 17:30:08 GMT
Cambridgeshire needs an extra seat. Re-aligning the existing seats to the new ward boundaries gives Peterborough 72094 NW Cambridgeshire 92721 Huntingdon 89207 S Cambridgeshire 86854 Cambridge 78165 SE Cambridgeshire 87025 NE Cambridgeshire 83958 There is a weird feature of the new ward boundaries in Peterborough. The new Fletton & Woodston ward crosses the Nene, and if included in NW Cambridgeshire would leave a small area north of the Nene isolated in that constituency. One solution could be to include both Fletton wards and Stanground South in Peterborough instead, and move Bretton, Ravensthorpe and West to NW Cambridgeshire. The plan below incorporates this, but will work (except for the names) if the simple re-alignment is preferred. 1. Peterborough East (75,147) as described above 2. Peterborough West & Ramsey (70,433) rest of Peterborough district; Ramsey, Stilton et al and Yaxley from Huntingdonshire 3. Huntingdon (75,801) Huntingdonshire district except the wards listed in seats 2 and 4. 4. SW Cambridgeshire (72,867) From Huntingdonshire, the St Neots wards, Great Paxton and Fenstanton; western parts of South Cambridgeshire district: Swavesey, Bar Hill, Caldecote, Hardwick, Barrington, Melbourn and everything to their west. 5. NE Cambridgeshire (75,139) All of Fenland district plus Sutton ward of East Cambridgeshire. 6. Ely (72,672) East Cambridgeshire district except Sutton; from South Cambridgeshire Cottenham, Longstanton, Over & Willingham. 7. Cambridge (71,746) The city without Queen Edith's and Trumpington. 8. Cambridge OuterS Cambridgeshire (76,219) Queen Edith's, Trumpington, the rest of South Cambridgeshire district. Not intended as a Lib Dem gerrymander, honest. Very good, I would just call Ely, East Cambridgeshire given it is almost all of the district and Ely is tiny (and you may get away with keeping Sutton in there with a bit of movement elsewhere?) I did play around with the boundary assistant myself (perhaps the numbers are out of date?) but it is probably more pitchfork bait than anything. If only screenshots could be easily attached here. My new seat is Mid Cambridgeshire, made of the northern tip of South Cambridgeshire plus St Ives and environs, but not Milton because of the annoying bit hanging off, which stays in South Cambridgeshire, whose City ward is Cherry Hinton instead of QE/Trumpington. To me keeping Addenbrooke's and Homerton College in the city is of importance and makes more sense. Huntingdon virtually unchanged other than adding Ellington - perhaps not feasible on current numbers. East Cambridgeshire district is united and padded out with Chatteris and environs North Cambridgeshire to be made of the southern half of NW and NE Cambs, and then Peterborough West and Peterborough East and Wisbech to top it off. |
|
|
|
Post by mattb on Jun 7, 2020 19:04:26 GMT
Very good, I would just call Ely, East Cambridgeshire given it is almost all of the district and Ely is tiny (and you may get away with keeping Sutton in there with a bit of movement elsewhere?) I did play around with the boundary assistant myself (perhaps the numbers are out of date?) but it is probably more pitchfork bait than anything. If only screenshots could be easily attached here. My new seat is Mid Cambridgeshire, made of the northern tip of South Cambridgeshire plus St Ives and environs, but not Milton because of the annoying bit hanging off, which stays in South Cambridgeshire, whose City ward is Cherry Hinton instead of QE/Trumpington. To me keeping Addenbrooke's and Homerton College in the city is of importance and makes more sense. Huntingdon virtually unchanged other than adding Ellington - perhaps not feasible on current numbers. East Cambridgeshire district is united and padded out with Chatteris and environs North Cambridgeshire to be made of the southern half of NW and NE Cambs, and then Peterborough West and Peterborough East and Wisbech to top it off. You can attach screenshots using Imgur or similar. The electorates in Boundary Assistant are (I think) 2015 but you can use the 2019 spreadsheet recently published on the Boundary Commission website. If translating back to Boundary Assistant to get a map you also need to consider where there have been subsequent ward boundary changes. (e.g. Milton no longer a separate ward). |
|
|
|
Post by evergreenadam on Jun 8, 2020 23:18:36 GMT
Cambridgeshire needs an extra seat. Re-aligning the existing seats to the new ward boundaries gives Peterborough 72094 NW Cambridgeshire 92721 Huntingdon 89207 S Cambridgeshire 86854 Cambridge 78165 SE Cambridgeshire 87025 NE Cambridgeshire 83958 There is a weird feature of the new ward boundaries in Peterborough. The new Fletton & Woodston ward crosses the Nene, and if included in NW Cambridgeshire would leave a small area north of the Nene isolated in that constituency. One solution could be to include both Fletton wards and Stanground South in Peterborough instead, and move Bretton, Ravensthorpe and West to NW Cambridgeshire. The plan below incorporates this, but will work (except for the names) if the simple re-alignment is preferred. 1. Peterborough East (75,147) as described above 2. Peterborough West & Ramsey (70,433) rest of Peterborough district; Ramsey, Stilton et al and Yaxley from Huntingdonshire 3. Huntingdon (75,801) Huntingdonshire district except the wards listed in seats 2 and 4. 4. SW Cambridgeshire (72,867) From Huntingdonshire, the St Neots wards, Great Paxton and Fenstanton; western parts of South Cambridgeshire district: Swavesey, Bar Hill, Caldecote, Hardwick, Barrington, Melbourn and everything to their west. 5. NE Cambridgeshire (75,139) All of Fenland district plus Sutton ward of East Cambridgeshire. 6. Ely (72,672) East Cambridgeshire district except Sutton; from South Cambridgeshire Cottenham, Longstanton, Over & Willingham. 7. Cambridge (71,746) The city without Queen Edith's and Trumpington. 8. Cambridge OuterS Cambridgeshire (76,219) Queen Edith's, Trumpington, the rest of South Cambridgeshire district. Not intended as a Lib Dem gerrymander, honest. Very good, I would just call Ely, East Cambridgeshire given it is almost all of the district and Ely is tiny (and you may get away with keeping Sutton in there with a bit of movement elsewhere?) I did play around with the boundary assistant myself (perhaps the numbers are out of date?) but it is probably more pitchfork bait than anything. If only screenshots could be easily attached here. My new seat is Mid Cambridgeshire, made of the northern tip of South Cambridgeshire plus St Ives and environs, but not Milton because of the annoying bit hanging off, which stays in South Cambridgeshire, whose City ward is Cherry Hinton instead of QE/Trumpington. To me keeping Addenbrooke's and Homerton College in the city is of importance and makes more sense. Huntingdon virtually unchanged other than adding Ellington - perhaps not feasible on current numbers. East Cambridgeshire district is united and padded out with Chatteris and environs North Cambridgeshire to be made of the southern half of NW and NE Cambs, and then Peterborough West and Peterborough East and Wisbech to top it off. Is South Cambridgeshire a good Lib Dem target then? |
|
|
|
Post by evergreenadam on Jun 8, 2020 23:22:00 GMT
In Leeds, like Sheffield, the ward boundary changes are fairly minor, and it's easy to re-align the existing constituencies to the new ward boundaries, with Headingley & Hyde Park being assigned to NW. The electorates after doing that for the constituencies wholly within the city boundaries are Central 76,003 East 65,837 NE 68,023 NW 66,873 W 63,556 Elmet & Rothwell 79,176 Pudsey 72,029 Pudsey and Central are within range, Elmet & Rothwell is too big, and the rest are too small. The city's total entitlement is 7.5 constituencies, which is close to what it has now. The basic problem here is that groups of four wards tend to be too small, and groups of five wards tend to be too big, though there's enough variation in the ward sizes that this isn't always the case. Exactly what happens depends on the overall pattern of seats in Yorkshire, and where it makes sense to cross the border. Note that all five Bradford seats are (on these figures) within tolerance, as is Pudsey, so trying to avoid ward splits in the west of Leeds proper by nibbling at Bradford is going to cause knock on problems. There are some four ward combinations which work, as well as the existing Pudsey. One is the two Morley wards plus any two of Farnley & Wortley, Middleton Park and Ardsley & Robin Hood. Another is modifying the existing Leeds NE by adding Headingley & Hyde Park instead of Alwoodley. Five ward combinations involving the wards around the city centre often work too. But I think some ward splits or multiple border crossings towards the east and north are likely to be necessary... Headingley has always belonged in NW. |
|
|
|
Post by carolus on Jun 8, 2020 23:36:15 GMT
Very good, I would just call Ely, East Cambridgeshire given it is almost all of the district and Ely is tiny (and you may get away with keeping Sutton in there with a bit of movement elsewhere?) I did play around with the boundary assistant myself (perhaps the numbers are out of date?) but it is probably more pitchfork bait than anything. If only screenshots could be easily attached here. My new seat is Mid Cambridgeshire, made of the northern tip of South Cambridgeshire plus St Ives and environs, but not Milton because of the annoying bit hanging off, which stays in South Cambridgeshire, whose City ward is Cherry Hinton instead of QE/Trumpington. To me keeping Addenbrooke's and Homerton College in the city is of importance and makes more sense. Huntingdon virtually unchanged other than adding Ellington - perhaps not feasible on current numbers. East Cambridgeshire district is united and padded out with Chatteris and environs North Cambridgeshire to be made of the southern half of NW and NE Cambs, and then Peterborough West and Peterborough East and Wisbech to top it off. Is South Cambridgeshire a good Lib Dem target then? I believe YL 's proposal there would see almost all the Conservative held wards moved out of South Cambs, and another Lib Dem friendly ward (Trumpington) moved in from Cambridge. |
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,903
|
Post by YL on Jun 9, 2020 6:28:09 GMT
In Leeds, like Sheffield, the ward boundary changes are fairly minor, and it's easy to re-align the existing constituencies to the new ward boundaries, with Headingley & Hyde Park being assigned to NW. The electorates after doing that for the constituencies wholly within the city boundaries are Central 76,003 East 65,837 NE 68,023 NW 66,873 W 63,556 Elmet & Rothwell 79,176 Pudsey 72,029 Pudsey and Central are within range, Elmet & Rothwell is too big, and the rest are too small. The city's total entitlement is 7.5 constituencies, which is close to what it has now. The basic problem here is that groups of four wards tend to be too small, and groups of five wards tend to be too big, though there's enough variation in the ward sizes that this isn't always the case. Exactly what happens depends on the overall pattern of seats in Yorkshire, and where it makes sense to cross the border. Note that all five Bradford seats are (on these figures) within tolerance, as is Pudsey, so trying to avoid ward splits in the west of Leeds proper by nibbling at Bradford is going to cause knock on problems. There are some four ward combinations which work, as well as the existing Pudsey. One is the two Morley wards plus any two of Farnley & Wortley, Middleton Park and Ardsley & Robin Hood. Another is modifying the existing Leeds NE by adding Headingley & Hyde Park instead of Alwoodley. Five ward combinations involving the wards around the city centre often work too. But I think some ward splits or multiple border crossings towards the east and north are likely to be necessary... Headingley has always belonged in NW. Indeed. But if these numbers were actually to be used by the Commission, the fact that you can make a legal seat without split wards (something that is not that easy in Leeds) by transferring it to North East might well see that get proposed. |
|
|
|
Post by evergreenadam on Jun 9, 2020 8:45:28 GMT
Cambridgeshire needs an extra seat. Re-aligning the existing seats to the new ward boundaries gives Peterborough 72094 NW Cambridgeshire 92721 Huntingdon 89207 S Cambridgeshire 86854 Cambridge 78165 SE Cambridgeshire 87025 NE Cambridgeshire 83958 There is a weird feature of the new ward boundaries in Peterborough. The new Fletton & Woodston ward crosses the Nene, and if included in NW Cambridgeshire would leave a small area north of the Nene isolated in that constituency. One solution could be to include both Fletton wards and Stanground South in Peterborough instead, and move Bretton, Ravensthorpe and West to NW Cambridgeshire. The plan below incorporates this, but will work (except for the names) if the simple re-alignment is preferred. 1. Peterborough East (75,147) as described above 2. Peterborough West & Ramsey (70,433) rest of Peterborough district; Ramsey, Stilton et al and Yaxley from Huntingdonshire 3. Huntingdon (75,801) Huntingdonshire district except the wards listed in seats 2 and 4. 4. SW Cambridgeshire (72,867) From Huntingdonshire, the St Neots wards, Great Paxton and Fenstanton; western parts of South Cambridgeshire district: Swavesey, Bar Hill, Caldecote, Hardwick, Barrington, Melbourn and everything to their west. 5. NE Cambridgeshire (75,139) All of Fenland district plus Sutton ward of East Cambridgeshire. 6. Ely (72,672) East Cambridgeshire district except Sutton; from South Cambridgeshire Cottenham, Longstanton, Over & Willingham. 7. Cambridge (71,746) The city without Queen Edith's and Trumpington. 8. Cambridge OuterS Cambridgeshire (76,219) Queen Edith's, Trumpington, the rest of South Cambridgeshire district. Not intended as a Lib Dem gerrymander, honest. Very similar to what I had. I suspect there aren't many plausible alternatives to this general scheme assuming the final numbers don't require a cross-county seat. In fact I left Cambridge unchanged and you don't need to keep any E Cambs wards in NE Cambs, thereby re-uniting E Cambs district in a single seat. As a result I called those seats 'Fenland' and 'East Cambs' and I didn't move Longstanton into E Cambs. I also had 'St Neots' as the name for the new seat. Would Peterborough East and Peterborough West be fairly safely Conservative? |
|
Wisconsin
Lib Dem
Posts: 1,131
Member is Online
|
Post by Wisconsin on Jun 9, 2020 13:00:50 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by evergreenadam on Jun 9, 2020 13:58:53 GMT
How long until we have to wait for that! |
|
