|
|
Post by greenchristian on Jun 18, 2020 13:07:13 GMT
Going that far over the Solihull border is going to have significant implications for Warwickshire. I’ve yet to see pleasing plans for Warwickshire under any review. Any change at one half of the county echos down to the other. Including the rural part of the West Mids panhandle may help with this.. or it may not I’ll have to have a look later. Am currently most interested in getting Leeds & Birmingham right. Well my first draft of a Coventry/Warwickshire/Solihull plan upthread is pretty close to a minimal change for that whole area (pretty much everything is recognisable as a tweak of an existing seat)), and deals with Solihull being significantly over quota for two seats by losing two wards to Kenilworth and Southam (I got 295 electors away from a plan that limited the cross-border seat to just Meriden ward on the Solihull side). Losing five seats to Birmingham forces a much larger amount of Solihull borough into one or more cross-border seats with Warwickshire (combining with Coventry might be possible, but would be much more difficult), and that's going to have quite the cascade effect given the geography.
|
|
ilerda
Conservative
Posts: 1,096
|
Post by ilerda on Jun 18, 2020 13:21:45 GMT
  Here's my thoughts on Birmingham. Done with a 5% tolerance so it's a miracle but I'm actually pretty pleased with it. Edit: Now including Coventry, Solihull and Warwickshire. I have managed to get the names of the two Solihull seats the wrong way round.  |
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,903
Member is Online
|
Post by YL on Jun 18, 2020 17:00:20 GMT
Am currently most interested in getting Leeds & Birmingham right. How about Kirklees? All those blocks of five wards which are too small (OK there are some which aren't, e.g. existing Colne Valley minus Lindley) and blocks of six wards which are too big. |
|
edgbaston
Labour
Posts: 4,348
Member is Online
|
Post by edgbaston on Jun 18, 2020 19:37:23 GMT
Am currently most interested in getting Leeds & Birmingham right. How about Kirklees? All those blocks of five wards which are too small (OK there are some which aren't, e.g. existing Colne Valley minus Lindley) and blocks of six wards which are too big. Yes it’s a fine old mess isn’t it? I think we could end up with Hudd North and Brighouse (a super interesting marginal) and Hudd SE, always interested to hear your thoughts YL |
|
|
|
Post by kevinlarkin on Jun 18, 2020 22:23:33 GMT
A 75 seat London, all within 5% of quota. Some of these might be considered sub-optimal, but I like the way Lambeth and Southwark can return to something quite close to the pre-1997 configuration.  |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jun 19, 2020 7:10:11 GMT
I can't 'like' that but it's an impressive effort to get 75 seats to fit. Just proves the stupidity of the 5% rule really (or why if that must be maintained why pollimg districts should routinely be used instead of wards)
|
|
|
|
Post by islington on Jun 19, 2020 9:46:37 GMT
That is a most impressive piece of work by Kevin Larkin that I have no hesitation in 'liking'.
I've been tinkering with it to try to reduce the number of orphan wards. So far I've managed to get Mottingham ward back into Bromley and Haggerston ward into the Hackney S seat. Also, if two wards are to be extracted from Islington to be put in a Camden-based seat, I suggest Clerkenwell and Bunhill would be a better choice - this allows at least one seat in London (Islington N) to remain unchanged. Also, it's possible for the Kensington & Chelsea seat to be contained wholly within the borough, without any Westminster wards.
And a bit of ward-shuffling in Wandsworth frees up the Graveney ward in Merton, which admittedly then leaves Colliers Wood as an orphan Merton ward in the Tooting seat but means that Mitcham no longer requires reinforcement from Sutton. So that borough can be treated separately, with its two constituencies left unaltered.
The trouble is, of course, that a lot of these numbers are so tight that these delicately-crafted creations may all get blown out of the water when we get the numbers for March 2020.
Many hours of pleasure await.
|
|
|
|
Post by John Chanin on Jun 19, 2020 10:03:21 GMT
That is a most impressive piece of work by Kevin Larkin that I have no hesitation in 'liking'. I've been tinkering with it to try to reduce the number of orphan wards. So far I've managed to get Mottingham ward back into Bromley and Haggerston ward into the Hackney S seat. Also, if two wards are to be extracted from Islington to be put in a Camden-based seat, I suggest Clerkenwell and Bunhill would be a better choice - this allows at least one seat in London (Islington N) to remain unchanged. Also, it's possible for the Kensington & Chelsea seat to be contained wholly within the borough, without any Westminster wards. And a bit of ward-shuffling in Wandsworth frees up the Graveney ward in Merton, which admittedly then leaves Colliers Wood as an orphan Merton ward in the Tooting seat but means that Mitcham no longer requires reinforcement from Sutton. So that borough can be treated separately, with its two constituencies left unaltered. The trouble is, of course, that a lot of these numbers are so tight that these delicately-crafted creations may all get blown out of the water when we get the numbers for March 2020. Many hours of pleasure await. With all the LGBCE reviews of London boroughs currently ongoing, surely there are going to be many new wards signed off between now and 1/12/2020 which will throw an even larger spanner in the works than variations in electorates. |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Jun 19, 2020 10:22:04 GMT
In my little bit of inner West London, the change from 600 to 650 means that the single-borough Kensington and Chelsea constituency is no longer on - which is likely to mean the previous recommendations have to be completely rewritten.
|
|
edgbaston
Labour
Posts: 4,348
Member is Online
|
Post by edgbaston on Jun 19, 2020 10:54:59 GMT
 It occurred to me that the commission often goes for the flawed 'minimal change' approach, and given that Warwickshire and Solihull do indeed go nicely together, I suspect this /\ will probably be very close to my final submission for B'ham. Selly Oak, N'field, H Green & Edgbaston become very nice seats, at the expense of Ladywood. |
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Jun 19, 2020 11:14:51 GMT
How about calling it East Bromwich? Wednesbury would be more prudent. |
|
Chris from Brum
Lib Dem
What I need is a strong drink and a peer group.
Posts: 9,722
|
Post by Chris from Brum on Jun 19, 2020 12:53:11 GMT
How about calling it East Bromwich? Wednesbury would be more prudent. Or possibly Tipton and Wednesbury. |
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,903
Member is Online
|
Post by YL on Jun 19, 2020 12:54:31 GMT
How about Kirklees? All those blocks of five wards which are too small (OK there are some which aren't, e.g. existing Colne Valley minus Lindley) and blocks of six wards which are too big. Yes it’s a fine old mess isn’t it? I think we could end up with Hudd North and Brighouse (a super interesting marginal) and Hudd SE, always interested to hear your thoughts YL Well, I have just managed a 53 seat plan with no split wards for Yorkshire & the Humber (assuming some estimates of the electorates of Rotherham's new wards aren't too far out). It is really not nice in places and I'm not going to post it all, but here are the Kirklees constituencies in it: Colne Valley (69,348) existing minus Lindley Huddersfield & Elland (76,214) Ashbrow, Dalton, Greenhead, Lindley, Newsome; Elland Mirfield & Denby Dale (69,077) Almondbury, Denby Dale, Kirkburton, Liversedge & Gomersal, Mirfield As I say, this is not very nice in places...Wakefield West & Dewsbury (76,160) Dewsbury East, Dewsbury South; Horbury & South Ossett, Ossett, Wakefield Rural, Wakefield West I'm not endorsing this...Batley & Morley (74,986) Batley East, Batley West, Dewsbury West; Morley North, Morley South
Bradford South & Heckmondwike (74,681) Birstall & Birkenshaw, Cleckheaton, Heckmondwike; Royds, Tong, Wyke It's connected if you look closely enough. There's even a road... |
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,903
Member is Online
|
Post by YL on Jun 19, 2020 12:55:23 GMT
Wednesbury would be more prudent. Or possibly Tipton and Wednesbury. They are talking about a constituency in Solihull containing Castle Bromwich, not West Bromwich West. |
|
Chris from Brum
Lib Dem
What I need is a strong drink and a peer group.
Posts: 9,722
|
Post by Chris from Brum on Jun 19, 2020 13:01:54 GMT
Or possibly Tipton and Wednesbury. They are talking about a constituency in Solihull containing Castle Bromwich, not West Bromwich West. Thread swerve, dear chap, thread swerve. |
|
|
|
Post by islington on Jun 19, 2020 13:16:34 GMT
In my little bit of inner West London, the change from 600 to 650 means that the single-borough Kensington and Chelsea constituency is no longer on - which is likely to mean the previous recommendations have to be completely rewritten. Not necessarily completely.
My tweak of Kevin Larkin's map has a K&C seat comprising the whole borough except the three northernmost wards. They go into a Paddington seat with all the Westminster wards north of the A40 and west of the A5, plus one more ward of your choice to get the numbers in range (I chose Abbey Road but Church Street or Knightsbridge would also work).
|
|
|
|
Post by hullenedge on Jun 19, 2020 14:21:36 GMT
Yes it’s a fine old mess isn’t it? I think we could end up with Hudd North and Brighouse (a super interesting marginal) and Hudd SE, always interested to hear your thoughts YL Well, I have just managed a 53 seat plan with no split wards for Yorkshire & the Humber (assuming some estimates of the electorates of Rotherham's new wards aren't too far out). It is really not nice in places and I'm not going to post it all, but here are the Kirklees constituencies in it: Colne Valley (69,348) existing minus Lindley Huddersfield & Elland (76,214) Ashbrow, Dalton, Greenhead, Lindley, Newsome; Elland Mirfield & Denby Dale (69,077) Almondbury, Denby Dale, Kirkburton, Liversedge & Gomersal, Mirfield As I say, this is not very nice in places...Wakefield West & Dewsbury (76,160) Dewsbury East, Dewsbury South; Horbury & South Ossett, Ossett, Wakefield Rural, Wakefield West I'm not endorsing this...Batley & Morley (74,986) Batley East, Batley West, Dewsbury West; Morley North, Morley South
Bradford South & Heckmondwike (74,681) Birstall & Birkenshaw, Cleckheaton, Heckmondwike; Royds, Tong, Wyke It's connected if you look closely enough. There's even a road...Given the constraints that's bloody good. Please post the rest. |
|
|
|
Post by Defenestrated Fipplebox on Jun 19, 2020 15:28:19 GMT
Well, I have just managed a 53 seat plan with no split wards for Yorkshire & the Humber (assuming some estimates of the electorates of Rotherham's new wards aren't too far out). It is really not nice in places and I'm not going to post it all, but here are the Kirklees constituencies in it: Colne Valley (69,348) existing minus Lindley Huddersfield & Elland (76,214) Ashbrow, Dalton, Greenhead, Lindley, Newsome; Elland Mirfield & Denby Dale (69,077) Almondbury, Denby Dale, Kirkburton, Liversedge & Gomersal, Mirfield As I say, this is not very nice in places...Wakefield West & Dewsbury (76,160) Dewsbury East, Dewsbury South; Horbury & South Ossett, Ossett, Wakefield Rural, Wakefield West I'm not endorsing this...Batley & Morley (74,986) Batley East, Batley West, Dewsbury West; Morley North, Morley South
Bradford South & Heckmondwike (74,681) Birstall & Birkenshaw, Cleckheaton, Heckmondwike; Royds, Tong, Wyke It's connected if you look closely enough. There's even a road...Given the constraints that's bloody good. Please post the rest.
Getting it to fit is a real acheivement, I got nowhere near.
Personally I think having to keep within Yorkshire and Humber etc is daft. For example Sheffield should be able to use Derbyshire wards if it makes for better constituency numbers at 5% leway. For me areas like Yorkshire and Humber, west Midlands, East Midlands are totally artificial contruct areas anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by islington on Jun 19, 2020 15:29:39 GMT
You can get a very nice compact Dewsbury seat (69454) by combining the three wards of the town proper with Mirfield and Heckmondwike. Then YL's Batley & Morley, having lost Dewsbury W, gains Birstall (74328). That leaves Cleckheaton and Liversedge to be joined to bits of Calderdale or Bradford, and Almondbury/Kirkburton/Denbydale with, presumably, the western wards of Barnsley.
|
|
edgbaston
Labour
Posts: 4,348
Member is Online
|
Post by edgbaston on Jun 19, 2020 16:13:03 GMT
Yes it’s a fine old mess isn’t it? I think we could end up with Hudd North and Brighouse (a super interesting marginal) and Hudd SE, always interested to hear your thoughts YL Well, I have just managed a 53 seat plan with no split wards for Yorkshire & the Humber (assuming some estimates of the electorates of Rotherham's new wards aren't too far out). It is really not nice in places and I'm not going to post it all, but here are the Kirklees constituencies in it: Colne Valley (69,348) existing minus Lindley Huddersfield & Elland (76,214) Ashbrow, Dalton, Greenhead, Lindley, Newsome; Elland Mirfield & Denby Dale (69,077) Almondbury, Denby Dale, Kirkburton, Liversedge & Gomersal, Mirfield As I say, this is not very nice in places...Wakefield West & Dewsbury (76,160) Dewsbury East, Dewsbury South; Horbury & South Ossett, Ossett, Wakefield Rural, Wakefield West I'm not endorsing this...Batley & Morley (74,986) Batley East, Batley West, Dewsbury West; Morley North, Morley South
Bradford South & Heckmondwike (74,681) Birstall & Birkenshaw, Cleckheaton, Heckmondwike; Royds, Tong, Wyke It's connected if you look closely enough. There's even a road...This is a very clever configuration and I like it for maintaining Colne Valley but I have rejected it in favour of a better plan in the Leeds/Baradford area... please post your whole plan. I'll do mine below, I know I will have missed obvious tricks. Sheffield Central 75128 Sheffield Brightside 69092 Sheffield East 75343 Sheffield Hillsborough 71143 Sheffield Ecclesall 70271 Rother Valley & Mosborough 75043 Rotherham South 73447 Rotherham North 73708 Don Valley 70077 Doncaster Central 69419 Doncaster North 75664 Barnsley Central 72748 Barnsley East 75990 Hemsworth 70716 Pontefract & Castleford 75656 Wakefield 70509 Normanton & Rothwell 70716 Morley & Batley 74328 Dewsbury 69454 Huddersfield South & Penistone 73866 Huddersfield West 69783 Huddersfield East 69070 Calder Valley 69613 Halifax 74036 Bradford South & Cleckheaton 72346 Bradford East 72140 Bradford West 75249 Shipley 72923 Keighley 75211 Leeds Central 76082 Leeds West & Tong 74385 Pudsey 69996 Leeds North West 70011 Leeds North East 69545 Elmet & Tadcaster 75512 Leeds East & Knottingley 73929 Skipton & Ripon 75521 Harrogate & Knaresborough 74282 Selby & Wetherby 74912 York Central 76052 York East & Pocklington 74082 Richmond 73776 Thirsk & Malton 74198 Scarborough & Whitby 74992 Bridlington 73988 Beverley & Holderness 72798 Goole 76073 Hull North 76193 Hull East 74148 Hull West & Hessle 75152 Scunthorpe 72957 North Lincolnshire 75002 Grimsby & Cleethorpes  |
|
