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 20, 2020 18:57:38 GMT
In my attempt at Lincolnshire and Nottinghamshire (map at end of post, I hope) Lincoln is unchanged. There are some awkward numbers in Notts: Ashfield and Mansfield are both too big and removing Warsop from the latter makes it too small, so I have an ugly nibble at Ashfield. The arrangement in Nottingham is simply a way of doing it without split wards, not a particular recommendation for a radical change. The seats around Nottingham have very little change. Bassetlaw 70438 Southwell & Retford 72984 Sherwood 69247 Mansfield 74718 Ashfield 70871 Gedling 70463 Broxtowe 73585 Rushcliffe 75506 Nottingham South 71835 Nottingham North West 72413 Nottingham North East 69422 Now across the border... Grantham & Newark 74987 ... and into Lincs Gainsborough 75846 Lincoln 74773 Louth & Horncastle 69907 Boothby Graffoe 69161 Stamford & Sleaford 75247 Boston & Skegness 75619 South Holland & the Deepings 70749 ... because who doesn't like a constituency named after a random obscure wapentake? Boothby Graffoe is a brilliant name for a constituency. That said, I'm not keen on cross-boundary seats between the Parts of Kesteven and all four of Holland, Lindsey, the City of Lincoln, and Nottinghamshire. |
|
|
|
Post by gwynthegriff on Jun 20, 2020 18:58:45 GMT
Or one or more cross-Mersey seats between Liverpool and Wallasey/Birkenhead. I assume it won't be suggested but I wonder if Kirkdale and Wallasey could be argued slightly better this time around. The tunnels are not a barrier, literally, and the Mersey isn't the Thames. How far do you have to go up the Mersey to cross for free? How far do you have to go up the Thames to cross for free? I think the answers are "a long way" (Thelwall M6?) and "practically in the estuary" (Woolwich?). |
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,744 
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Jun 20, 2020 20:03:37 GMT
Here goes:  Zoom to West Yorks:  Yes, Leeds East & Tadcaster. Also Illingworth & Mixenden in Keighley, Wakefield scattered to the four winds, that Pontefract & Selby thing, some of the detail in Bradford, and while Skipton & Richmond might have a common Dales identity I don't think it would be popular. Rotherham boundaries are approximate: - Rother Vale is in Sheffield South East (the red Sheffield seat) - Brinsworth is in Sheffield Park & Meadowhall (the green Sheffield seat) - Rother Valley (blue) includes both Wickersley wards and Bramley & Ravenfield - Rotherham (yellow) includes Dalton & Thrybergh and Sitwell - Conisbrough & Rawmarsh (white) includes both Swinton and both Rawmarsh wards Can I recommend a swap in the North Yorkshire area? I don't know how the numbers work but swap Dales ward (in Ryedale) with Filey, if possible. Generally orphan wards should be avoided, and the deeply rural part of the moors in Ryedale looks to Helmsley/Pickering/Kirkbymoorside rather than Whitby/Scarborough. Likewise Filey doesn't seem to fit with Thirsk and Malton, and has much more in common with Scarborough (or Bridlington in a pinch). If the numbers allow us to finally move Filey away from Malton then we may as well do so. Yes, Dales is very much Kirbymoorside/Pickering, there's mile after mile of open moorland to the north, and the ward boundary even goes south of the A171, which would make the constituency fairly weird. And if Filey and Hunmanby can't fit with the rest of Scraborough BC, a better fit would be with Bridlington than with Thisk & Malton - though the Bridglington coast seat doesn't really have the numerical flexibility to take it. |
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,744
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Jun 20, 2020 20:05:52 GMT
Let's try again...
Clearly I need more practice with images, but this is my stab at North Yorks. I did this without looking at YL's version because I didn't want to be influenced by it, but I see we both independently had the idea of severing the 135-year association of Thirsk and Malton.
That looks a good model. |
|
|
|
Post by lancastrian on Jun 20, 2020 22:03:44 GMT
An attempt at Lancashire, Manchester and Cheshire, using @pr1berske 's suggestion of Chorley and Horwich as the Lancashire/Greater Manchester cross border constituency. Do they have pitchforks in Runcorn and Ellesmere Port? The size and shapes of the wards in Cheshire make it all very awkward. Given the 5% rule most of Greater Manchester isn't that bad IMO - I'm sure residents of Cheadle would disagree. It isn't strictly necessary to include Rainford in West Lancashire, but I think it's better than the arrangement I had before. St Helens North is within quota either way. On the new boundaries for Pendle Brierfield East and Clover Hill would be in the Burnley seat - unfortunately the new wards I think guarantee one of the towns being split. Edit: Fylde can be improved by moving Stanah to Blackpool North, Freckleton to Fylde and Gisburn/Rimington to Mid Lancashire. Thanks for posting. This was my NW - not dissimilar to yours. But Stockport works nicely for three whole seats and I think generally my Cheshire works better than yours. Ended up quite liking most of this actually, only one or two really contrived outcomes.   Carlisle 69074 Workington & W Cumberland 74785 Barrow & Furness 72167 N Cumberland 72624 Westmoreland & Penrith 76212 Morecambe 69762 Lancaster 70353 Pendle & Bowland 69416 Burnley 70385 Rossendale & Darwen 73180 Accrington 71267 Blackburn 74925 Clitheroe & Garstang 70113 Fleetwood & Poulton 71622 Fylde 71451 Blackpool 71267 Preston N 72663 Preston S 74653 Crosby 70239 Chorley 69159 Leyland & W Lancs 70141 Southport 71299 Ormskirk & Skelmersdale 70343 Bootle 75258 Wallasey 69103 Birkenhead 74300 Wirral 71303 Ellesmere Port & Bebbington 74218 Northwich & Norton 70859 Widnes & Runcorn 72332 Liverpool Wavertree 73864 Liverpool Garston & Halewood 75335 Liverpool Riverside 70433 Liverpool West Derby & Roby 71847 Liverpool Walton 74492 Huyton & Kirby 70622 St Helens N 76090 St Helens S 69726 Eddisbury 74032 Chester & Great Sutton 75805 Winsford & Alsager 75493 Crewe & Nantwich 69559 Sandbach & Congleton 70859 Macclesfield 69530 Tatton 76016 Warrington 73668 Padgate & Lowton 74732 Wythenshawe & Hale 76142 Manchester Moss Side 74462 Manchester Withington 73569 Manchester Ardwick 75947 Manchester Blackley & Broughton 72532 Cheadle 75763 Hazel Grove 74280 Stockport 76014 Ashton-u-L 71215 Denton & Hyde 73121 Failsworth & Moston 71280 Saddleworth 75989 Oldham 74484 Rochdale 71665 Heywood & Middleton 72918 Bury 69332 Altrincham & Sale 74811 Prestwich & Radcliffe 75637 Bolton 75760 Farnworth & Hulton 69697 Westhoughton 72871 Stretford & Urmston 75557 Worsley 75607 Salford & Eccles 69351 Makerfield 74400 Leigh 69245 Wigan 75661 I agree that's better for Cheshire, it's unfortunate Chester has to be split though. Here's an attempt to combine my Lancashire with your Cheshire and Stockport.  (Manchester Central does span three boroughs, as do Droylsden and Westhoughton.) |
|
|
|
Post by lancastrian on Jun 20, 2020 22:03:54 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Jun 21, 2020 11:03:33 GMT
In my attempt at Lincolnshire and Nottinghamshire (map at end of post, I hope) Lincoln is unchanged. There are some awkward numbers in Notts: Ashfield and Mansfield are both too big and removing Warsop from the latter makes it too small, so I have an ugly nibble at Ashfield. The arrangement in Nottingham is simply a way of doing it without split wards, not a particular recommendation for a radical change. The seats around Nottingham have very little change. Bassetlaw 70438 Southwell & Retford 72984 Sherwood 69247 Mansfield 74718 Ashfield 70871 Gedling 70463 Broxtowe 73585 Rushcliffe 75506 Nottingham South 71835 Nottingham North West 72413 Nottingham North East 69422 Now across the border... Grantham & Newark 74987 ... and into Lincs Gainsborough 75846 Lincoln 74773 Louth & Horncastle 69907 Boothby Graffoe 69161 Stamford & Sleaford 75247 Boston & Skegness 75619 South Holland & the Deepings 70749 ... because who doesn't like a constituency named after a random obscure wapentake? That said, I'm not keen on cross-boundary seats between the Parts of Kesteven and all four of Holland, Lindsey, the City of Lincoln, and Nottinghamshire. already adopted as an alter ego name by the comedian and singer James Rogers. |
|
|
|
Post by 🏴☠️ Neath West 🏴☠️ on Jun 21, 2020 11:48:06 GMT
Here is an outtake. See if you can spot what the big problem is:   Oxfordshire1 Banbury 72235 Yes 2 Witney 70306 Yes 3 Bicester 73142 Yes 4 Oxford West and Abingdon 71212 Yes 5 Oxford East 71304 Yes 6 Wantage 75019 Yes Oxfordshire-Berkshire7 Henley 75593 Yes Berkshire8 Newbury 72229 Yes 9 Wokingham 70171 Yes 10 Reading West 75140 Yes 11 Reading East 74011 Yes 12 Maidenhead 72084 Yes 13 Windsor 70965 Yes 14 Bracknell 69923 Yes Berkshire-Surrey15 Camberley and Sandhurst 69223 Yes Surrey16 Runnymede and Weybridge 75241 Yes 17 Spelthorne 71197 Yes 18 Esher and Walton 71595 Yes 19 Woking 69879 Yes 20 West Surrey 70199 Yes 21 Guildford 71357 Yes 22 South West Surrey 74331 Yes 23 Mole Valley 71963 Yes 24 Epsom and Ewell 74842 Yes 25 Reigate 75373 Yes 26 East Surrey 71003 Yes Aside from those pitchforks in Leatherhead, all fairly nice, but... |
|
|
|
Post by mattb on Jun 21, 2020 11:50:50 GMT
I agree that's better for Cheshire, it's unfortunate Chester has to be split though. Here's an attempt to combine my Lancashire with your Cheshire and Stockport. (Manchester Central does span three boroughs, as do Droylsden and Westhoughton.) Fair enough - personally I still prefer my Lancs on balance (I don't like splitting Pendle when it's not needed and I don't like 2 urban Preston wards in the big mid-Lancs seat - but that's partly my personal prejudice against seats combining a small part of a larger town in an otherwise very rural seat). I also don't like so many 3-borough seats (though recognising I had one myself). One very minor tweak - if you need to take High Leigh out of Tatton, rather than introducing another crossing of the E/W Cheshire border, you can put it into the Sandbach/Congleton seat (and if you want you can then move Sutton back into Macclesfield where it probably more naturally fits). |
|
|
|
Post by mattb on Jun 21, 2020 12:17:22 GMT
Has anyone made an attempt on Lincolnshire? Well, I would really advocate doing what 🏴☠️ Neath West 🏴☠️ has done and treating it together with N Lincs and NE Lincs, but I think the Commission will stick to the regional border here, as I've been assuming in my Yorkshire maps. If that regional boundary is respected, then Lincolnshire really needs a partner: it has 7.61 quotas so you could just draw 8 seats in theory but in practice it's going to be nearly impossible even with split wards. Perhaps the most obvious partner is Rutland which gets that 7.61 up to 8.01. Alternatively it could join with Notts, with the two county council areas getting 16 seats between them and Nottingham city retaining its three seats (although South is too big and the other two are too small). I think the latter gives an easier breakdown of the region as a whole: Derbyshire (including Derby city) 11 seats (as now, though some adjustments are needed) Notts + Lincs (admin counties) 16 Nottingham city 3 Leicester city 3 Leics (admin county) + Rutland + North Northamptonshire (pending) 11 West Northamptonshire (pending) 4 But that Leics/Rutland/N Northants group could be awkward; a three county "Greater Rutland" seat might be an option. In spite of that, I'd probably be looking at Lincs with Notts. Grantham & Newark? As a result of your post I had a look at this and it is surprisingly awkward to resolve. I couldn't find a scheme I was happy with for a Lincs-Notts seat, so I went with Stamford & Rutland which I think works out quite well across Lincs. Then to my considerable surprise there is a plausible scheme for Northants to retain 7 whole seats with only one crossing between the halves. That meant I could have a Leics-Notts seat (Melton & Southwell), retaining the current pattern in Notts (the only other substantive change is Newark & Retford). Derbys only needs 3 wards to move to get all seats within quota.   On the basis that the Northants solution is a fluke and unlikely to survive the final numbers/new wards, I also looked at Northants with 4 whole seats in west and pairing with Leics in the east. The west works fine but the east is hideous on the current numbers (2 possible versions below, both pretty unsatisfactory):   |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2020 12:36:05 GMT
I agree that's better for Cheshire, it's unfortunate Chester has to be split though. Here's an attempt to combine my Lancashire with your Cheshire and Stockport. (Manchester Central does span three boroughs, as do Droylsden and Westhoughton.) Fair enough - personally I still prefer my Lancs on balance (I don't like splitting Pendle when it's not needed and I don't like 2 urban Preston wards in the big mid-Lancs seat - but that's partly my personal prejudice against seats combining a small part of a larger town in an otherwise very rural seat). I also don't like so many 3-borough seats (though recognising I had one myself). One very minor tweak - if you need to take High Leigh out of Tatton, rather than introducing another crossing of the E/W Cheshire border, you can put it into the Sandbach/Congleton seat (and if you want you can then move Sutton back into Macclesfield where it probably more naturally fits). It's not ideal, but Fulwood is often used as jigsaw pieces to attach to Ribble Valley, or Wyre, however so required. The wards of Fulwood 'proper' are Greyfriars, Garrison, and Sharoe Green, so they would be best suited to be moved if they can all be in one go. If not, any two could easily be taken. Pendle is difficult, I always try to keep it as one borough, although I did manage Burnley and Nelson before the new numbers were added to Boundary Assistant. |
|
|
|
Post by islington on Jun 21, 2020 12:36:06 GMT
Let's try again...
Clearly I need more practice with images, but this is my stab at North Yorks. I did this without looking at YL's version because I didn't want to be influenced by it, but I see we both independently had the idea of severing the 135-year association of Thirsk and Malton.
Thirsk and Malton were actually in separate constituencies from 1983 to 2010. The Ryedale constituency contained Malton but not Thirsk. Thanks. I stand corrected. But I've had another bash at this anyway - see the next post. |
|
jamie
Top Poster
Posts: 7,051
|
Post by jamie on Jun 21, 2020 13:00:05 GMT
If anybody wants a challenge, the North East is there for the taking. Suffice to say, Stockton North will become an abomination...
|
|
|
|
Post by islington on Jun 21, 2020 13:04:45 GMT
Let's try again...
Clearly I need more practice with images, but this is my stab at North Yorks. I did this without looking at YL's version because I didn't want to be influenced by it, but I see we both independently had the idea of severing the 135-year association of Thirsk and Malton.
Here's an attempt at tidier boundaries in the York area.
Compared with the previous effort: Thirsk & Malton: Existing seat less Huby, Easingwold, Raskelf and plus Tanfield, Bedale - 75455. This keeps a Thirsk & Malton seat, albeit Thirsk is now out on something of a limb. Selby: Selby district less the three wards in Rothwell and plus Osbaldwick, Fulford, Wheldrake and the Thorpes of Bishop and Copman - 76202 York: Existing York Inner seat including the whole of Hull Road ward but adding Dringhouses and losing Acomb - 73056. In my view this is an improvement: both wards are integral parts of the city but Dringhouses more so than Acomb. Vale of York: Remaining York wards plus Huby, Easingwold, Raskelf; Ouseburn, Claro, Boroughbridge - 73190. This is a much more logical and compact seat than Thirsk in my previous plan.
Wetherby: As suggested before but without Ouseburn - 72100. This has the advantage that the seat now protrudes less far into N Yorks. Harrogate & Knaresborough: All the wards of those two towns plus Killinghall and Washburn - 74846 Skipton and Ripon: Remainder of Harrogate district and the whole of Craven - 74583
I'm a lot happier than this. York's northern suburbs and peripheries now form the clear basis of a seat and the additional places added in, like Ouseburn and Boroughbridge, are at least (unlike remote Thirsk) recognizably within York's sphere of influence.
|
|
|
|
Post by mattb on Jun 21, 2020 13:10:35 GMT
Here is an outtake. See if you can spot what the big problem is: Here is my version of SE. Bucks - works fine although I struggled to come up with a name for the extra rural seat once I'd taken out all the urban/suburban seats Oxon - very similar to yours (without the extra Thames crossing  ) Berks - again similar to yours although I avoided the long tail on Bracknell by allowing Windsor to take a horrible bite out of Slough I tried the Sandhurst wards in both Surrey and Hants and in the end went with Sandhurst & Fleet rather than Camberley. Whichever of Hants and Surrey doesn't pair with Berks then has to pair with Sussex and I came to the conclusion that the Hants-Berks / Surrey-Sussex pairs were marginally preferable (either way Hampshire is not at all easy given the ward sizes). Surrey - we have differences because of the different pairings - but I do like your Reigate (I hadn't thought of that option) so will see if I can incorporate into my scheme. Kent works fine with the extra Kent Weald seat enabling the current muddle around Maidstone to be more-or-less sorted out.     |
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on Jun 21, 2020 13:41:08 GMT
Here is an outtake. See if you can spot what the big problem is: Here is my version of SE. Bucks - works fine although I struggled to come up with a name for the extra rural seat once I'd taken out all the urban/suburban seats Oxon - very similar to yours (without the extra Thames crossing ) Berks - again similar to yours although I avoided the long tail on Bracknell by allowing Windsor to take a horrible bite out of Slough I tried the Sandhurst wards in both Surrey and Hants and in the end went with Sandhurst & Fleet rather than Camberley. Whichever of Hants and Surrey doesn't pair with Berks then has to pair with Sussex and I came to the conclusion that the Hants-Berks / Surrey-Sussex pairs were marginally preferable (either way Hampshire is not at all easy given the ward sizes). Surrey - we have differences because of the different pairings - but I do like your Reigate (I hadn't thought of that option) so will see if I can incorporate into my scheme. Kent works fine with the extra Kent Weald seat enabling the current muddle around Maidstone to be more-or-less sorted out. You think that works fine for Kent? I can tell you, the heirs of Jack Cade are after you.... |
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,903
|
Post by YL on Jun 21, 2020 14:38:05 GMT
Here is my full attempt at the East Midlands:  Notts and Lincs are as already posted. Derbyshire is straightforward: Hatton and Hilton move from South Derbyshire (now 70673) to Derbyshire Dales (now 71492) and South West Parishes ward of Amber Valley moves from Dales to "Mid Derbyshire", which I'm going to call Belper (70511) as I dislike "Mid" names and think this is one of the worse examples. It also doesn't look much like a rabbit any more. Then in Leicestershire, Rutland and Northants I have: Daventry 71578 South Northamptonshire 72660 Northampton South 69910 Northampton North 69210 Wellingborough 72618 Kettering 69008 Rutland & Higham Ferrers 76196 Corby & Market Harborough 75272 South Leicestershire 73701 Oadby & Blaby 73012 Melton Mowbray 73358 Loughborough 74248 Charnwood 71977 North West Leicestershire 72790 Bosworth 73512 Leicester West 72456 Leicester North East 74754 Leicester South East 71231 Now I will have a look at mattb 's posts on the area. |
|
|
|
Post by mattb on Jun 21, 2020 15:42:19 GMT
Here is my full attempt at the East Midlands: View AttachmentNotts and Lincs are as already posted. Derbyshire is straightforward: Hatton and Hilton move from South Derbyshire (now 70673) to Derbyshire Dales (now 71492) and South West Parishes ward of Amber Valley moves from Dales to "Mid Derbyshire", which I'm going to call Belper (70511) as I dislike "Mid" names and think this is one of the worse examples. It also doesn't look much like a rabbit any more. Now I will have a look at mattb 's posts on the area. Your east Northants (using Rutland) much better than mine - but my Lincs (using Rutland) much better than yours (in my opinion!). I guess we have to see how the final numbers fall ... |
|
|
|
Post by mattb on Jun 21, 2020 16:44:08 GMT
If anybody wants a challenge, the North East is there for the taking. Suffice to say, Stockton North will become an abomination... OK I like a challenge, and not having much else to do on a Sunday afternoon ... here's my initial attempt. Certainly tricky because it's a small region and the total allocation is so close to a half-seat. Certainly I have some awkward seat shapes, but overall the plan seems to work OK. There are several seats that could be dramatically improved in shape if the figues were just very slightly different at ward level, so we'll have to see what the final numbers look like ...  Berwick & Morpeth 75001 Blyth & Ashington 74238 Hexham 74853 Tynemouth 75923 Cramlington & Benton 75018 Newcastle-u-T N 69938 Newcastle-u-T C 70118 Newcastle-u-T E & Wallsend 72388 Blaydon 73993 Gateshead & Hebburn 71144 Jarrow 75752 Sunderland N & Boldon 74078 Sunderland S 71851 Washington & Chester-le-Street 75698 Houghton & Easington 74089 Peterlee & Spennymoor 73739 Consett 75844 Darlington 74098 Durham City & Weardale 75661 Billingham & Aycliffe 75272 Bishop Auckland & Teesdale 74753 Hartlepool 73367 Middlesbrough S & Yarm 72453 Stockton & Thornaby 74384 Middlesborough 73738 Redcar 74608 |
|
|
|
Post by mattb on Jun 21, 2020 17:38:03 GMT
You think that works fine for Kent? I can tell you, the heirs of Jack Cade are after you.... What am I missing? |
|
)
