J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,744 
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Jun 22, 2020 5:02:14 GMT
Tees Valley (6 seats)
In contrast, this part of the map works very well. Hartlepool and Darlington are the easiest seats of all to draw - the former is unchanged and the latter becomes conterminous with the borough. Stockton isn't perfect but consists of those parts of the borough north of the Tees (and not within the Billingham and Sedgefield seat). Thornaby and Yarm then join with western Middlesbrough to form Middlesbrough West - You've got a nice boundary running along the proper county boundary! What's the opposite of pitchforks? I'll wave them in abundance!  |
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,903
|
Post by YL on Jun 22, 2020 6:36:13 GMT
Tees Valley (6 seats)
In contrast, this part of the map works very well. Hartlepool and Darlington are the easiest seats of all to draw - the former is unchanged and the latter becomes conterminous with the borough. Stockton isn't perfect but consists of those parts of the borough north of the Tees (and not within the Billingham and Sedgefield seat). Thornaby and Yarm then join with western Middlesbrough to form Middlesbrough West - You've got a nice boundary running along the proper county boundary! What's the opposite of pitchforks? I'll wave them in abundance! Sadly that's not possible with the actual rules on these figures (unless you cross the regional boundary of course); neither is the single Darlington borough constituency. Here is my quick attempt at the North East. bjornhattan , where are the pitchforks?  Redcar 74608 Middlesbrough South & Yarm 72453 Middlesbrough North & Eston 73738 Stockton & Thornaby 75984 Hartlepool 70235 Darlington 72587 Sedgefield & Billingham 75870 Easington 74884 Bishop Auckland 75671 North West Durham 70390 City of Durham 69912 North Durham 73521 Sunderland South & Houghton 76029 Sunderland North & Whitburn 69444 Sunderland West & Washington 75240 Jarrow & South Shields 75752 Gateshead East & Hebburn 72301 Tyne Bridge 72124 Blaydon 74697 Newcastle West & Hexham 75284 Newcastle North 75137 Newcastle East & Wallsend 75958 Cramlington & Longbenton 75018 Tynemouth 75923 Berwick & Morpeth 75001 Ashington & Blyth 74238 |
|
|
|
Post by mattb on Jun 22, 2020 7:27:25 GMT
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 isn't necessary to split Pendle, but there is a continuous urban area along the valley there, in contrast to the moors you have to cross to reach Rossendale - I would argue my map only has two constituencies separated by hills, Pendle and Rossendale and Darwen, whereas yours adds Burnley and gives Rossendale a third distinct part in Rochdale, albeit those extra parts aren't very big. The difference in Preston is mostly because I like Chorley and Horwich, but Fulwood has been making up the numbers in rural seats for the past 37 years anyway, they probably wouldn't protest too much at their continuing separation from Preston. FWIW, seeing as it's fairly horrible however you draw it, I do prefer the greater concentration of the electorate around the A6/Longridge in my Mid Lancashire. The three borough seats I admit I don't like very much - though I think you could sensibly draw one in central Manchester with more of Salford. I have managed to redraw the area to get rid of them: Various other combinations are possible for the Manchester seats. That's much better in Manchester & surrounds. Actually I like Salford Quays in Manchester Central. You're completely right about Norden, I tried really hard to avoid that and failed. I also accept there's nothing actually wrong with Fulwood in mid-Lancs (or whatever it's called) - as I said, that's my personal prejudice rather than a 'real' objection. With the adjustment to get rid of the 3-borough seats, on balance I now prefer your scheme. If I get a chance at some point I will see if I can tweak it further |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2020 7:33:19 GMT
It isn't necessary to split Pendle, but there is a continuous urban area along the valley there, in contrast to the moors you have to cross to reach Rossendale - I would argue my map only has two constituencies separated by hills, Pendle and Rossendale and Darwen, whereas yours adds Burnley and gives Rossendale a third distinct part in Rochdale, albeit those extra parts aren't very big. The difference in Preston is mostly because I like Chorley and Horwich, but Fulwood has been making up the numbers in rural seats for the past 37 years anyway, they probably wouldn't protest too much at their continuing separation from Preston. FWIW, seeing as it's fairly horrible however you draw it, I do prefer the greater concentration of the electorate around the A6/Longridge in my Mid Lancashire. The three borough seats I admit I don't like very much - though I think you could sensibly draw one in central Manchester with more of Salford. I have managed to redraw the area to get rid of them: Various other combinations are possible for the Manchester seats. That's much better in Manchester & surrounds. Actually I like Salford Quays in Manchester Central. You're completely right about Norden, I tried really hard to avoid that and failed. I also accept there's nothing actually wrong with Fulwood in mid-Lancs (or whatever it's called) - as I said, that's my personal prejudice rather than a 'real' objection. With the adjustment to get rid of the 3-borough seats, on balance I now prefer your scheme. If I get a chance at some point I will see if I can tweak it further Norden is a difficult ward to add because the main concentration of population is right in the bottom corner. Adding it to Rossendale looks okay on a map but then you zoom in and there is almost nothing from the border until you're practically in Rochdale. This is why I wonder if the Lancs-Gtr Manc crossborder seat has to be Chorley/Horwich. Even adding Ramsbottom to Rossendale seems to knock the figure way out of synch. |
|
|
|
Post by bjornhattan on Jun 22, 2020 9:01:11 GMT
You've got a nice boundary running along the proper county boundary! What's the opposite of pitchforks? I'll wave them in abundance! Sadly that's not possible with the actual rules on these figures (unless you cross the regional boundary of course); neither is the single Darlington borough constituency. Here is my quick attempt at the North East. bjornhattan , where are the pitchforks? View AttachmentRedcar 74608 Middlesbrough South & Yarm 72453 Middlesbrough North & Eston 73738 Stockton & Thornaby 75984 Hartlepool 70235 Darlington 72587 Sedgefield & Billingham 75870 Easington 74884 Bishop Auckland 75671 North West Durham 70390 City of Durham 69912 North Durham 73521 Sunderland South & Houghton 76029 Sunderland North & Whitburn 69444 Sunderland West & Washington 75240 Jarrow & South Shields 75752 Gateshead East & Hebburn 72301 Tyne Bridge 72124 Blaydon 74697 Newcastle West & Hexham 75284 Newcastle North 75137 Newcastle East & Wallsend 75958 Cramlington & Longbenton 75018 Tynemouth 75923 Berwick & Morpeth 75001 Ashington & Blyth 74238 Not too many pitchforks required there! You've made a bit of a mess of my part of Gateshead - the boundaries between Low Fell and Chowdene don't really exist on the ground, and while Tyne Bridge isn't the worst place to cross the Tyne, it shouldn't really stretch all the way to Lemington (which has no connection with central Gateshead). But other than that, there are no horrible combinations which can be easily avoided (and your Billingham and Sedgefield is much nicer than mine). |
|
|
|
Post by mattb on Jun 22, 2020 9:50:52 GMT
It isn't necessary to split Pendle, but there is a continuous urban area along the valley there, in contrast to the moors you have to cross to reach Rossendale - I would argue my map only has two constituencies separated by hills, Pendle and Rossendale and Darwen, whereas yours adds Burnley and gives Rossendale a third distinct part in Rochdale, albeit those extra parts aren't very big. The difference in Preston is mostly because I like Chorley and Horwich, but Fulwood has been making up the numbers in rural seats for the past 37 years anyway, they probably wouldn't protest too much at their continuing separation from Preston. FWIW, seeing as it's fairly horrible however you draw it, I do prefer the greater concentration of the electorate around the A6/Longridge in my Mid Lancashire. The three borough seats I admit I don't like very much - though I think you could sensibly draw one in central Manchester with more of Salford. I have managed to redraw the area to get rid of them: Various other combinations are possible for the Manchester seats. OK I incorporated your Manchester area. Then I realised your Warrington S includes Penketh with I think no road link to the rest of the seat - not fatal but not ideal. So fixed that - and at the cost of a bit more crossing of council boundaries (it's a real shame you can't add Newton directly into Leigh instead of Culcheth) - freed up some scope to tidy up my version of Lancs. That enabled me to indulge my urban/rural obsession with Fulwood, put Wesham back together with Kirkham in Fylde, change the Blackpool wards in Fylde as someone suggested, and improve East Lancs.  Edit: further updated version which avoids the orphan wards in Cheshire and improves Chester. Only real downside now is the split of Ellesmere Port.  |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Jun 22, 2020 9:53:53 GMT
What's Bolton West ever done to offend you?
|
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,903
|
Post by YL on Jun 22, 2020 12:31:11 GMT
Not too many pitchforks required there! You've made a bit of a mess of my part of Gateshead - the boundaries between Low Fell and Chowdene don't really exist on the ground, and while Tyne Bridge isn't the worst place to cross the Tyne, it shouldn't really stretch all the way to Lemington (which has no connection with central Gateshead). But other than that, there are no horrible combinations which can be easily avoided (and your Billingham and Sedgefield is much nicer than mine). How about the following two three ward shuffles? Chowdene -> Gateshead East & Hebburn (joining Low Fell) Deckham (or Felling?) -> Tyne Bridge Dunston & Teams -> Blaydon Lemington -> Newcastle North Dene & South Gosforth -> Newcastle East & Wallsend (better I guess for the Dene part, not so much for the Gosforth part) Walker -> Tyne Bridge |
|
|
|
Post by bjornhattan on Jun 22, 2020 12:38:16 GMT
Not too many pitchforks required there! You've made a bit of a mess of my part of Gateshead - the boundaries between Low Fell and Chowdene don't really exist on the ground, and while Tyne Bridge isn't the worst place to cross the Tyne, it shouldn't really stretch all the way to Lemington (which has no connection with central Gateshead). But other than that, there are no horrible combinations which can be easily avoided (and your Billingham and Sedgefield is much nicer than mine). How about the following two three ward shuffles? Chowdene -> Gateshead East & Hebburn (joining Low Fell) Deckham (or Felling?) -> Tyne Bridge Dunston & Teams -> Blaydon Lemington -> Newcastle North Dene & South Gosforth -> Newcastle East & Wallsend (better I guess for the Dene part, not so much for the Gosforth part) Walker -> Tyne Bridge Happy with that. I'd move Deckham into Tyne Bridge (being more central within Gateshead). The Newcastle swaps are a bit harder to justify - you can't really split Walker from Walkergate - but again is slightly better than the alternative. |
|
|
|
Post by 🏴☠️ Neath West 🏴☠️ on Jun 22, 2020 19:25:41 GMT
It seems a shame not to do Gyetsid like this:  1 Gateshead 70616 Yes 2 Blaydon 74088 Yes |
|
|
|
Post by bjornhattan on Jun 22, 2020 20:04:37 GMT
It seems a shame not to do Gyetsid like this: 1 Gateshead 70616 Yes 2 Blaydon 74088 Yes That's about the best possible solution for Gateshead, but there's a problem when it comes to the rest of the North East. The south of the region needs 16 seats (Newcastle, North Tyneside, and Northumberland has 8 seats), but has 16.6 quotas, and so all of your seats will need to be fairly close to the upper limit. Sunderland and County Durham both have large wards which make this really difficult. |
|
|
|
Post by 🏴☠️ Neath West 🏴☠️ on Jun 22, 2020 22:19:27 GMT
It seems a shame not to do Gyetsid like this: 1 Gateshead 70616 Yes 2 Blaydon 74088 Yes That's about the best possible solution for Gateshead, but there's a problem when it comes to the rest of the North East. The south of the region needs 16 seats (Newcastle, North Tyneside, and Northumberland has 8 seats), but has 16.6 quotas, and so all of your seats will need to be fairly close to the upper limit. Sunderland and County Durham both have large wards which make this really difficult. So forget the obsolete Euro-Regions and put Redcar, Middlesbrough, and Thornaby back into Yorkshire. (But yes, whoever drew those Durham wards must have been on acid.) Edit: Or, heresy: put Consett into Hexham. |
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,744
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Jun 22, 2020 22:28:52 GMT
That's about the best possible solution for Gateshead, but there's a problem when it comes to the rest of the North East. The south of the region needs 16 seats (Newcastle, North Tyneside, and Northumberland has 8 seats), but has 16.6 quotas, and so all of your seats will need to be fairly close to the upper limit. Sunderland and County Durham both have large wards which make this really difficult. So forget the obsolete Euro-Regions and put Redcar, Middlesbrough, and Thornaby back into Yorkshire. (But yes, whoever drew those Durham wards must have been on acid.) Edit: Or, heresy: put Consett into Hexham. What is the electoral allocation for Teesside-in-Yorkshire? And on the same topic, Lincolnshire-in-Humberside. I've been drafting notes for a submission to the consultation on those points. |
|
|
|
Post by bjornhattan on Jun 22, 2020 22:51:50 GMT
So forget the obsolete Euro-Regions and put Redcar, Middlesbrough, and Thornaby back into Yorkshire. (But yes, whoever drew those Durham wards must have been on acid.) Edit: Or, heresy: put Consett into Hexham. What is the electoral allocation for Teesside-in-Yorkshire? And on the same topic, Lincolnshire-in-Humberside. I've been drafting notes for a submission to the consultation on those points. I have Teesside-in-Yorkshire as 237,712 electors, or 3.27 times the constituency quota. To make this area up to a fourth seat, you must either cross the boundary between East Cleveland and Whitby/Scarborough or between Yarm and Hambleton. The former will probably involve splitting Scarborough town, but the latter actually works well (though Richmond will need to go into a seat with Ripon/Skipton). I've included a map to show one possible arrangement, which retains the same basic pattern as now. 1: Northallerton and Yarm (71,325) 2: Redcar (69,572) 3: Middlesbrough and Thornaby (71,505) 4: Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland (71,228)  The electorate of Lincolnshire-in-Humberside is 235,723, or 3.25 times the constituency quota. Note for Teesside-in-Yorkshire, I haven't included the parts of Teesdale south of the Tees. I estimate its electorate at between 3,000 and 4,000 based on population. |
|
|
|
Post by 🏴☠️ Neath West 🏴☠️ on Jun 22, 2020 23:07:10 GMT
So forget the obsolete Euro-Regions and put Redcar, Middlesbrough, and Thornaby back into Yorkshire. (But yes, whoever drew those Durham wards must have been on acid.) Edit: Or, heresy: put Consett into Hexham. What is the electoral allocation for Teesside-in-Yorkshire? And on the same topic, Lincolnshire-in-Humberside. I've been drafting notes for a submission to the consultation on those points. The regions I currently have, using Lieutenancy Counties and Metropolitan/London Boroughs as the building blocks for creating regions, are: Barking and Dagenham, Havering, Redbridge, and Waltham Forest 647,463 8.92 Barnet, Brent, and Harrow 583,517 8.04 Barnsley, Kirklees, Rotherham, and Sheffield 1,073,750 14.79 Bedfordshire and Northamptonshire 991,414 13.65 Berkshire, Oxfordshire, and Surrey 1,962,699 27.03 Bexley, Greenwich, and Lewisham 515,714 7.10 Birmingham 735,443 10.13 Bolton and Wigan 438,606 6.04 Bradford 363,363 5.00 Bristol and Gloucestershire 1,002,154 13.80 Bromley, Croydon, Kingston upon Thames, and Merton 721,749 9.94 Buckinghamshire 585,524 8.06 Bury 144,969 2.00 Calderdale 147,917 2.04 Cambridgeshire 590,024 8.13 Camden, Hackney, and Islington 435,833 6.00 Cheshire and Wirral 1,072,722 14.77 Cornwall 438,680 6.04 Coventry 218,047 3.00 Cumbria, Lancashire, Oldham, Rochdale, and Tameside 1,983,789 27.32 Derbyshire 791,637 10.90 Devon, Dorset, and Wiltshire 2,035,036 28.03 Doncaster 216,250 2.98 Durham, South Tyneside, and Sunderland 965,971 13.30 Ealing, Hammersmith and Fulham, and Hillingdon 508,407 7.00 East Riding of Yorkshire and North Yorkshire 1,284,451 17.69 East Sussex and West Sussex 1,256,098 17.30 Enfield and Haringey 361,393 4.98 Essex and Hertfordshire 2,171,930 29.91 Gateshead 144,704 1.99 Hampshire 1,335,894 18.40 Herefordshire 142,248 1.96 Hounslow, Richmond upon Thames, and Wandsworth 501,362 6.90 Kensington and Chelsea, Westminster, and City of London 212,427 2.93 Kent 1,314,440 18.10 Knowsley, Liverpool, and St Helens 590,416 8.13 Lambeth 220,228 3.03 Leeds and Wakefield 798,754 11.00 Leicestershire and Rutland 781,075 10.76 Lincolnshire 788,629 10.86 Manchester, Salford, and Trafford 710,531 9.79 Newham and Tower Hamlets 360,813 4.97 Norfolk and Suffolk 1,244,794 17.14 Northumberland, Newcastle upon Tyne, and North Tyneside 573,612 7.90 Nottinghamshire 824,865 11.36
Sandwell 219,242 3.02 Sefton 216,796 2.99 Shropshire 377,272 5.20
Somerset 717,594 9.88 Southwark 209,571 2.89
Staffordshire, Dudley, Walsall, and Wolverhampton 1,441,406 19.85 Stockport 226,057 3.11
Sutton 143,715 1.98 Warwickshire and Solihull 581,956 8.01 Worcestershire 441,749 6.08 These round nicely through the Webster/St-Whatnot Method to get the right number of constituencies for a Wightless England. I have coloured my four most divergent regions (on average) in red. These actually all work. There probably need to be ward splits in some of the metropolitan ones to get them to work, but this feels to me to be the sort of level at which ward splits are preferable to knock-on carnage across large areas. |
|
bsjmcr
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,591
|
Post by bsjmcr on Jun 22, 2020 23:33:30 GMT
The three borough seats I admit I don't like very much - though I think you could sensibly draw one in central Manchester with more of Salford. I have managed to redraw the area to get rid of them: Various other combinations are possible for the Manchester seats. Not bad, not bad. Shouldn't Little Hulton go into Bolton South/Farnworth instead of splitting Walkden? A shame that Swinton is split, but there we are, nice to see Eccles as one to make up for this. Names: Manchester Central and Salford Quays Manchester North and Oldham West Manchester East (and Droylsden) Manchester Moss Side Manchester Withington Manchester Chorlton and Stretford Salford, Eccles (and Swinton South?)/Salford Central Worsley (and Swinton North?) Bolton East Bolton West and Atherton (ideally if Atherleigh was joined up instead of Tyldesley?) Bolton South / Farnworth (and Hulton - again if LH was there instead of Walkden North) Manchester Wythenshawe and Timperley? Sale and Urmston Altrincham and Tatton |
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,744
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Jun 23, 2020 1:29:18 GMT
What is the electoral allocation for Teesside-in-Yorkshire? And on the same topic, Lincolnshire-in-Humberside. I've been drafting notes for a submission to the consultation on those points. I have Teesside-in-Yorkshire as 237,712 electors, or 3.27 times the constituency quota. To make this area up to a fourth seat, you must either cross the boundary between East Cleveland and Whitby/Scarborough or between Yarm and Hambleton. The former will probably involve splitting Scarborough town, but the latter actually works well (though Richmond will need to go into a seat with Ripon/Skipton). I've included a map to show one possible arrangement, which retains the same basic pattern as now. 1: Northallerton and Yarm (71,325) 2: Redcar (69,572) 3: Middlesbrough and Thornaby (71,505) 4: Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland (71,228) The electorate of Lincolnshire-in-Humberside is 235,723, or 3.25 times the constituency quota. Note for Teesside-in-Yorkshire, I haven't included the parts of Teesdale south of the Tees. I estimate its electorate at between 3,000 and 4,000 based on population. Ooo, that Guisborough seat actually looks quite nice, and the Redcar/Gusiborough boundary is my idealised redrawn NYCC boundary, and does the northern edge of the Northallerton seat - which is also my prefered NYCC boundary. South Teesdale is quite acceptable in a County Durham seat. |
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,744
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Jun 23, 2020 1:37:15 GMT
The electorate of Lincolnshire-in-Humberside is 235,723, or 3.25 times the constituency quota. Hmmm. Would putting West Trent (Isle of Axholm, etc.) in Yorkshire drop it to 3.00? That would be nice, as well as useful. (The Trent and Idle should be the real Yorkshire boundary.) |
|
|
|
Post by bjornhattan on Jun 23, 2020 3:37:04 GMT
The electorate of Lincolnshire-in-Humberside is 235,723, or 3.25 times the constituency quota. Hmmm. Would putting West Trent (Isle of Axholm, etc.) in Yorkshire drop it to 3.00? That would be nice, as well as useful. (The Trent and Idle should be the real Yorkshire boundary.) The Isle of Axholme wards (which seem to be the whole area west of the Trent) have an electorate of 17,799, so that leaves Lincolnshire-on-Humber with 217,924 - I think that's 3.00 exactly. So as long as you're happy to put Axholme in with Goole or Thorne, that would work well. |
|
|
|
Post by bjornhattan on Jun 23, 2020 3:40:17 GMT
I have Teesside-in-Yorkshire as 237,712 electors, or 3.27 times the constituency quota. To make this area up to a fourth seat, you must either cross the boundary between East Cleveland and Whitby/Scarborough or between Yarm and Hambleton. The former will probably involve splitting Scarborough town, but the latter actually works well (though Richmond will need to go into a seat with Ripon/Skipton). I've included a map to show one possible arrangement, which retains the same basic pattern as now. 1: Northallerton and Yarm (71,325) 2: Redcar (69,572) 3: Middlesbrough and Thornaby (71,505) 4: Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland (71,228) The electorate of Lincolnshire-in-Humberside is 235,723, or 3.25 times the constituency quota. Note for Teesside-in-Yorkshire, I haven't included the parts of Teesdale south of the Tees. I estimate its electorate at between 3,000 and 4,000 based on population. Ooo, that Guisborough seat actually looks quite nice, and the Redcar/Gusiborough boundary is my idealised redrawn NYCC boundary, and does the northern edge of the Northallerton seat - which is also my prefered NYCC boundary. South Teesdale is quite acceptable in a County Durham seat. I'm not a huge fan of the Guisborough seat - it takes in too much of Middlesbrough's southern suburbs for my liking. I tend to prefer having urban Middlesbrough (including Eston, Thornaby, etc) entirely within two seats, but I couldn't find a way to get "Redcar and Cleveland" within quota without splitting Redcar or Guisborough. |
|
