|
|
Post by islington on Aug 1, 2020 14:33:05 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Aug 1, 2020 14:53:12 GMT
 src=" |
|
|
|
Post by AdminSTB on Aug 1, 2020 14:59:07 GMT
islington , if you want your images to display, try entering the BB Code in the manner shown below: [img style="max-width:100%;" src="https://i.ibb.co/85hQRNF/Screenshot-2020-08-01-at-15-29-35.png" alt="Herts/Beds"]In fact, if you click on the "Quote" button on minionofmidas's posts, it should show you how he did it.
|
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,742 
|
Post by Adrian on Aug 1, 2020 16:01:59 GMT
Sussex (17 seats)
Hove 74767 - no change
Brighton Pavilion/Kemptown (2 seats) 149655 - The border would only be slightly different to what it is now. cf. Worthing.
Eastbourne 70814 - the borough
Hastings & Rye 75852
Bexhill & Battle 70122
Lewes & Uckfield 72497 - This allows the Hailsham/Polegate/Willingdon area to be united in one seat.
Wealden 70834
Mid Sussex 71266
East Grinstead 73912
Crawley 74712 - the borough
Horsham 75536
Littlehampton, Arundel & Chanctonbury 76077
Worthing East 76159* - includes WC3
Worthing West 76028* - It makes sense to move the boundary slightly rather than make a much more significant change.
Chichester 72851 - Constituency border follows 95% of borough border.
Bognor 75016 - You can't drive directly from Bognor to Selsey, but as you know I don't think this matters.
|
|
|
|
Post by islington on Aug 1, 2020 16:21:30 GMT
It seems everyone else has a flawed map of Staffs, so here's mine.
The main drawback is a Stafford seat that extends all the way to the Derbys border.
I'm eternally grateful to Minion for his help with posting maps.
Newcastle-under-Lyme - 73167 Stoke-on-Trent N - 71971
Stoke-on-Trent S - 71104 Leek - 71027 Stone - 72492 Burton - 69417
Stafford - 75019 W Staffs - 69658 Cannock - 73904
Lichfield - 75715
Tamworth - 73346 Kingswinford (partly cut off at the bottom of the map, but I've posted it before) - 71626
 |
|
andrewp
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,573
Member is Online
|
Post by andrewp on Aug 1, 2020 17:24:22 GMT
It seems everyone else has a flawed map of Staffs, so here's mine.
The main drawback is a Stafford seat that extends all the way to the Derbys border.
I'm eternally grateful to Minion for his help with posting maps.
Newcastle-under-Lyme - 73167 Stoke-on-Trent N - 71971
Stoke-on-Trent S - 71104 Leek - 71027 Stone - 72492 Burton - 69417
Stafford - 75019 W Staffs - 69658 Cannock - 73904
Lichfield - 75715
Tamworth - 73346 Kingswinford (partly cut off at the bottom of the map, but I've posted it before) - 71626
The current Burton constituency always seems an odd shape to me, and most new schemes seem to keep it roughly the same. I assume there’s no feasible way of it extending South without messing up Tamworth and or Lichfield? |
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Aug 1, 2020 18:37:01 GMT
It seems everyone else has a flawed map of Staffs, so here's mine.
The main drawback is a Stafford seat that extends all the way to the Derbys border.
I'm eternally grateful to Minion for his help with posting maps.
Newcastle-under-Lyme - 73167 Stoke-on-Trent N - 71971
Stoke-on-Trent S - 71104 Leek - 71027 Stone - 72492 Burton - 69417
Stafford - 75019 W Staffs - 69658 Cannock - 73904
Lichfield - 75715
Tamworth - 73346 Kingswinford (partly cut off at the bottom of the map, but I've posted it before) - 71626
Similar to mine, except I called the West Staffordshire seat Penkridge, and split a ward in Wolverhampton to draw better seats in Wolverhampton/Walsall. Also, the Newchapel and Kidsgrove wards should be part of Stoke-on-Trent North, not Staffordshire Moorlands or any successor thereof. |
|
|
|
Post by John Chanin on Aug 1, 2020 18:47:49 GMT
You can construct a scheme that links Uttoxeter with Stone, and Burton with Lichfield, although I’m not recommending it.
Although I said I wouldn’t play I have looked at the West Midlands (my home area) and have come up with two plausible schemes for Staffordshire and the Black Country that seem to be different from any posted here.
|
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,742
|
Post by Adrian on Aug 1, 2020 20:09:31 GMT
The seats are much better if the cross-border seat is Aldridge & Burntwood.
|
|
|
|
Post by lancastrian on Aug 1, 2020 20:12:22 GMT
You can construct a scheme that links Uttoxeter with Stone, and Burton with Lichfield, although I’m not recommending it. Although I said I wouldn’t play I have looked at the West Midlands (my home area) and have come up with two plausible schemes for Staffordshire and the Black Country that seem to be different from any posted here. Alternatively, using islington 's plan with Lichfield and Brownhills, you can have Burton with all the East Staffs wards east of Uttoxeter and an orphan ward from Lichfield, move Stone into the Stafford constituency and Uttoxeter into 'Stone' (so SE Stoke, Uttoxeter and Cheadle). Or combine Uttoxeter with Leek and Cheadle and reshuffle Stoke. I'm not sure either option is any better than the current Burton constituency though. |
|
|
|
Post by islington on Aug 1, 2020 20:25:59 GMT
You can construct a scheme that links Uttoxeter with Stone, and Burton with Lichfield, although I’m not recommending it. Although I said I wouldn’t play I have looked at the West Midlands (my home area) and have come up with two plausible schemes for Staffordshire and the Black Country that seem to be different from any posted here. Alternatively, using islington 's plan with Lichfield and Brownhills, you can have Burton with all the East Staffs wards east of Uttoxeter and an orphan ward from Lichfield, move Stone into the Stafford constituency and Uttoxeter into 'Stone' (so SE Stoke, Uttoxeter and Cheadle). Or combine Uttoxeter with Leek and Cheadle and reshuffle Stoke. I'm not sure either option is any better than the current Burton constituency though. I agree. The difficulty isn't about extending Burton to the south, which is perfectly feasible and, taken in isolation, probably an improvement. But the big problem is what then to do with Uttoxeter: solutions are possible, of course, but they all look pretty grim. |
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Aug 2, 2020 2:56:12 GMT
Alternatively, using islington 's plan with Lichfield and Brownhills, you can have Burton with all the East Staffs wards east of Uttoxeter and an orphan ward from Lichfield, move Stone into the Stafford constituency and Uttoxeter into 'Stone' (so SE Stoke, Uttoxeter and Cheadle). Or combine Uttoxeter with Leek and Cheadle and reshuffle Stoke. I'm not sure either option is any better than the current Burton constituency though. I agree. The difficulty isn't about extending Burton to the south, which is perfectly feasible and, taken in isolation, probably an improvement. But the big problem is what then to do with Uttoxeter: solutions are possible, of course, but they all look pretty grim. You make it sound as if the options include demolition of the town. |
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,904
Member is Online
|
Post by YL on Aug 2, 2020 6:25:43 GMT
It seems everyone else has a flawed map of Staffs, so here's mine. The main drawback is a Stafford seat that extends all the way to the Derbys border. If you don't put Brownhills into Lichfield, there's no need to change either Lichfield or Tamworth other than assigning the wards currently split between the constituencies to one of them. So those areas going into Stafford is ultimately a knock on effect of refusing to split a ward in distant Wolverhampton. I don't know what you've done in Shropshire, but I came to the conclusion that the numbers in Staffs+Stoke+Dudley fitted well with those in Shropshire (including Telford & Wrekin) and that that allowed no crossing of the Herefordshire/Shropshire border and hence essentially no change in Herefordshire. Hence Shifnal and Albrighton making the numbers up in a mostly Staffordshire seat. (Plan posted way back.) Shropshire can of course be treated on its own, but with some difficulty. |
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on Aug 2, 2020 7:50:22 GMT
I agree. The difficulty isn't about extending Burton to the south, which is perfectly feasible and, taken in isolation, probably an improvement. But the big problem is what then to do with Uttoxeter: solutions are possible, of course, but they all look pretty grim. You make it sound as if the options include demolition of the town. if only.. |
|
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 Aug 2, 2020 8:17:58 GMT
You make it sound as if the options include demolition of the town. if only.. The main problem with Uttoxeter is that it sounds like an item of surgical equipment for use in treating the pox. |
|
|
|
Post by islington on Aug 2, 2020 10:10:30 GMT
It seems everyone else has a flawed map of Staffs, so here's mine. The main drawback is a Stafford seat that extends all the way to the Derbys border. If you don't put Brownhills into Lichfield, there's no need to change either Lichfield or Tamworth other than assigning the wards currently split between the constituencies to one of them. So those areas going into Stafford is ultimately a knock on effect of refusing to split a ward in distant Wolverhampton. I don't know what you've done in Shropshire, but I came to the conclusion that the numbers in Staffs+Stoke+Dudley fitted well with those in Shropshire (including Telford & Wrekin) and that that allowed no crossing of the Herefordshire/Shropshire border and hence essentially no change in Herefordshire. Hence Shifnal and Albrighton making the numbers up in a mostly Staffordshire seat. (Plan posted way back.) Shropshire can of course be treated on its own, but with some difficulty. YL, on your first point: not really. It's true that if you put Brownhills back into Walsall you could then keep the wards in question to Lichfield; but that's only half the story because you'd then have to make up the numbers in Stafford from somewhere, with substantial knock-on implications for the rest of the county. Whereas Lichfield and Tamworth LAs, taken together, can be assigned two whole seats. So it's not the need to accommodate Brownhills that has driven me to put these wards in the Stafford seat; it's the fact that it's the least bad way of finding the necessary numbers for Stafford.
On your second point, I've treated Shropshire separately for five seats. I couldn't improve on the plan someone posted way upthread for this. It's not pretty, but it's not so bad as all that. And, with Cheswardine in the E Salop seat and Prees and Hodnet in Oswestry, it does highlight what I might describe as the Tern Hill polyp: namely a small westward extension of Cheswardine ward that is attached to the rest of it only by what appears to be a point boundary. I presume this does not breach the expectation that seats be contiguous.
|
|
|
|
Post by islington on Aug 2, 2020 12:21:38 GMT
I agree. The difficulty isn't about extending Burton to the south, which is perfectly feasible and, taken in isolation, probably an improvement. But the big problem is what then to do with Uttoxeter: solutions are possible, of course, but they all look pretty grim. You make it sound as if the options include demolition of the town. It's not too late to insert a suitable provision into the Bill currently before Parliament.
"Insert new section
() If, in the reasonable opinion of the relevant Commission, the most appropriate arrangement of constituencies in a given area is not possible by reason only of an excess of registered electors in a specific ward or wards, the Commission may at its sole discretion require the armed forces of the Crown to undertake a nuclear strike against the ward or wards in question to bring the relevant constituency within quota."
Should go through nem con.
|
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,742
|
Post by Adrian on Aug 2, 2020 17:16:01 GMT
I agree. The difficulty isn't about extending Burton to the south, which is perfectly feasible and, taken in isolation, probably an improvement. But the big problem is what then to do with Uttoxeter: solutions are possible, of course, but they all look pretty grim. You make it sound as if the options include demolition of the town. I sense Margery's hand in this. |
|
|
|
Post by islington on Aug 2, 2020 17:44:15 GMT
Sussex (17 seats) Hove 74767 - no change Brighton Pavilion/Kemptown (2 seats) 149655 - The border would only be slightly different to what it is now. cf. Worthing. Eastbourne 70814 - the borough Hastings & Rye 75852 Bexhill & Battle 70122 Lewes & Uckfield 72497 - This allows the Hailsham/Polegate/Willingdon area to be united in one seat. Wealden 70834 Mid Sussex 71266 East Grinstead 73912 Crawley 74712 - the borough Horsham 75536 Littlehampton, Arundel & Chanctonbury 76077 Worthing East 76159* - includes WC3 Worthing West 76028* - It makes sense to move the boundary slightly rather than make a much more significant change. Chichester 72851 - Constituency border follows 95% of borough border. Bognor 75016 - You can't drive directly from Bognor to Selsey, but as you know I don't think this matters. Adrian, I particularly like the Lewes & Uckfield combination because, as you say, it allows you to keep together the messy confusion of wards in the Polegate/Willingdon area.
On the other hand I do feel that an extra seat for Sussex offers an opportunity that ought to be taken to put Worthing - or as much of it as possible - into a single seat. On further reflection, compared with my earlier plan posted weeks ago, I think Goring is the most natural ward to remove; but this has knock-on implications.
I'll post a map in a moment.
|
|
|
|
Post by emidsanorak on Aug 2, 2020 17:56:54 GMT
Just testing to see if I can do this. 1 Leek 73640 Yes 2 SoT North 73446 Yes 3 NuL 69709 Yes 4 SoT Central 70305 Yes 5 SoT South 70048 Yes 6 Stafford 72467 Yes 7 Burton 75475 Yes 8 Penkridge & Shifnal 72299 Yes 9 Lichfield 74335 Yes 10 Cannock 73904 Yes 11 Tamworth 74392 Yes 12 Kingswinford & Wombourne 71626 Yes  |
|
