|
|
Post by greenhert on Aug 5, 2020 16:36:48 GMT
I'd like to add that Neath West's Maldon is particularly good. It's the old Colchester South & Maldon without the urban bits of Colchester. That was a ridiculous seat, but only because of those bits As was the 1983-97 seat of Colchester North, whose successor seat was North Essex (it was subsequently succeeded by Harwich & North Essex). We may see a Colchester North constituency reappear, though, albeit without any Tendring wards. Colchester South & Maldon was completely unnecessary. |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Aug 5, 2020 16:40:42 GMT
It's the old Colchester South & Maldon without the urban bits of Colchester. That was a ridiculous seat, but only because of those bits As was the 1983-97 seat of Colchester North, whose successor seat was North Essex (it was subsequently succeeded by Harwich & North Essex). We may see a Colchester North constituency reappear, though, albeit without any Tendring wards. No, you won't. |
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,903
|
Post by YL on Aug 5, 2020 18:10:34 GMT
]The main differences with YL's plan are in the eastern half. As with his plan, there's a new seat in the south of the county; but instead of extending it to the coast I've kept my version inland and taken the southern part of Maidstone district. This has allowed Faversham to be much more of a north Kent seat, taking in Whitstable; in turn allowing a better division of Thanet than the current arrangement (which YL has preserved). Ashford now stays within the eponymous district; and although Canterbury now awkwardly takes two wards apiece from Shepway and Dover, there are no orphans anywhere in the county. I am amazed. Not because I think there is anything wrong with your plan, but because you are proposing making changes (beyond realignment to new ward boundaries) to two adjoining in quota seats in a corner of the map, and are even apparently making a point of doing so. Next you'll be proposing a split ward! |
|
|
|
Post by islington on Aug 5, 2020 18:44:08 GMT
I'm pleading guilty, m'lud.
I've always disliked the current Thanet seats: badly drawn and worse named. So it would be a pleasure to get rid of them. Besides, having one seat entirely within the Isle of Thanet means one fewer LA boundary crossed, and in any case Sandwich is an ancient east Kent town, one of the Cinque Ports, and belongs with Deal and Dover rather than with the tawdry once-genteel seaside resorts of Thanet (by which criterion, if anything is to be added to Thanet, Herne Bay is a far better fit).
But, as you point out, the Thanet seats are both within range and if you really want to retain them it can be done, without disrupting the entire map, by keeping Aylesham in Dover and removing Alkham instead; and putting Sturry back into Canterbury. Still no orphans, but I'm uneasy about giving Canterbury a coastline on the Strait of Dover.
|
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,742 
|
Post by Adrian on Aug 6, 2020 4:24:30 GMT
Yorkshire & the top bit of Lincolnshire, based on 53 seats
I worked this plan out a couple of weeks ago but thanks to Kevin, I've now been able to map it. I've chosen to deal with the Axholme problem by having a Selby & Howden seat.
York: Inner 70735, Outer 71612
North Yorks: Richmond 73776, Harrogate 71416, Skipton & Ripon 71677, Scarborough 72191, Thirsk & Malton 75455
North Yorks/Humberside: Selby 74585*
North/Leeds: Wetherby 71139*
Leeds: North 72648*, North East 74826*, Central 76160, North West 75521*, South East 72296*, West 73648*
Leeds/Kirklees: Morley 75269*
Kirklees: Batley & Spen 75640*, Dewsbury 73673*, Huddersfield 75971*, Colne Valley 74594*
Bradford: West 71585, East 74205, Keighley 73384, Shipley 74522, South 69667
Calderdale: Halifax 74503*, Calder Valley 73414*
Wakefield: Wakefield 69715, Agbrigg 74150, Pontefract 72989
Wakefield/Barnsley: Hemsworth & Dearne 72929
Barnsley: Barnsley 72442, Penistone 70853
Sheffield: Hillsborough 73358*, Brightside 70676*, Handsworth 75290*, Heeley 72488*, Hallam 75160*
Sheffield/Rotherham: Wentworth 72165*
Rotherham: Rotherham 70360, Rother Valley 73678
Doncaster: Don Valley 71167, Central 69419, North 75664
Humberside: Hull North 74813, Hull South 75916, Haltemprice 75406*, Beverley 75550*, Bridlington 73380*, Goole 72892*, Scunthorpe 71740, Grimsby N & Brigg 72301, Grimsby S & Cleethorpes 73883
|
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,903
|
Post by YL on Aug 6, 2020 7:42:32 GMT
Yorkshire & the top bit of Lincolnshire, based on 53 seats I worked this plan out a couple of weeks ago but thanks to Kevin, I've now been able to map it. I've chosen to deal with the Axholme problem by having a Selby & Howden seat. I like most of this. In particular, the general layout in West and North Yorkshire looks good, and keeps the Leeds component of the Wetherby seat away from the main built up area. I would personally prefer to bury the ghost of Humberside once and for all and put Axholme somewhere else (preferably Lincolnshire of course, but I don't see the BCE crossing the regional boundary) but I see why you've done what you've done, and splitting Wolds Weighton (the 28 parish ward, so not hard to split) allows for a less bad outcome than some. However there are two specific things I think you've got wrong in Sheffield. Firstly, if there's too much electorate in the Ecclesfield wards for your plan I would split East, not West: take off the unparished area in the south, polling districts KE and KH. Secondly, Dore in Heeley used to be a possible compromise -- it really fits better in Hallam but was distinct enough that it could go elsewhere if necessary -- but the 2016 ward review moved areas which are really Ecclesall into Dore & Totley ward, so I think it's now a mistake. I haven't checked the numbers, but you could probably simply swap it for Nether Edge & Sharrow; that would also fit better in Hallam IMO but it's less clear cut. |
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on Aug 6, 2020 8:09:05 GMT
Yorkshire & the top bit of Lincolnshire, based on 53 seats I worked this plan out a couple of weeks ago but thanks to Kevin, I've now been able to map it. I've chosen to deal with the Axholme problem by having a Selby & Howden seat. York: Inner 70735, Outer 71612 North Yorks: Richmond 73776, Harrogate 71416, Skipton & Ripon 71677, Scarborough 72191, Thirsk & Malton 75455 North Yorks/Humberside: Selby 74585* North/Leeds: Wetherby 71139* Leeds: North 72648*, North East 74826*, Central 76160, North West 75521*, South East 72296*, West 73648* Leeds/Kirklees: Morley 75269* Kirklees: Batley & Spen 75640*, Dewsbury 73673*, Huddersfield 75971*, Colne Valley 74594* Bradford: West 71585, East 74205, Keighley 73384, Shipley 74522, South 69667 Calderdale: Halifax 74503*, Calder Valley 73414* Wakefield: Wakefield 69715, Agbrigg 74150, Pontefract 72989 Wakefield/Barnsley: Hemsworth & Dearne 72929 Barnsley: Barnsley 72442, Penistone 70853 Sheffield: Hillsborough 73358*, Brightside 70676*, Handsworth 75290*, Heeley 72488*, Hallam 75160* Sheffield/Rotherham: Wentworth 72165* Rotherham: Rotherham 70360, Rother Valley 73678 Doncaster: Don Valley 71167, Central 69419, North 75664 Humberside: Hull North 74813, Hull South 75916, Haltemprice 75406*, Beverley 75550*, Bridlington 73380*, Goole 72892*, Scunthorpe 71740, Grimsby N & Brigg 72301, Grimsby S & Cleethorpes 73883 I'm not sure in your efforts not to say Humberside calling it the top bit of Lincolnshire is actually much of an improvement.  |
|
|
|
Post by islington on Aug 6, 2020 13:13:39 GMT
Yorkshire & the top bit of Lincolnshire, based on 53 seats I worked this plan out a couple of weeks ago but thanks to Kevin, I've now been able to map it. I've chosen to deal with the Axholme problem by having a Selby & Howden seat. York: Inner 70735, Outer 71612 North Yorks: Richmond 73776, Harrogate 71416, Skipton & Ripon 71677, Scarborough 72191, Thirsk & Malton 75455 North Yorks/Humberside: Selby 74585* North/Leeds: Wetherby 71139* Leeds: North 72648*, North East 74826*, Central 76160, North West 75521*, South East 72296*, West 73648* Leeds/Kirklees: Morley 75269* Kirklees: Batley & Spen 75640*, Dewsbury 73673*, Huddersfield 75971*, Colne Valley 74594* Bradford: West 71585, East 74205, Keighley 73384, Shipley 74522, South 69667 Calderdale: Halifax 74503*, Calder Valley 73414* Wakefield: Wakefield 69715, Agbrigg 74150, Pontefract 72989 Wakefield/Barnsley: Hemsworth & Dearne 72929 Barnsley: Barnsley 72442, Penistone 70853 Sheffield: Hillsborough 73358*, Brightside 70676*, Handsworth 75290*, Heeley 72488*, Hallam 75160* Sheffield/Rotherham: Wentworth 72165* Rotherham: Rotherham 70360, Rother Valley 73678 Doncaster: Don Valley 71167, Central 69419, North 75664 Humberside: Hull North 74813, Hull South 75916, Haltemprice 75406*, Beverley 75550*, Bridlington 73380*, Goole 72892*, Scunthorpe 71740, Grimsby N & Brigg 72301, Grimsby S & Cleethorpes 73883 Wow, Adrian, you're like a kid let loose in the sweet shop.
Am I correct in thinking that the Goole seat includes parts of no fewer than three split wards?
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Aug 6, 2020 13:22:42 GMT
Whereas I'm the kid who can't even get the lid off the sodding jar  |
|
|
|
Post by ClevelandYorks on Aug 6, 2020 13:59:55 GMT
Whereas I'm the kid who can't even get the lid off the sodding jar You mean you can’t access the new features? Look up how to clear the cache on your browser, it worked for me |
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,742
|
Post by Adrian on Aug 6, 2020 16:38:09 GMT
Yorkshire & the top bit of Lincolnshire, based on 53 seats I worked this plan out a couple of weeks ago but thanks to Kevin, I've now been able to map it. I've chosen to deal with the Axholme problem by having a Selby & Howden seat. I like most of this. In particular, the general layout in West and North Yorkshire looks good, and keeps the Leeds component of the Wetherby seat away from the main built up area. I would personally prefer to bury the ghost of Humberside once and for all and put Axholme somewhere else (preferably Lincolnshire of course, but I don't see the BCE crossing the regional boundary) but I see why you've done what you've done, and splitting Wolds Weighton (the 28 parish ward, so not hard to split) allows for a less bad outcome than some. However there are two specific things I think you've got wrong in Sheffield. Firstly, if there's too much electorate in the Ecclesfield wards for your plan I would split East, not West: take off the unparished area in the south, polling districts KE and KH. Secondly, Dore in Heeley used to be a possible compromise -- it really fits better in Hallam but was distinct enough that it could go elsewhere if necessary -- but the 2016 ward review moved areas which are really Ecclesall into Dore & Totley ward, so I think it's now a mistake. I haven't checked the numbers, but you could probably simply swap it for Nether Edge & Sharrow; that would also fit better in Hallam IMO but it's less clear cut. Don't get too hung up on my plans for Leeds and Sheffield. I'm not from Yorkshire so such details are for someone else to decide. My opinion on the details only carries weight in places like Cheshire and Birmingham that I know well. My purpose is to show how a metropolitan region can/should be dealt with by using the local authorities as a baseline. Large wards should be broken down where necessary to avoid bacon strips, multiple crossings of LA boundaries, splitting communities, etc. islington East Yorkshire has huge wards (which are also problematic from the point of view of local democracy) and any kind of respect for their integrity is misplaced. There's no harm at all in splitting them into their component parishes. The real issue here isn't ward splitting (which is a distraction) but what to do about the big question of South Humberside and the smaller question of Axholme. I feel the need to keep the three Axholme wards together but can it be justified if it has knock-on effects in Grimsby, Selby and Hull? |
|
|
|
Post by islington on Aug 6, 2020 17:02:29 GMT
Adrian -
On wards, I understand your position but I respectfully disagree. I take wards as I find them: I don't spend time worrying about whether they are well or ill drawn; that's a matter for the local government boundary review, a separate exercise. I do happen to agree with you that the wards in Humberside are grotetesquely large, but there it is. We work with what we've got.
On Axholme, I agree it would be good to keep the three wards together, but for me it's a 'nice-to-have', not a 'must-have'. I couldn't see on your map how it affects Grimsby, but if it forces a split through the heart of the town, then the cure's worse than the disease.
|
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,742
|
Post by Adrian on Aug 6, 2020 18:59:43 GMT
Adrian - On wards, I understand your position but I respectfully disagree. I take wards as I find them: I don't spend time worrying about whether they are well or ill drawn; that's a matter for the local government boundary review, a separate exercise. I do happen to agree with you that the wards in Humberside are grotetesquely large, but there it is. We work with what we've got. On Axholme, I agree it would be good to keep the three wards together, but for me it's a 'nice-to-have', not a 'must-have'. I couldn't see on your map how it affects Grimsby, but if it forces a split through the heart of the town, then the cure's worse than the disease. Wards are there as part of local democracy. They are not there as part of national democracy.* Their use as building blocks is a matter of convenience, and slavish adherence to them is a matter of expediency, which equates to not doing one's job properly. I do stick to ward boundaries as much as I think is reasonable. For example, the seats in Wakefield aren't ideal, but there are quite a lot of conflicting options if you split wards, so it's probably best to go for the convenience of the non-split solution. But in the case of Calderdale the only non-split solutions involve crossing the LA boundary, which is unacceptable in principle (although there are circumstances where it might be justified). Splitting LAs and communities is where justification is required. Splitting wards requires no justification. I have divided Grimsby town between seats, which I don't normally do, but as I said about Leeds and Sheffield, this is a matter best judged by local people. *Before you say that the same is true of LA boundaries, the difference is that LA boundaries are an essential component of "local ties" - which we should be keeping in mind when considering which plan is most effective in representing not only our people but also our communities - and an essential component of our national fabric. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 6, 2020 19:25:12 GMT
Fairly pleased with this arrangement for Avon and Gloucestershire, with two seats crossing the Bristol/S Gloucestershire boundary:   Weston-super-Mare - 70701 North Somerset - 70296 Midsomer Norton - 70810 Bath - 71681 Bristol South East - 74597 Bristol South - 72213 Kingswood - 72517 Bristol North East - 76177 Bristol West - 74611 Bristol North West - 75983 Bradley Stoke & Yate - 72595 Thornbury & Dursley - 70748 Stroud & Quedgeley - 69809 Cotswolds - 69945 Cheltenham - 69108 Tewkesbury - 73386 Gloucester - 72511 Forest of Dean - 71879 I'm not wild about dividing Patchway and Bradley Stoke between constituencies, but I'm quite pleased with how naturally doing that allows the Bristol seats to fall. Not unreasonable, but Bristol/South Gloucestershire is probably better considered with the rest of Gloucestershire than Somerset. Otherwise you have to cross the Gloucs/Wilts border |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Aug 6, 2020 20:04:41 GMT
Fairly pleased with this arrangement for Avon and Gloucestershire, with two seats crossing the Bristol/S Gloucestershire boundary: Weston-super-Mare - 70701 North Somerset - 70296 Midsomer Norton - 70810 Bath - 71681 Bristol South East - 74597 Bristol South - 72213 Kingswood - 72517 Bristol North East - 76177 Bristol West - 74611 Bristol North West - 75983 Bradley Stoke & Yate - 72595 Thornbury & Dursley - 70748 Stroud & Quedgeley - 69809 Cotswolds - 69945 Cheltenham - 69108 Tewkesbury - 73386 Gloucester - 72511 Forest of Dean - 71879 I'm not wild about dividing Patchway and Bradley Stoke between constituencies, but I'm quite pleased with how naturally doing that allows the Bristol seats to fall. Not unreasonable, but Bristol/South Gloucestershire is probably better considered with the rest of Gloucestershire than Somerset. Otherwise you have to cross the Gloucs/Wilts border The second picture hasn't loaded properly (I'll fix that), but if you look at the seat names it ought to be reasonably obvious that that's what I've done. |
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Aug 6, 2020 20:05:07 GMT
Adrian - On wards, I understand your position but I respectfully disagree. I take wards as I find them: I don't spend time worrying about whether they are well or ill drawn; that's a matter for the local government boundary review, a separate exercise. I do happen to agree with you that the wards in Humberside are grotetesquely large, but there it is. We work with what we've got. On Axholme, I agree it would be good to keep the three wards together, but for me it's a 'nice-to-have', not a 'must-have'. I couldn't see on your map how it affects Grimsby, but if it forces a split through the heart of the town, then the cure's worse than the disease. [The East Riding of Yorkshire wards, you mean. The North Lincolnshire/North East Lincolnshire wards are sensibly sized, as are the Hull wards.] |
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,903
|
Post by YL on Aug 6, 2020 20:30:08 GMT
On Axholme, I agree it would be good to keep the three wards together, but for me it's a 'nice-to-have', not a 'must-have'. I couldn't see on your map how it affects Grimsby, but if it forces a split through the heart of the town, then the cure's worse than the disease. It doesn't: you can have a Grimsby & Cleethorpes seat covering most of the urban area (Scartho nibbled off, which is not ideal, but you're not going to get ideal in this area with that regional boundary) and the obvious Scunthorpe seat, with a leftovers seat covering the area between them and no need to cross the Trent. |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Aug 6, 2020 21:43:36 GMT
The East Yorkshire wards are large, but if you assign 6 seats to East Yorkshire and Hull and chuck the Isle of Axholme in with Doncaster instead then you can still get perfectly satisfactory seats out of them without ward splitting.
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,744
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Aug 6, 2020 22:18:53 GMT
The East Yorkshire wards are large, but if you assign 6 seats to East Yorkshire and Hull and chuck the Isle of Axholme in with Doncaster instead then you can still get perfectly satisfactory seats out of them without ward splitting. Isle of Axholme should be in Yorkshire anyway, why on earth does the border stray randomly away from the Trent like that. Until about 1850 there was no way to cross to Lincolnshire without getting wet. |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Aug 7, 2020 5:40:09 GMT
Whereas I'm the kid who can't even get the lid off the sodding jar You mean you can’t access the new features? Look up how to clear the cache on your browser, it worked for me I get the polygon thing for splitting wards which I was just being inept in trying to operate but I was expecting to be able to split by polling district. I may have misunderstood and that is only if you load the London polling district map at the outset, but I got the impression this was going to be possible for individual wards with the new release. I don't think it's a browser issue |
|
