Vote UK Almanac of British Politics?

[Chris from Brum]

I hope you mean extraterritorial rather than extraterrestrial, or has the invasion from Mars started already?

[bjornhattan]

Mar 28, 2020 7:36:08 GMT Chris from Brum said:

I hope you mean extraterritorial rather than extraterrestrial, or has the invasion from Mars started already?

It is, I must have misread it once and then got confused throughout. The technical description is actually "U Activities of extraterritorial organisations and bodies", so it presumably also applies to those working for the UN, and maybe the EU as well (not sure about the last one - is the EU classed as extraterritorial or public administration?)

[carlton43]

Mar 27, 2020 22:19:42 GMT bjornhattan said:

Mar 27, 2020 16:41:08 GMT jamie said:

Employment by industry could be interesting. We often hear claims about how important x industry is to a constituency, so data to back up (or disprove) would be useful. 

I've calculated a value comparing the proportion of workers in each industry (as defined by the census) with the national average for every constituency. For example, if 15% of the population of a constituency worked in education, that would be divided by the 10% who work in education nationally to give a figure of 1.5.

The top ten values for this measure (including the percentages working in that industry in brackets) are:

1. West Suffolk, Extraterrestrial organisations: 71.0 (5.7%)
2. South West Norfolk, Extraterrestrial organisations: 18.0 (1.4%)
3. Cities of London and Westminster, Extraterrestrial organisations: 16.6 (1.3%)
4. Harrogate and Knaresborough, Extraterrestrial organisations: 13.6 (1.1%)
5. Leicester East, Textiles manufacturing: 13.4 (5.4%)
6. Huntingdon, Extraterrestrial organisations: 12.7 (1.0%)
7. Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland, Mining: 11.7 (2.1%)
8. Kensington, Extraterrestrial organisations: 11.5 (0.9%)
9. St Austell and Newquay, Mining: 11.4 (2.0%)
10. Westminster North, Extraterrestrial organisations: 10.3 (0.8%)

Do note that this measure is biased towards smaller industries, which is why extraterrestrial organisations (I'm assuming this is embassies and foreign military bases rather than flying saucers) features so heavily. Another figure which may be of interest is 23.1% - this is the proportion of workers employed in Education in Cambridge, and is the highest proportion of workers in one industry in any constituency. At present all of this data is for England and Wales only, since there doesn't seem to be a lookup table converting Scottish or Northern Irish OAs to constituencies, and while I have found another source for Scotland I'm yet to actually see how that is structured.

So in West Suffolk 71% of electors are Actual Aliens?

Wonder why that is?  Might believe it of Norfolk.

[carlton43]

Mar 28, 2020 8:35:12 GMT bjornhattan said:

Mar 28, 2020 7:36:08 GMT Chris from Brum said:

I hope you mean extraterritorial rather than extraterrestrial, or has the invasion from Mars started already?

It is, I must have misread it once and then got confused throughout. The technical description is actually "U Activities of extraterritorial organisations and bodies", so it presumably also applies to those working for the UN, and maybe the EU as well (not sure about the last one - is the EU classed as extraterritorial or public administration?)

What is that supposed to mean, if anything?

And how old are those figures for Mining in Cleveland for instance?

[andrewteale]

Mar 28, 2020 9:03:37 GMT carlton43 said:

Mar 27, 2020 22:19:42 GMT bjornhattan said:

I've calculated a value comparing the proportion of workers in each industry (as defined by the census) with the national average for every constituency. For example, if 15% of the population of a constituency worked in education, that would be divided by the 10% who work in education nationally to give a figure of 1.5.

The top ten values for this measure (including the percentages working in that industry in brackets) are:

1. West Suffolk, Extraterrestrial organisations: 71.0 (5.7%)
2. South West Norfolk, Extraterrestrial organisations: 18.0 (1.4%)
3. Cities of London and Westminster, Extraterrestrial organisations: 16.6 (1.3%)
4. Harrogate and Knaresborough, Extraterrestrial organisations: 13.6 (1.1%)
5. Leicester East, Textiles manufacturing: 13.4 (5.4%)
6. Huntingdon, Extraterrestrial organisations: 12.7 (1.0%)
7. Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland, Mining: 11.7 (2.1%)
8. Kensington, Extraterrestrial organisations: 11.5 (0.9%)
9. St Austell and Newquay, Mining: 11.4 (2.0%)
10. Westminster North, Extraterrestrial organisations: 10.3 (0.8%)

Do note that this measure is biased towards smaller industries, which is why extraterrestrial organisations (I'm assuming this is embassies and foreign military bases rather than flying saucers) features so heavily. Another figure which may be of interest is 23.1% - this is the proportion of workers employed in Education in Cambridge, and is the highest proportion of workers in one industry in any constituency. At present all of this data is for England and Wales only, since there doesn't seem to be a lookup table converting Scottish or Northern Irish OAs to constituencies, and while I have found another source for Scotland I'm yet to actually see how that is structured.

So in West Suffolk 71% of electors are Actual Aliens?

Wonder why that is?  Might believe it of Norfolk.

West Suffolk has some big US military bases in it (Mildenhall and so on).

[Chris from Brum]

Mar 28, 2020 8:35:12 GMT bjornhattan said:

Mar 28, 2020 7:36:08 GMT Chris from Brum said:

I hope you mean extraterritorial rather than extraterrestrial, or has the invasion from Mars started already?

It is, I must have misread it once and then got confused throughout. The technical description is actually "U Activities of extraterritorial organisations and bodies", so it presumably also applies to those working for the UN, and maybe the EU as well (not sure about the last one - is the EU classed as extraterritorial or public administration?)

Thats a relief, otherwise I might have been calling for news from Horsell Common.

[bjornhattan]

Mar 28, 2020 9:07:47 GMT carlton43 said:

Mar 28, 2020 8:35:12 GMT bjornhattan said:

It is, I must have misread it once and then got confused throughout. The technical description is actually "U Activities of extraterritorial organisations and bodies", so it presumably also applies to those working for the UN, and maybe the EU as well (not sure about the last one - is the EU classed as extraterritorial or public administration?)

What is that supposed to mean, if anything?

And how old are those figures for Mining in Cleveland for instance?

I was just wondering whether those employed by the EU would be classed as working for extraterritorial organisations whilst we were a member state. Anyone working for the EU now would definitely be in that category.

As to your 71% point, that isn't quite true - the proportion of workers who work for extraterritorial organisations in West Suffolk is 71 times the national average, but that only equates to about 6% of the workforce. The largest industry in West Suffolk is actually retail, but this is less noteworthy because every constituency has many retail workers (even the lowest figure, in the Cities of London and Westminster, is 8.6%).

As regards age, unfortunately all figures are from the 2011 Census. So I have no doubt that many figures are out of date. However, even where significant industrial change has happened, the impact on the statistics may be less than some think. Take Redcar for example, although the steelworks closing was a major news story, the constituency is only 235th out of 573 for the proportion of workers in manufacturing (even in "low tech" manufacturing, which would contain the steel industry, it comes in at number 28). Also, keep in mind that that all figures are based on home address not work address, so if someone commutes from Whitby to the mine at Boulby, they will be counted for Scarborough and Whitby rather than for East Cleveland.

[carlton43]

Mar 28, 2020 9:12:08 GMT andrewteale said:

Mar 28, 2020 9:03:37 GMT carlton43 said:

So in West Suffolk 71% of electors are Actual Aliens?

Wonder why that is?  Might believe it of Norfolk.

West Suffolk has some big US military bases in it (Mildenhall and so on).

How many Americans do you think there are and what proportion of the electorate?  Very considerable wind down over recent decades.

[greenchristian]

Mar 28, 2020 9:37:19 GMT carlton43 said:

Mar 28, 2020 9:12:08 GMT andrewteale said:

West Suffolk has some big US military bases in it (Mildenhall and so on).

How many Americans do you think there are and what proportion of the electorate?  Very considerable wind down over recent decades.

No matter what the number is, they'll be approximately 0% of the electorate (though this doesn't mean that their presence won't affect voting habits, or mean that there aren't members of the electorate whose jobs depend on the bases). However, there isn't a set of workforce statistics that is filtered by eligibility to vote, so we'll have to make do with statistics for the population as a whole.

[carlton43]

Mar 28, 2020 9:29:23 GMT bjornhattan said:

Mar 28, 2020 9:07:47 GMT carlton43 said:

What is that supposed to mean, if anything?

And how old are those figures for Mining in Cleveland for instance?

I was just wondering whether those employed by the EU would be classed as working for extraterritorial organisations whilst we were a member state. Anyone working for the EU now would definitely be in that category.

As to your 71% point, that isn't quite true - the proportion of workers who work for extraterritorial organisations in West Suffolk is 71 times the national average, but that only equates to about 6% of the workforce. The largest industry in West Suffolk is actually retail, but this is less noteworthy because every constituency has many retail workers (even the lowest figure, in the Cities of London and Westminster, is 8.6%).

As regards age, unfortunately all figures are from the 2011 Census. So I have no doubt that many figures are out of date. However, even where significant industrial change has happened, the impact on the statistics may be less than some think. Take Redcar for example, although the steelworks closing was a major news story, the constituency is only 235th out of 573 for the proportion of workers in manufacturing (even in "low tech" manufacturing, which would contain the steel industry, it comes in at number 28). Also, keep in mind that that all figures are based on home address not work address, so if someone commutes from Whitby to the mine at Boulby, they will be counted for Scarborough and Whitby rather than for East Cleveland.

In your original figures you stated 71% and now you state it to be 71x the national average but at that rate it is still only 6% of the workforce?

I ask what on earth this is actually measuring?  Why?  And what does it tell us that is in any way useful?

If this example is really 71x the national average and is yet only 6% of workforce, it must be vanishingly small for most constituencies?  So what is it for?

And if it is all based on figures from a Census already a decade behind us, in a fast changing economic environment, what are we doing this for? 

Is the object of this statistic to measure those 'working outside the confines of the constituency in which the live.?  If so, what does that really help with?  In a Bury St Edmunds seat probably most live and work in the constituency, but in one hard up against a city like Cambridge, they will not.  Yet in their heads there will be no difference at all to the voters.  The journey and journey times will be the same in each case.  What is it telling us that is useful or meaningful?

[bjornhattan]

Mar 28, 2020 11:16:15 GMT carlton43 said:

Mar 28, 2020 9:29:23 GMT bjornhattan said:

I was just wondering whether those employed by the EU would be classed as working for extraterritorial organisations whilst we were a member state. Anyone working for the EU now would definitely be in that category.

As to your 71% point, that isn't quite true - the proportion of workers who work for extraterritorial organisations in West Suffolk is 71 times the national average, but that only equates to about 6% of the workforce. The largest industry in West Suffolk is actually retail, but this is less noteworthy because every constituency has many retail workers (even the lowest figure, in the Cities of London and Westminster, is 8.6%).

As regards age, unfortunately all figures are from the 2011 Census. So I have no doubt that many figures are out of date. However, even where significant industrial change has happened, the impact on the statistics may be less than some think. Take Redcar for example, although the steelworks closing was a major news story, the constituency is only 235th out of 573 for the proportion of workers in manufacturing (even in "low tech" manufacturing, which would contain the steel industry, it comes in at number 28). Also, keep in mind that that all figures are based on home address not work address, so if someone commutes from Whitby to the mine at Boulby, they will be counted for Scarborough and Whitby rather than for East Cleveland.

In your original figures you stated 71% and now you state it to be 71x the national average but at that rate it is still only 6% of the workforce?

I ask what on earth this is actually measuring?  Why?  And what does it tell us that is in any way useful?

If this example is really 71x the national average and is yet only 6% of workforce, it must be vanishingly small for most constituencies?  So what is it for?

And if it is all based on figures from a Census already a decade behind us, in a fast changing economic environment, what are we doing this for? 

Is the object of this statistic to measure those 'working outside the confines of the constituency in which the live.?  If so, what does that really help with?  In a Bury St Edmunds seat probably most live and work in the constituency, but in one hard up against a city like Cambridge, they will not.  Yet in their heads there will be no difference at all to the voters.  The journey and journey times will be the same in each case.  What is it telling us that is useful or meaningful?

I suppose as a measure it isn't that useful - it does indicate where there are concentrations of unusual industries, but as I mentioned when I gave those figures, that does mean it is biased towards industries which are vanishingly small for most constituencies (and in several is actually zero). The issue is that just looking at which industry employs the most workers from each constituency is equally biased, just in the other direction: retail and education would dominate the vast majority of constituencies, and it would be hard to detect distinctive industries in each seat. The fact that 12% of Brentwood's residents work in the financial sector is much more notable than the fact that 14% work in retail, because the former figure is the 10th highest in the country and the latter is below average.

I would totally dispute the point that the data being a decade old makes it useless. While the absolute figures may be out of date, the relative figures are still reasonably accurate. If the number of people who work in agriculture has massively fallen in the last decade, for example, then saying that X% of some seat work in agriculture is pointless, but saying that the proportion of agricultural workers is in the top 20 in the country is likely to still be true, assuming the decline has been reasonably uniform. Is that a fair assumption? I would have to look into it, but my instincts say that it is: most of the seats with a large number of professional workers now had high proportions of professional workers fifty years ago, and the same is true for most industries, barring perhaps those which saw dramatic decline in the 1970s and 1980s.

With regard to the last point, I'd more say that it's a factor that should be kept in mind. To give an example from the post you quoted there, the Cities of London and Westminster has the lowest proportion of residents working in retail. However, that doesn't mean there isn't a big retail presence, it's just that the vast majority of workers at the various shops of Oxford Street will commute in. But residents are the ones who will decide the results in the constituency - otherwise Poplar and Limehouse would be much more amenable to the Conservatives.

[Robert Waller]

I'm just wondering if at this stage we could avoid this thread rather wandering off track....

For example, would anyone who has expressed interest like to nominate a constituency or constituencies for which they are willing to write an initial entry?

For example Pete Whitehead, andrewp, andrewteale?

(Just selected as the first three to give a positive response to my initial suggestion)

[AdminSTB]

It may seem increasingly irrelevant, but you can tell a lot about a constituency by the way it voted in the EU referendum. Therefore I think that would be useful and interesting data to include in constituency profiles.

[Pete Whitehead]

Mar 28, 2020 11:52:33 GMT Robert Waller said:

I'm just wondering if at this stage we could avoid this thread rather wandering off track....

For example, would anyone who has expressed interest like to nominate a constituency or constituencies for which they are willing to write an initial entry?

For example @pete Whitehead, andrewp, andrew Teale?

(Just selected as the first three to give a positive response to my initial suggestion)

I can certainly take care of the Hertfordshire seats. I'm pretty knowledgable about some other areas too but would defer to others more local in eg the West Midlands. I'm pretty strong on Greater London as a whole and especially the part which covers Middlesex

[andrewteale]

Mar 28, 2020 11:52:33 GMT Robert Waller said:

I'm just wondering if at this stage we could avoid this thread rather wandering off track....

For example, would anyone who has expressed interest like to nominate a constituency or constituencies for which they are willing to write an initial entry?

For example Pete Whitehead, andrewp, andrewteale?

(Just selected as the first three to give a positive response to my initial suggestion)

Happy to handle as much of the North West, particularly Greater Manchester.

[Merseymike]

I can cover Merseyside. There are some other seats I also have knowledge of scattered around the country

[gwynthegriff]

Mar 28, 2020 11:52:33 GMT Robert Waller said:

I'm just wondering if at this stage we could avoid this thread rather wandering off track....

For example, would anyone who has expressed interest like to nominate a constituency or constituencies for which they are willing to write an initial entry?

For example Pete Whitehead, andrewp, andrewteale?

(Just selected as the first three to give a positive response to my initial suggestion)

If there's a template to follow I could offer some insight on South Cheshire seats.

[andrewp]

Mar 28, 2020 11:52:33 GMT Robert Waller said:

I'm just wondering if at this stage we could avoid this thread rather wandering off track....

For example, would anyone who has expressed interest like to nominate a constituency or constituencies for which they are willing to write an initial entry?

For example Pete Whitehead , andrewp , andrewteale ?

(Just selected as the first three to give a positive response to my initial suggestion)

I would start in Somerset, and then spread outwards to Devon, the former Avon, Cornwall. I always get the feeling this a part of the world that others on this site have slightly less knowledge off, but if anyone else does have knowledge of those places then I will take a back seat!

[greenchristian]

I might be willing to cover Coventry. Though I have a much better feel for the differences between parts of Coventry than the differences between Coventry and the rest of the country. I'd like to see an example of what other people come up with before I commit, though.

[jamie]

I’m happy to write entries for the North East. Also happy to provide detailed data on the geography of the vote for much of England (personal hobby).