|
|
Post by yellowperil on Apr 26, 2020 18:45:17 GMT
Hastings, as befits a Cinque Port and a place synonymous with the most famous date in English history, has been sending MPs to parliament since the fourteenth century, but the Borough of Hastings today falls some way short of the numbers to support a modern Westminster constituency, so since 1983 has required a small part of the neighbouring Rother district to make up the numbers- currently 4 wards of Rother. They include , appropriately enough, two more Cinque Ports that were added to the eponymous and original five and they are Rye and Winchelsea. Of course in those far off days they were the new boys in the Cinque Port confederacy, upstarts one might say , so in a nice piece of self-promotion they dignified themselves with the title of the Ancient Towns, and today after seven centuries or so that seems a fair description, except that Winchelsea, now genuinely ancient, struggles to justify the name of town. So the present constituency is now the Borough of Hastings in total, plus the Rother ward of Rye and Winchelsea, and then also three more deeply rural wards, now called East Rother, South Rother, and Brede & Udimore ( these are the new ward names and boundaries which became effective 2019)
Hastings is a fairly compact urban borough, comprising the Old Town in a narrow valley leading to the sea and the beached fishing boats,the pretty compact town centre ,the cliff tops behind it with its ancient castle once occupied by the Conqueror,various suburbs clinging to the steep hills behind, the rather splendid purpose built resort of St Leonards , begun by Decimus Burton in the 1830s and lying just to the west of Hastings proper , and more hillside suburbs behind that. These days , Hastings itself is a strongly Labour town and 12 of the 16 wards are Labour held. The Conservatives only hold on in 4, all at the west end: West St Leonards, Maze Hill up above that , and the northwestern fringes in Ashdown and Conquest wards. Undoubtedly the Conservative vote will be better in a general election, but its pretty unlikely they could win in Hastings without the Rother bit of the constituency.
In 2015 the Tories had won in all four wards in the Rother end of the constituency, and generally by quite comfortable margins , so returning then all 8 councillors. This really was the blue end of the constituency. That had not always been the case and Rye town had often been quite tightly fought and had sometime returned Lib Dem or Labour councillors, in contrast to sea of blue in the more rural wards surrounding, but by 2015 that all seemed in the past. However May 2019 was rather different. Across Rother district the Conservatives were to lose control of the council, and while the more dramatic bits were happening in the neighbouring constituency, two seats did go Lib Dem, with their candidates elected in Rye and in South Rother. Indeed they just possibly might have done even better had they put up more than one candidate in each ward. There was clearly problems in the Conservative camp in Rother, probably mainly about the Tory administration on the council, but it really might have suggested that the Hastings Tories could not depend on the Rother Tories to ride to their rescue. One place where the Tories appeared to be still doing fairly well was the rural ward of East Rother, extending along the coast as far as Camber. The Tory candidate topping the poll there was Sally-Ann Hart. Of whom more shortly.
Hastings has shared many of the problems of other south coast seaside resorts and fishing centres. It is rather different to the average resort though, with the Stade, its unique fishing beach with its distinctive net houses being a different sort of tourist draw. The slightly faded grandeur of St Leonards, too, although more closely matched to the other Sussex resorts like Brighton , Eastbourne or Bexhill has a rather different sort of elegance to its rivals. On the whole, Hastings has had a bit of a struggle updating itself for the twenty-first century. The new art gallery on the Stade was controversial with some of its near neighbours, including the fishermen, some of whom thought it should not have been located on the Stade. Its fortunes have been a bit mixed and in spite of some success it lost its main sponsor the Jerwood Foundation, so has relaunched from the Jerwood Gallery now as the Hastings Contemporary (2019). It has not quite had the transforming impact of the Turner Contemporary in Margate, with which it is inevitably compared.
Rye is the second major centre of the constituency, a really handsome hilltop town with a big tourist draw and a very arty centre, and it is surrounded by a lovely rural and coastal area, with a number of smallish settlements- Winchelsea , a sort of mini version of Rye, then Fairlight, with its crumbling cliffs rather like the eroding coasts of East Anglia, Guestling, Pett, the beach resort of Camber, the inland Brede valley villages of Udimore and Brede itself. This is a rather different world to the rather workaday place that is the central Hastings, and much more natural Tory territory.
When the constituency was formed in1983 it was first held by Kenneth Warren , who had held the old Hastings constituency since 1970, back in the days when it was expected that south coast seaside towns were naturally Conservative. Warren carried on until his retirement in 1992 , and he was succeeded by another Conservative, Jacqui Lait. In 1997the seat was captured by Labour's Michael Foster until he in turn lost it back in 2010 to the Tories in the form of Amber Rudd. Very much seen as a protege of Theresa May in those early years, Rudd rapidly rose to be Home Secretary by 2016, but when her majority in 2017 shrank down to 346, the constituency was regarded as super-marginal. One factor was seen as being that she was regarded as having remainer sympathies in a seat with quite a vocal leaver electorate. Her subsequent parliamentary career was somewhat chequered but she was back in the cabinet as Work and Pensions Secretary before resigning the Conservative whip in 2019 and sitting as an independent. She was replaced as Conservative candidate for the 2019 general election by Sally-Ann Hart, who was able to increase the Conservative majority to a rather more comfortable 4,043.
|
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on Apr 27, 2020 11:06:53 GMT
I think this is one of your best profiles. Thank you- actually I wonder whether it's a bit easier writing ones you know a bit about but not too much! Still adding to it and correcting as I go, though. I noticed I had written that the Jerwood gallery location was not popular with "the fisherman" when I had meant to write "fisherm en", but come to think of it even though I've corrected it there might have been something in that! |
|
|
|
Post by matureleft on Apr 27, 2020 11:45:30 GMT
I think this is one of your best profiles. Thank you- actually I wonder whether it's a bit easier writing ones you know a bit about but not too much! Still adding to it and correcting as I go, though. I noticed I had written that the Jerwood gallery location was not popular with "the fisherman" when I had meant to write "fisherm en", but come to think of it even though I've corrected it there might have been something in that! In its Jerwood incarnation (from one visit) it was a rather good, but small, gallery in a striking location. Obviously it's shut now but does the change look as if it might work.
Hastings being the home of Robert Tressell and the presumed location (though harshly called Mugsborough in the novel!) of the painters and decorators in The Ragged-Trousered Philanthropists might be worth a nod.
|
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on Apr 27, 2020 13:23:52 GMT
Thank you- actually I wonder whether it's a bit easier writing ones you know a bit about but not too much! Still adding to it and correcting as I go, though. I noticed I had written that the Jerwood gallery location was not popular with "the fisherman" when I had meant to write "fisherm en", but come to think of it even though I've corrected it there might have been something in that! In its Jerwood incarnation (from one visit) it was a rather good, but small, gallery in a striking location. Obviously it's shut now but does the change look as if it might work.
Hastings being the home of Robert Tressell and the presumed location (though harshly called Mugsborough in the novel!) of the painters and decorators in The Ragged-Trousered Philanthropists might be worth a nod.
On the Jerwood: I quite liked the Jerwood too and I haven't yet seen it in its present incarnation but as I understood it there was some doubt as to whether they would be able to keep their original core collection of 300+ paintings . The original curator is still in charge though, as I understand it. This would have been a crucial year for its development, so not the best of luck, I would have thought. On Tressell- yes I thought I might getting a plea in that direction! I haven't even mentioned Tressell ward as one of the central Hastings ward firmly in Labour hands. It could well feature in the final version. |
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on Apr 27, 2020 14:03:44 GMT
As with some of my other threads for this exercise I will list the key election results and other significant statistics in 2 separate posts, some of which may or may not make it into the later versions of the profile.They will be there in the thread for reference anyway and may gradually be added to from time to time. It seems to me quite possible that by the time this is all ready for a final version we might well have the 2021 census data available! Anyway, here is the last 4 general election results in full:
General Election 2019.
26,896 (49.6%) Con (S-A Hart)
22,853 (42.1%) Lab (P. Chowney)
3,960 (7.3%) LD (N.Perry)
565 (1.0%) Ind (P.Crosland)
General Election 2017
25,668 (46.9%) Con (A.Rudd)
25,322 (46.2%) Lab (P.Chowney)
1, 885 (3.4%) LD (N.Perry)
1,479 (2.7%) UKIP (M. Phillips)
412 (0.8%) Ind (N.Wilson)
General Election 2015
22, 686 (44.5%) Con (A.Rudd)
17, 890 (35.1%) Lab (S.Owen)
9, 786 (13.3%) UKIP (A.Michael)
1,951 ( 3.8%) GP (J. Bowers)
1,614( 3.2%) LD (N. Perry)
General Election 2010
20,468 ( 41.1%) Con (A.Rudd)
18, 475 (37.1%) Lab (M. Foster)
7, 825 (15.7%) LD (N.Perry)
1,397 ( 2.8%) UKIP (A.Smith)
1,310 (2.6%) BNP (N.Prince)
339 (0.7%) ED (R.Bridger)
European Referendum 2016
Leave 54.9%
Remain 45.1%
|
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on Apr 27, 2020 14:23:37 GMT
As I have said, this is a lttle bit towards the edge of my "home turf", being over the border into another county, but not so far removed that I don't visit it quite often, and indeed If I look out the window from my prison home I can (just about) see the tower of Fairlight church which is within this constituency. Mind you, as I think I have said on another thread, my clearest memories of Fairlight relate to the Glen with its well known naturist beach. Now that I can't see from my windows . Even with binoculars.
Anyway, I really would welcome contributions from others with knowledge of Hastings and Rye to contribute as I am very aware that I know some aspects pretty well but its a bit of an outsiders' view in a way that the six Kent ones weren't.
|
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on Apr 28, 2020 9:47:52 GMT
A few more statistics for Hastings & Rye:
Census 2011:ethnicity
White 94.4% (SE 90.7, UK 87.2)
Asian 2.1% (SE 5.2, UK 6.9)
Mixed 2.0% ( SE 1.9, UK 2.0)
Black 1.0% (SE 1.6,UK 3.0)
Other 0.5%(SE 0.6, UK 0.9)
Employment data etc 2019
In employment 79.0% (SE 76.0, GB 71.7)
employees 65.8% (SE 66.3, GB 64.0)
self employed # (SE 9.3, GB 7.4) #= too small to be counted
Occupational groups
Managerial, directors,senior off. 47.2% (SE 52.6, GB 47.5)
Professional 10.4% (SE 13.3, GB 11.4)
Caring, Leisure, other services 10.4% ( SE SE 8.7,GB 9.1)
Qualifications
NVQ4+ 38.5% (SE43.4,GB 40.3)
no quals 10.7% (SE 5.8.GB 7.7)
Earnings
f/t w£ 502.7(SE 636.0, GB 587.0)
|
|
|
|
Post by elinorhelyn on Mar 22, 2021 14:21:31 GMT
Never understood why Hastings doesn't have its own seat, when Eastbourne, town of a similar size does, where I'm from. Will it get one in the boundary review? Can someone do the math on the GE results since 2010 of Hastings District only?
|
|
|
|
Post by greatkingrat on Mar 22, 2021 14:43:07 GMT
Hastings District on its own is entitled to 0.87 seats so you have to add something to it.
|
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Mar 22, 2021 22:11:28 GMT
Never understood why Hastings doesn't have its own seat, when Eastbourne, town of a similar size does, where I'm from. Will it get one in the boundary review? Can someone do the math on the GE results since 2010 of Hastings District only? Hastings did have its own seat until 1983. It is now too small to have a parliamentary seat to itself, unfortunately. |
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Yn Ennill Yma
Posts: 6,142 
|
Post by Foggy on Mar 23, 2021 5:54:02 GMT
Eastbourne does not have a seat all to itself yet in any case, though it will do after the next review.
I always found Hastings to seem a lot rougher than Eastbourne on visits there. Travelling from the west, I would alight at Warrior Square station. The next stop along would've been Ore and Winchelsea which are in this constituency. They are served by trains despite the latter apparently struggling "to justify the name of town" according to YP!
|
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on Mar 23, 2021 7:33:36 GMT
Eastbourne does not have a seat all to itself yet in any case, though it will do after the next review. I always found Hastings to seem a lot rougher than Eastbourne on visits there. Travelling from the west, I would alight at Warrior Square station. The next stop along would've been Ore and Winchelsea which are in this constituency. They are served by trains despite the latter apparently struggling "to justify the name of town" according to YP! Winchelsea is a lovely place of which I am very fond, but with barely 600 souls and facilities more or less what you might expect in a village of that size, I stand by my point that its claim to be a town is based on its history rather than present day realities. The fact that it has a railway station hardly changes anything- so does my own village of Pluckley, with almost twice the population of Winchelsea, and similar facilities, but I wouldn't dream of calling it a town. |
|
|
|
Post by No Offence Alan on Mar 23, 2021 8:02:03 GMT
Eastbourne does not have a seat all to itself yet in any case, though it will do after the next review. I always found Hastings to seem a lot rougher than Eastbourne on visits there. Travelling from the west, I would alight at Warrior Square station. The next stop along would've been Ore and Winchelsea which are in this constituency. They are served by trains despite the latter apparently struggling "to justify the name of town" according to YP! Winchelsea is a lovely place of which I am very fond, but with barely 600 souls and facilities more or less what you might expect in a village of that size, I stand by my point that its claim to be a town is based on its history rather than present day realities. The fact that it has a railway station hardly changes anything- so does my own village of Pluckley, with almost twice the population of Winchelsea, and similar facilities, but I wouldn't dream of calling it a town. Tyndrum, population 167, has two railway stations. |
|
|
|
Post by elinorhelyn on Mar 23, 2021 13:54:21 GMT
Eastbourne does not have a seat all to itself yet in any case, though it will do after the next review. I always found Hastings to seem a lot rougher than Eastbourne on visits there. Travelling from the west, I would alight at Warrior Square station. The next stop along would've been Ore and Winchelsea which are in this constituency. They are served by trains despite the latter apparently struggling "to justify the name of town" according to YP! Eastbourne only has one ward outside of the BC area, Willingdon and its basically contiguous with the Eastbourne conobation, whereas Hastings has to have the rural hinterland of Rother in the seat. |
|
sirbenjamin
IFP
True fame is reading your name written in graffiti, but without the words 'is a wanker' after it.
Posts: 4,979
|
Post by sirbenjamin on Mar 25, 2021 15:58:58 GMT
Battle should be included in the Borough of Hastings. It is by far the single biggest thing associated with the place. It singularly defines the name FFS. Why the hell isn't it so? Who would possibly make a decision to draw a modern-day Hastings and not include the site of the bloody battle?!? Was it someones idea of a joke? To deliberately annoy folks like me?
And following on from this: Given that it's not, and Hastings is too small to constitute a seat on its own, are are the Rother wards that are added to it the ones around Rye rather than the Battle wards?!? Again, what was the thought process? 'Ooh, lets create a deliberate anomaly for the sake of it'?
Is there a thread anywhere for boundaries/names that are simply *wrong*? Like this. And Hillsborough Stadium not being in Sheffield Hillsborough? Mitcham and Morden not including Morden tube station which is what everybody thinks of when they think 'Morden'. And so on...
If not, it's probably needed. I'm sure there are lots of examples all over the country.
|
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Mar 25, 2021 16:26:46 GMT
Battle should be included in the Borough of Hastings. It is by far the single biggest thing associated with the place. It singularly defines the name FFS. Why the hell isn't it so? Who would possibly make a decision to draw a modern-day Hastings and not include the site of the bloody battle?!? Was it someones idea of a joke? To deliberately annoy folks like me? And following on from this: Given that it's not, and Hastings is too small to constitute a seat on its own, are are the Rother wards that are added to it the ones around Rye rather than the Battle wards?!? Again, what was the thought process? 'Ooh, lets create a deliberate anomaly for the sake of it'? Is there a thread anywhere for boundaries/names that are simply *wrong*? Like this. And Hillsborough Stadium not being in Sheffield Hillsborough? Mitcham and Morden not including Morden tube station which is what everybody thinks of when they think 'Morden'. And so on... If not, it's probably needed. I'm sure there are lots of examples all over the country. There is no anomaly here. We are constructing modern constituencies on the basis of contiguity and logic. What happened in 1066 does not bloody matter and is relevant to nothing at all. Hastings is the name of the town and thus provides the name of the constituency. It is not large enough by itself. So one casts around for obvious join-ons like St. Leonards and Ore, and then to places close that are similar. Much of hastings is a drab low class utter dump, rather like Hove. The good days are long gone. Battle is very small and rather nice and in no way at all anything like Hastings. And Rye has down market bits but (as devotees of 'Foyle's War' and 'Mapp and Lucia') will know, it is generally much nicer and well up-market from Hastings. It is close in proximity but not a natural demographic fit. Like much of Sussex, constituency structure is quite difficult. A battle 1000-years ago is not a point to consider. It really isn't. |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Mar 25, 2021 16:35:12 GMT
Battle should be included in the Borough of Hastings. It is by far the single biggest thing associated with the place. It singularly defines the name FFS. Why the hell isn't it so? Who would possibly make a decision to draw a modern-day Hastings and not include the site of the bloody battle?!? Was it someones idea of a joke? To deliberately annoy folks like me? And following on from this: Given that it's not, and Hastings is too small to constitute a seat on its own, are are the Rother wards that are added to it the ones around Rye rather than the Battle wards?!? Again, what was the thought process? 'Ooh, lets create a deliberate anomaly for the sake of it'? Is there a thread anywhere for boundaries/names that are simply *wrong*? Like this. And Hillsborough Stadium not being in Sheffield Hillsborough? Mitcham and Morden not including Morden tube station which is what everybody thinks of when they think 'Morden'. And so on... If not, it's probably needed. I'm sure there are lots of examples all over the country. Yes it's here vote-2012.proboards.com/thread/15049/2023-review-south-eastIt would be quite possible to draw a seat which combined Hastings with the two Battle wards together with Sedlescombe & Westfield and instead placing all the Rother wards which are currently in this seat in a seat with Bexhill. I suggest it wouldn't be the optimum scheme for the area, but why not propose it there rather than getting angry about it in another thread ? |
|
sirbenjamin
IFP
True fame is reading your name written in graffiti, but without the words 'is a wanker' after it.
Posts: 4,979
|
Post by sirbenjamin on Mar 25, 2021 16:49:17 GMT
Battle should be included in the Borough of Hastings. It is by far the single biggest thing associated with the place. It singularly defines the name FFS. Why the hell isn't it so? Who would possibly make a decision to draw a modern-day Hastings and not include the site of the bloody battle?!? Was it someones idea of a joke? To deliberately annoy folks like me? And following on from this: Given that it's not, and Hastings is too small to constitute a seat on its own, are are the Rother wards that are added to it the ones around Rye rather than the Battle wards?!? Again, what was the thought process? 'Ooh, lets create a deliberate anomaly for the sake of it'? Is there a thread anywhere for boundaries/names that are simply *wrong*? Like this. And Hillsborough Stadium not being in Sheffield Hillsborough? Mitcham and Morden not including Morden tube station which is what everybody thinks of when they think 'Morden'. And so on... If not, it's probably needed. I'm sure there are lots of examples all over the country. Yes it's here vote-2012.proboards.com/thread/15049/2023-review-south-eastIt would be quite possible to draw a seat which combined Hastings with the two Battle wards together with Sedlescombe & Westfield and instead placing all the Rother wards which are currently in this seat in a seat with Bexhill. I suggest it wouldn't be the optimum scheme for the area, but why not propose it there rather than getting angry about it in another thread ?
I meant a generic thread for all kinds of boundary/placename anomalies, not just this one in particular. It's probably far from the worst.
|
|
sirbenjamin
IFP
True fame is reading your name written in graffiti, but without the words 'is a wanker' after it.
Posts: 4,979
|
Post by sirbenjamin on Mar 25, 2021 17:02:01 GMT
Battle should be included in the Borough of Hastings. It is by far the single biggest thing associated with the place. It singularly defines the name FFS. Why the hell isn't it so? Who would possibly make a decision to draw a modern-day Hastings and not include the site of the bloody battle?!? Was it someones idea of a joke? To deliberately annoy folks like me? And following on from this: Given that it's not, and Hastings is too small to constitute a seat on its own, are are the Rother wards that are added to it the ones around Rye rather than the Battle wards?!? Again, what was the thought process? 'Ooh, lets create a deliberate anomaly for the sake of it'? Is there a thread anywhere for boundaries/names that are simply *wrong*? Like this. And Hillsborough Stadium not being in Sheffield Hillsborough? Mitcham and Morden not including Morden tube station which is what everybody thinks of when they think 'Morden'. And so on... If not, it's probably needed. I'm sure there are lots of examples all over the country. There is no anomaly here. We are constructing modern constituencies on the basis of contiguity and logic. What happened in 1066 does not bloody matter and is relevant to nothing at all. Hastings is the name of the town and thus provides the name of the constituency. It is not large enough by itself. So one casts around for obvious join-ons like St. Leonards and Ore, and then to places close that are similar. Much of hastings is a drab low class utter dump, rather like Hove. The good days are long gone. Battle is very small and rather nice and in no way at all anything like Hastings. And Rye has down market bits but (as devotees of 'Foyle's War' and 'Mapp and Lucia') will know, it is generally much nicer and well up-market from Hastings. It is close in proximity but not a natural demographic fit. Like much of Sussex, constituency structure is quite difficult. A battle 1000-years ago is not a point to consider. It really isn't.
Yes but THE TOWN IS NAMED AFTER THE BATTLE. There is no getting away from that.
There is lots of stuff named after things from 1000 years ago or more that survives to this day in placenames. This just happens to be a particularly well-known one. It's one of very the few historical events from 1000 years ago that most ordinary people could actually name.
But this is a broader point about aesthetics, common sense, and what traditionally belongs where. I'd have thought you'd have at least some sympathy towards that view?
If the Borough of Dover didn't include the famous White Cliffs, that would be just as stupid. A Cambridge seat drawn to exclude all the universities would be ridiculous. As would a seat named after a river that didn't flow through it. And so on.
The Borough of Hastings not including the site of the actual battle is absolutely fucktarded. And I suspect I'll be waiting a long time to hear an argument that convinces me otherwise.
How many schoolchildren, when asked about the battle of Hastings, would immediately say 'ah yes, it famously took place outside of Hastings, in what is now the town of Battle, which is of course part of Rother District'?
Probably not even schoolchildren in the Hastings area. If they even attend school there.
|
|
|
|
Post by No Offence Alan on Mar 25, 2021 17:35:12 GMT
There is no anomaly here. We are constructing modern constituencies on the basis of contiguity and logic. What happened in 1066 does not bloody matter and is relevant to nothing at all. Hastings is the name of the town and thus provides the name of the constituency. It is not large enough by itself. So one casts around for obvious join-ons like St. Leonards and Ore, and then to places close that are similar. Much of hastings is a drab low class utter dump, rather like Hove. The good days are long gone. Battle is very small and rather nice and in no way at all anything like Hastings. And Rye has down market bits but (as devotees of 'Foyle's War' and 'Mapp and Lucia') will know, it is generally much nicer and well up-market from Hastings. It is close in proximity but not a natural demographic fit. Like much of Sussex, constituency structure is quite difficult. A battle 1000-years ago is not a point to consider. It really isn't. Yes but THE TOWN IS NAMED AFTER THE BATTLE. There is no getting away from that.
There is lots of stuff named after things from 1000 years ago or more that survives to this day in placenames. This just happens to be a particularly well-known one. It's one of very the few historical events from 1000 years ago that most ordinary people could actually name.
But this is a broader point about aesthetics, common sense, and what traditionally belongs where. I'd have thought you'd have at least some sympathy towards that view? If the Borough of Dover didn't include the famous White Cliffs, that would be just as stupid. A Cambridge seat drawn to exclude all the universities would be ridiculous. As would a seat named after a river that didn't flow through it. And so on.
The Borough of Hastings not including the site of the actual battle is absolutely fucktarded. And I suspect I'll be waiting a long time to hear an argument that convinces me otherwise. How many schoolchildren, when asked about the battle of Hastings, would immediately say 'ah yes, it famously took place outside of Hastings, in what is now the town of Battle, which is of course part of Rother District'?
Probably not even schoolchildren in the Hastings area. If they even attend school there.
One of the nicest (and oldest) books I own is a school atlas from 1892 (no, it wasn't my personal one!!) There are maps of troop dispositions of several historic battles, but not one for the battle of Hastings. There is a map for the battle of Senlac though. |
|
