|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jun 27, 2020 11:31:40 GMT
I don’t mind Devon East as it contains most of East Devon DC area. I also don’t mind Cornwall South East as it is the Southern half of the Eastern end of the county. i suppose you could have a uniform policy of all constituencies being named after the largest town or 2 towns. that would leave the 2 aforementioned seats as Saltash and Liskeard & Exmouth and Sidmouth. Largest two towns would turn Suffolk Coastal into "Felixstowe and Woodbridge", which would neither be meaningful nor popular! Felixstowe is the obvious and proper name. It is the one place most people know being one of our more important ports. Any other name is frankly daft. |
|
|
|
Post by owainsutton on Jun 27, 2020 11:32:27 GMT
Gravesham should be Gravesend NW Norfolk should be Kings Lynn NE Cambridgshire should be Wisbech North Devon should be Barnstaple North Herefordshire should be Leominster SW Wiltshire should be Westbury North Wiltshire should be Malmesbury NW Hamshire should be Andover East Hampshire should be Petersfield SW Surrey should be Farnham Staffordshire Moorlands should be Leek West Lancashire should be Ormskirk Hertsmere is a crap name. In contrast with those who entertain the bizarre notion that a constituency should not be named after a settlement if it contains some other settlements, I should be perfectly happy for it to be called Elstree Hertsmere is doubly crap, because it originated as a neologism for an LA which came into existence in 1974 at the same time as Hartismere Rural District vanished, the latter being a historic name coming from one of the hundreds of Suffolk. (Hartismere, coincidentally, was administered from the aforementioned Eye.) |
|
|
|
Post by owainsutton on Jun 27, 2020 11:34:30 GMT
Largest two towns would turn Suffolk Coastal into "Felixstowe and Woodbridge", which would neither be meaningful nor popular! Felixstowe is the obvious and proper name. It is the one place most people know being one of our more important ports. Any other name is frankly daft. An argument that absolutely nobody remotely familiar with the constituency would make. Reviving Dunwich would be about as meaningful. |
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Jun 27, 2020 11:36:12 GMT
Marlborough would be a more fitting name for North Wiltshire, although then there is also Royal Wootton Bassett. It would be a very fitting name if Marlborough was actually in that constituency. Malmesbury & Royal Wootton Bassett, then-Marlborough is actually in the Devizes constituency. |
|
bsjmcr
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,593 
|
Post by bsjmcr on Jun 27, 2020 11:36:27 GMT
Yes and no. Your examples make sense, but it would be awful to see Redbridge, Havering, etc get featured instead. Then again, it surprises and frustrates that very well-known London borough names such as Camden* and Wandsworth, aren't featured anywhere! So you make a very good point, but once again one size doesn't fit all.
Wasn't it the case that London borough names used to once prefix the constituency name, and that Enfield Southgate, Ealing Southall, Lewisham Deptford, etc are hangovers from that era? Perhaps that should be revived, short of putting 'London' in front of all the names. Obviously where sensible e.g. - 'Barking' and 'Dagenham 'and Rainham' ' can be left be! The one where the principal settlement is the borough's name can be the 'Central' one - Richmond Central, Bromley Central, Barnet Central to replace the silly 'Chipping' prefix, etc
*Bit annoying that Keir Starmer is the member for unremarkable 'Holborn' and what is just a train station, rather than 'Camden (Town)', surely? What next, Manchester Central -> Piccadilly and Victoria?
|
|
|
|
Post by owainsutton on Jun 27, 2020 11:38:11 GMT
Nah, just try calling that one Kirkwall. In the 10th/11th centuries, the Norse overlords called the Hebrides and the Isle of Man the "Sudreys" (southern isles) (hence the surviving name of "Sodor and Man") and they called Orkney & Shetland the "Nordreys" (northern isles). So you could call it "Nordrey". Or you could invent a modern portmanteau name like Kirkwick. Or Hoynst. Or something. Or, mundanely, Northern Isles. |
|
|
|
Post by owainsutton on Jun 27, 2020 11:40:40 GMT
Is there any specific reason why a constituency should in its name bear any relevence at all to other matters including the local authority? I prefer directness, clarity and common sense information about what and where the constituency is. So no Bassetlaws, no 'The Deepings', always one sole name wherever possible, no foreign languages unknown to the majority of the population of Britain, and no cumbersome 'catch-all' splurge names that are a complete nonsense. This constituency is Canvey or Canvey Island. That places and identifies it for us all. It contains other bits as well. So what? Don't care. Doesn't matter. A prime obvious name matters not nit-picking complexity and silliness. But we live in an age of nit-picking silliness and wankers pandering to every community and preferring complexity and irritating foreign wording to massage an extreme minority of clots and twerps. Does any constituency have a "foreign" name? (i.e. a name using a language from outside the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland) Well, there's precedents for it. Calais and Tournai... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2020 11:50:25 GMT
As ever when these discussions happen, I think it proves how "one size fits all" really doesn't work. One town names work for, say, Stone. One town names don't work for, say, Suffolk Coastal.
It's a good thing that Boundary Commissions can adapt to each individual situation. They sometimes make errors. They are allowed to make mistakes.
|
|
|
|
Post by heslingtonian on Jun 27, 2020 12:19:19 GMT
Elstree is a very small place with not much of a communal centre. Borehamwood is far larger and would be a more obvious name. Radlett is a lot larger than Elstree. Borehamwood is Elstree Highly debatable |
|
|
|
Post by heslingtonian on Jun 27, 2020 12:21:59 GMT
Is there any specific reason why a constituency should in its name bear any relevence at all to other matters including the local authority? I prefer directness, clarity and common sense information about what and where the constituency is. So no Bassetlaws, no 'The Deepings', always one sole name wherever possible, no foreign languages unknown to the majority of the population of Britain, and no cumbersome 'catch-all' splurge names that are a complete nonsense. This constituency is Canvey or Canvey Island. That places and identifies it for us all. It contains other bits as well. So what? Don't care. Doesn't matter. A prime obvious name matters not nit-picking complexity and silliness. But we live in an age of nit-picking silliness and wankers pandering to every community and preferring complexity and irritating foreign wording to massage an extreme minority of clots and twerps. Does any constituency have a "foreign" name? (i.e. a name using a language from outside the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland) South Holland and the Deepings! |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jun 27, 2020 12:34:55 GMT
Well I'm happy to debate it with you in some detail if you like, but it rather misses the point I was making anyway, which was that as somebody who comes originally from a part of that constituency which could not under any definition be described as 'Elstree', I would have had less objection to my home constituency bearing that name than I did to the name it has, which I regard as crap. It was a riposte to those who claim that 'Skelmersdale would object to Ormskirk' and 'Bromyard would object to Leominster'. In other words I would prefer a single, succinct name which is clearly identifiable to people from outside the area as well as having some significance within it (I would have objected to the name 'Borehamwood' incidentally) |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jun 27, 2020 12:37:00 GMT
Didcot is a pretty important railway junction so I suspect many will have heard of it, certainly more than Wantage. Yeah, I'm pretty sure I've never heard of Wantage outside of electoral contexts. Not heard of the famouse Wantage Tramway!! (Gasps) |
|
|
|
Post by where2travel on Jun 27, 2020 12:47:30 GMT
Yeah, I'm pretty sure I've never heard of Wantage outside of electoral contexts. Whereas Didcot is, of course, well known having given its name to the piece of card removed when you have your railway ticket punched.  I never knew that (good piece of trivia). It seems like it's used for the round bits punched out of regular hole-punchers now as well. The first thing that comes to mind when I think of Didcot is the Power Station, although I understand that's no longer there. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jun 27, 2020 13:32:10 GMT
Felixstowe is the obvious and proper name. It is the one place most people know being one of our more important ports. Any other name is frankly daft. An argument that absolutely nobody remotely familiar with the constituency would make. Reviving Dunwich would be about as meaningful. That is a gormless and stupid remark. I am very familiar with the constituency and have been for over 5-decades. Felixstowe is the dominant place, the best known place and a very important British port. It is the clear and obviouse name for this constituency. Dunwich was an important port, city, mint, naval station and strong point until silting up and subsequent storms destoyed it and consigned it to the sea bed. Felixstowe lives and thrives and must be the name. All else is daft waffle. |
|
|
|
Post by owainsutton on Jun 27, 2020 13:59:14 GMT
An argument that absolutely nobody remotely familiar with the constituency would make. Reviving Dunwich would be about as meaningful. That is a gormless and stupid remark. I am very familiar with the constituency and have been for over 5-decades. Felixstowe is the dominant place, the best known place and a very important British port. It is the clear and obviouse name for this constituency. Dunwich was an important port, city, mint, naval station and strong point until silting up and subsequent storms destoyed it and consigned it to the sea bed. Felixstowe lives and thrives and must be the name. All else is daft waffle. Sounds like you're very familiar with......Felixstowe. |
|
|
|
Post by Yaffles on Jun 27, 2020 14:12:18 GMT
Yeah, I'm pretty sure I've never heard of Wantage outside of electoral contexts. Not heard of the famouse Wantage Tramway!! (Gasps) It has a fine statue of Alfred the Great - for some tenuous reason. |
|
|
|
Post by Defenestrated Fipplebox on Jun 27, 2020 14:14:18 GMT
Not heard of the famouse Wantage Tramway!! (Gasps) It has a fine statue of Alfred the Great - for some tenuous reason.
Pull it down, he burnt those lovely cakes.
|
|
|
|
Post by heslingtonian on Jun 27, 2020 15:50:16 GMT
Well I'm happy to debate it with you in some detail if you like, but it rather misses the point I was making anyway, which was that as somebody who comes originally from a part of that constituency which could not under any definition be described as 'Elstree', I would have had less objection to my home constituency bearing that name than I did to the name it has, which I regard as crap. It was a riposte to those who claim that 'Skelmersdale would object to Ormskirk' and 'Bromyard would object to Leominster'. In other words I would prefer a single, succinct name which is clearly identifiable to people from outside the area as well as having some significance within it (I would have objected to the name 'Borehamwood' incidentally) Why Elstree but not Borehamwood? Borehamwood is much the larger and more significant settlement of the two |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2020 15:56:02 GMT
Well I'm happy to debate it with you in some detail if you like, but it rather misses the point I was making anyway, which was that as somebody who comes originally from a part of that constituency which could not under any definition be described as 'Elstree', I would have had less objection to my home constituency bearing that name than I did to the name it has, which I regard as crap. It was a riposte to those who claim that 'Skelmersdale would object to Ormskirk' and 'Bromyard would object to Leominster'. In other words I would prefer a single, succinct name which is clearly identifiable to people from outside the area as well as having some significance within it (I would have objected to the name 'Borehamwood' incidentally) Why Elstree but not Borehamwood? Borehamwood is much the larger and more significant settlement of the two This reads like a conversation at a Boundary Commission public consultation. |
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Jun 27, 2020 15:58:48 GMT
Well I'm happy to debate it with you in some detail if you like, but it rather misses the point I was making anyway, which was that as somebody who comes originally from a part of that constituency which could not under any definition be described as 'Elstree', I would have had less objection to my home constituency bearing that name than I did to the name it has, which I regard as crap. It was a riposte to those who claim that 'Skelmersdale would object to Ormskirk' and 'Bromyard would object to Leominster'. In other words I would prefer a single, succinct name which is clearly identifiable to people from outside the area as well as having some significance within it (I would have objected to the name 'Borehamwood' incidentally) Why Elstree but not Borehamwood? Borehamwood is much the larger and more significant settlement of the two Isn't Potters Bar the largest in the constituency? |
|
