|
|
Post by islington on Jun 28, 2020 12:10:44 GMT
Potters Bar is the third largest town in the constituency after Elstree-Borehamwood and Bushey I can see why they ended up calling it Hertsmere!! I can see why they should go back to S Herts. |
|
|
|
Post by islington on Jun 28, 2020 12:19:30 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? I'm sorry, I can't let this pass.
'St Pancras', in this context, is not the name of a railway station. It's ultimately derived from the ancient parish of St Pancras, which was constituted as a Parliamentary Borough as long ago as 1885 when it received four seats (and I cannot resist the temptation to post a map of them here). The later metropolitan borough of the same name, and covering virtually the same area, was also referenced in constituency names. So this is a name that maintains a valuable historic link.
|
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Jun 28, 2020 15:29:37 GMT
If anything, the question is why mighty Saint Pancras was renamed upon annexing its smaller neighbors Holborn and Hampstead. Hackney wasn't under identical circumstances. (No need to wonder why the 83? 74? Boundary commission went with Hampstead & Highgate rather than St Pancras N & Hampstead.)
|
|
bsjmcr
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,593 
|
Post by bsjmcr on Jun 28, 2020 15:59:29 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? I'm sorry, I can't let this pass.
'St Pancras', in this context, is not the name of a railway station. It's ultimately derived from the ancient parish of St Pancras, which was constituted as a Parliamentary Borough as long ago as 1885 when it received four seats (and I cannot resist the temptation to post a map of them here). The later metropolitan borough of the same name, and covering virtually the same area, was also referenced in constituency names. So this is a name that maintains a valuable historic link.
Very well, it might be a historic link, I didn't know it went back such a long way, but would anybody today actually say 'I'm from St Pancras', rather than 'I'm from Camden'? (genuine question, as unsurprisingly I'm not a Londoner!) The point was more on how such a well-known local authority name isn't represented in Parliament, yet other historic 'hundreds' and made-up LA names are. Lambeth is another one. IMO, the only boroughs that don't deserve a mention are Redbridge and Havering. Even Haringey is a real place, right? (spelt differently for some reason?). |
|
|
|
Post by bjornhattan on Jun 28, 2020 16:22:26 GMT
I'm sorry, I can't let this pass.
'St Pancras', in this context, is not the name of a railway station. It's ultimately derived from the ancient parish of St Pancras, which was constituted as a Parliamentary Borough as long ago as 1885 when it received four seats (and I cannot resist the temptation to post a map of them here). The later metropolitan borough of the same name, and covering virtually the same area, was also referenced in constituency names. So this is a name that maintains a valuable historic link.
Very well, it might be a historic link, I didn't know it went back such a long way, but would anybody today actually say 'I'm from St Pancras', rather than 'I'm from Camden'? (genuine question, as unsurprisingly I'm not a Londoner!) The point was more on how such a well-known local authority name isn't represented in Parliament, yet other historic 'hundreds' and made-up LA names are. Lambeth is another one. IMO, the only boroughs that don't deserve a mention are Redbridge and Havering. Even Haringey is a real place, right? (spelt differently for some reason?). Havering-atte-Bower is much smaller than Romford or Upminster, but it is a real place, and I'd argue a fair bit more distinct than somewhere like Hillingdon. |
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Jun 28, 2020 16:57:44 GMT
I'm sorry, I can't let this pass.
'St Pancras', in this context, is not the name of a railway station. It's ultimately derived from the ancient parish of St Pancras, which was constituted as a Parliamentary Borough as long ago as 1885 when it received four seats (and I cannot resist the temptation to post a map of them here). The later metropolitan borough of the same name, and covering virtually the same area, was also referenced in constituency names. So this is a name that maintains a valuable historic link.
Very well, it might be a historic link, I didn't know it went back such a long way, but would anybody today actually say 'I'm from St Pancras', rather than 'I'm from Camden'? (genuine question, as unsurprisingly I'm not a Londoner!) The point was more on how such a well-known local authority name isn't represented in Parliament, yet other historic 'hundreds' and made-up LA names are. Lambeth is another one. IMO, the only boroughs that don't deserve a mention are Redbridge and Havering. Even Haringey is a real place, right? (spelt differently for some reason?). Haringey is a historic form of the word for Hornsey. |
|
jamie
Top Poster
Posts: 7,069
|
Post by jamie on Jun 28, 2020 18:12:45 GMT
I've had a look through London and theres quite a few poor constituency names, some already mentioned by others.
Barking + Dagenham and Rainham - Probably controversial, but i'd rename these 'Dagenham West' and 'Dagenham East'. What exactly constitutes Dagenham is debatable, but most of Dagenham is in Barking constituency and arguably makes up a majority of it. Its a well known place, and the new names would get rid of the small and misleading 'and Rainham'.
Bermondsey and Old Southwark - Its just 'Bermondsey'.
Bethnal Green and Bow - Rename to 'Bethnal Green'. No need to include Bow in the name as Bethnal Green is the largest settlement and central to the constituency. If were including Bow, why not also Stepney and Whitechapel?
Chingford and Woodford Green - Rename to just 'Chingford'. A large part of Woodford Green is in Ilford North so the current name is rather misleading. If the pitchforks become too threatening, rename 'Chingford and Woodford Wells'.
Chipping Barnet - Rename to just 'Barnet'. It includes Barnet Gate, Barnet Vale, East Barnet, Friern Barnet, High Barnet, and New Barnet. If Barnet is good enough a name for a local authority, why not the constituency which specifically covers all the Barnets?
Cities of London and Westminster - Rename to 'Westminster', its not exactly an obscure hamlet or wapentake.
Erith and Thamesmead - Rename to just 'Thamesmead'. Erith is on the edge of the constituency and parts are not even in this constituency.
Hackney North and Stoke Newington + Hackney South and Shoreditch - Rename 'Hackney North' and 'Hackney South'.
Kingston and Surbiton - Rename to just 'Surbiton'. A good chunk of Kingston is in Richmond Park so this would be a more accurate name.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2020 18:16:31 GMT
Cities of London and Westminster - Rename to 'Westminster', its not exactly an obscure hamlet or wapentake. Although I do usually favour short constituency names, I would have to disagree here due to the historical importance of the City of London, and would retain the current constituency name. |
|
|
|
Post by bjornhattan on Jun 28, 2020 18:20:11 GMT
I've had a look through London and theres quite a few poor constituency names, some already mentioned by others. Barking + Dagenham and Rainham - Probably controversial, but i'd rename these 'Dagenham West' and 'Dagenham East'. What exactly constitutes Dagenham is debatable, but most of Dagenham is in Barking constituency and arguably makes up a majority of it. Its a well known place, and the new names would get rid of the small and misleading 'and Rainham'. Bermondsey and Old Southwark - Its just 'Bermondsey'. Bethnal Green and Bow - Rename to 'Bethnal Green'. No need to include Bow in the name as Bethnal Green is the largest settlement and central to the constituency. If were including Bow, why not also Stepney and Whitechapel? Chingford and Woodford Green - Rename to just 'Chingford'. A large part of Woodford Green is in Ilford North so the current name is rather misleading. If the pitchforks become too threatening, rename 'Chingford and Woodford Wells'. Chipping Barnet - Rename to just 'Barnet'. It includes Barnet Gate, Barnet Vale, East Barnet, Friern Barnet, High Barnet, and New Barnet. If Barnet is good enough a name for a local authority, why not the constituency which specifically covers all the Barnets? Cities of London and Westminster - Rename to 'Westminster', its not exactly an obscure hamlet or wapentake. Erith and Thamesmead - Rename to just 'Thamesmead'. Erith is on the edge of the constituency and parts are not even in this constituency. Hackney North and Stoke Newington + Hackney South and Shoreditch - Rename 'Hackney North' and 'Hackney South'. Kingston and Surbiton - Rename to just 'Surbiton'. A good chunk of Kingston is in Richmond Park so this would be a more accurate name. I'm not sure about renaming Barking, but the "and Rainham" definitely needs to go. Either that, or "Gillingham and Rainham" needs to lose its Rainham! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2020 18:20:29 GMT
I've had a look through London and theres quite a few poor constituency names, some already mentioned by others. Barking + Dagenham and Rainham - Probably controversial, but i'd rename these 'Dagenham West' and 'Dagenham East'. What exactly constitutes Dagenham is debatable, but most of Dagenham is in Barking constituency and arguably makes up a majority of it. Its a well known place, and the new names would get rid of the small and misleading 'and Rainham'. Bermondsey and Old Southwark - Its just 'Bermondsey'. Bethnal Green and Bow - Rename to 'Bethnal Green'. No need to include Bow in the name as Bethnal Green is the largest settlement and central to the constituency. If were including Bow, why not also Stepney and Whitechapel? Chingford and Woodford Green - Rename to just 'Chingford'. A large part of Woodford Green is in Ilford North so the current name is rather misleading. If the pitchforks become too threatening, rename 'Chingford and Woodford Wells'. Chipping Barnet - Rename to just 'Barnet'. It includes Barnet Gate, Barnet Vale, East Barnet, Friern Barnet, High Barnet, and New Barnet. If Barnet is good enough a name for a local authority, why not the constituency which specifically covers all the Barnets? Cities of London and Westminster - Rename to 'Westminster', its not exactly an obscure hamlet or wapentake. Erith and Thamesmead - Rename to just 'Thamesmead'. Erith is on the edge of the constituency and parts are not even in this constituency. Hackney North and Stoke Newington + Hackney South and Shoreditch - Rename 'Hackney North' and 'Hackney South'. Kingston and Surbiton - Rename to just 'Surbiton'. A good chunk of Kingston is in Richmond Park so this would be a more accurate name. "City of London" had (has?) to feature in the constituency name at one point, set down in legislation. |
|
|
|
Post by islington on Jun 28, 2020 18:27:02 GMT
I've had a look through London and theres quite a few poor constituency names, some already mentioned by others. Barking + Dagenham and Rainham - Probably controversial, but i'd rename these 'Dagenham West' and 'Dagenham East'. What exactly constitutes Dagenham is debatable, but most of Dagenham is in Barking constituency and arguably makes up a majority of it. Its a well known place, and the new names would get rid of the small and misleading 'and Rainham'. Bermondsey and Old Southwark - Its just 'Bermondsey'. Bethnal Green and Bow - Rename to 'Bethnal Green'. No need to include Bow in the name as Bethnal Green is the largest settlement and central to the constituency. If were including Bow, why not also Stepney and Whitechapel? Chingford and Woodford Green - Rename to just 'Chingford'. A large part of Woodford Green is in Ilford North so the current name is rather misleading. If the pitchforks become too threatening, rename 'Chingford and Woodford Wells'. Chipping Barnet - Rename to just 'Barnet'. It includes Barnet Gate, Barnet Vale, East Barnet, Friern Barnet, High Barnet, and New Barnet. If Barnet is good enough a name for a local authority, why not the constituency which specifically covers all the Barnets? Cities of London and Westminster - Rename to 'Westminster', its not exactly an obscure hamlet or wapentake. Erith and Thamesmead - Rename to just 'Thamesmead'. Erith is on the edge of the constituency and parts are not even in this constituency. Hackney North and Stoke Newington + Hackney South and Shoreditch - Rename 'Hackney North' and 'Hackney South'. Kingston and Surbiton - Rename to just 'Surbiton'. A good chunk of Kingston is in Richmond Park so this would be a more accurate name. "City of London" had (has?) to feature in the constituency name at one point, set down in legislation. Correct, but that requirement was abolished by the 2011 Act.
Nevertheless, there has been a 'City of London' constituency for over 700 years so I'd like to keep the reference even if there's now no legal duty to do so.
|
|
|
|
Post by 🏴☠️ Neath West 🏴☠️ on Jun 28, 2020 18:39:37 GMT
Cities of London and Westminster - Rename to 'Westminster', its not exactly an obscure hamlet or wapentake. Just call it London Central. |
|
pl
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,686
|
Post by pl on Jun 28, 2020 19:53:22 GMT
Cities of London and Westminster - Rename to 'Westminster', its not exactly an obscure hamlet or wapentake. Just call it London Central. I hadn't realised until this evening that the right of the 'City of London' to be included in the constituency name was abolished in 2011, along with the protection of the City from being divided between constituencies. |
|
cj
Socialist
These fragments I have shored against my ruins
Posts: 3,285
|
Post by cj on Jun 28, 2020 20:10:39 GMT
I'm sorry, I can't let this pass.
'St Pancras', in this context, is not the name of a railway station. It's ultimately derived from the ancient parish of St Pancras, which was constituted as a Parliamentary Borough as long ago as 1885 when it received four seats (and I cannot resist the temptation to post a map of them here). The later metropolitan borough of the same name, and covering virtually the same area, was also referenced in constituency names. So this is a name that maintains a valuable historic link.
Very well, it might be a historic link, I didn't know it went back such a long way, but would anybody today actually say 'I'm from St Pancras', rather than 'I'm from Camden'? (genuine question, as unsurprisingly I'm not a Londoner!) The point was more on how such a well-known local authority name isn't represented in Parliament, yet other historic 'hundreds' and made-up LA names are. Lambeth is another one. IMO, the only boroughs that don't deserve a mention are Redbridge and Havering. Even Haringey is a real place, right? (spelt differently for some reason?). Never underestimate the degree to which a Londoner will drill down in a conversation to find out where you're from.
E.g. "I'm from North London" "Whereabouts?" "Muswell Hill" "Whereabouts?" "bottom of the hill" "Whereabouts?" "off Colney Hatch" "Whereabouts?" "Sydney Road" "Whereabouts?" "Opposite end to the Minstrel Boy"
Ok the last back and forth is an exaggeration, but otherwise that is a conversation I have had before.
Its the civvy version for of the Knowledge
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,842
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Jun 28, 2020 20:26:26 GMT
Very well, it might be a historic link, I didn't know it went back such a long way, but would anybody today actually say 'I'm from St Pancras', rather than 'I'm from Camden'? (genuine question, as unsurprisingly I'm not a Londoner!) The point was more on how such a well-known local authority name isn't represented in Parliament, yet other historic 'hundreds' and made-up LA names are. Lambeth is another one. IMO, the only boroughs that don't deserve a mention are Redbridge and Havering. Even Haringey is a real place, right? (spelt differently for some reason?). Never underestimate the degree to which a Londoner will drill down in a conversation to find out where you're from.
E.g. "I'm from North London" "Whereabouts?" "Muswell Hill" "Whereabouts?" "bottom of the hill" "Whereabouts?" "off Colney Hatch" "Whereabouts?" "Sydney Road" "Whereabouts?" "Opposite end to the Minstrel Boy"
Ok the last back and forth is an exaggeration, but otherwise that is a conversation I have had before.
Its the civvy version for of the Knowledge
In Sheffield people navigate via things that aren't there. You know where Wade's was, where the Hole In The Road used to be, well, go past where C&A used to be, past what used to be Marples, opposite where Burger King used to be, and by what used to be the Head Post Office, opposite what used to be The Roxy.... |
|
|
|
Post by gwynthegriff on Jun 28, 2020 20:34:18 GMT
Never underestimate the degree to which a Londoner will drill down in a conversation to find out where you're from. E.g. "I'm from North London" "Whereabouts?" "Muswell Hill" "Whereabouts?" "bottom of the hill" "Whereabouts?" "off Colney Hatch" "Whereabouts?" "Sydney Road" "Whereabouts?" "Opposite end to the Minstrel Boy" Ok the last back and forth is an exaggeration, but otherwise that is a conversation I have had before. Its the civvy version for of the Knowledge
In Sheffield people navigate via things that aren't there. You know where Wade's was, where the Hole In The Road used to be, well, go past where C&A used to be, past what used to be Marples, opposite where Burger King used to be, and by what used to be the Head Post Office, opposite what used to be The Roxy.... I used to Clerk a Parish Council where they would navigate by who used to live near where they were talking about. Them: "There's a terrible pothole on Mill Lane" Me: "Whereabouts?" Them: "It's by the Clarke's place" Them2: "More by Harrisons I would say" Me: (frantically looking at map) "So which part of Mill Lane?" Them: "Like we say, between Clarke's place and Harrison's" Me: (Now scanning the electoral register for Mill Lane) "But I can't find anyone called Clarke or Harrison in Mill Lane!" Them (both): "Oh it's not Clarkes nor Harrisons there now. There's new people; can't remember their names though ..." Them3: "Isn't one of them a cousin of Frank?" Me: " Can't you just tell me the name of the property?"Them1, 2 and 3: "Are you alright Gwyn?" |
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,842
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Jun 29, 2020 0:28:40 GMT
In Sheffield people navigate via things that aren't there. You know where Wade's was, where the Hole In The Road used to be, well, go past where C&A used to be, past what used to be Marples, opposite where Burger King used to be, and by what used to be the Head Post Office, opposite what used to be The Roxy.... I used to Clerk a Parish Council where they would navigate by who used to live near where they were talking about. Them: "There's a terrible pothole on Mill Lane" Me: "Whereabouts?" Them: "It's by the Clarke's place" Them2: "More by Harrisons I would say" Me: (frantically looking at map) "So which part of Mill Lane?" Them: "Like we say, between Clarke's place and Harrison's" Me: (Now scanning the electoral register for Mill Lane) "But I can't find anyone called Clarke or Harrison in Mill Lane!" Them (both): "Oh it's not Clarkes nor Harrisons there now. There's new people; can't remember their names though ..." Them3: "Isn't one of them a cousin of Frank?" Me: " Can't you just tell me the name of the property?"Them1, 2 and 3: "Are you alright Gwyn?" On my membership list I have had to put one member's address as (similar to): anticlockwise road in Fryup Dale. Though you have to drive clockwise to see the sign with the name on it. |
|
Richard Allen
Banned
Four time loser in VUKPOTY finals
Posts: 19,052
|
Post by Richard Allen on Jun 29, 2020 0:41:28 GMT
Never underestimate the degree to which a Londoner will drill down in a conversation to find out where you're from. E.g. "I'm from North London" "Whereabouts?" "Muswell Hill" "Whereabouts?" "bottom of the hill" "Whereabouts?" "off Colney Hatch" "Whereabouts?" "Sydney Road" "Whereabouts?" "Opposite end to the Minstrel Boy" Ok the last back and forth is an exaggeration, but otherwise that is a conversation I have had before. Its the civvy version for of the Knowledge
In Sheffield people navigate via things that aren't there. You know where Wade's was, where the Hole In The Road used to be, well, go past where C&A used to be, past what used to be Marples, opposite where Burger King used to be, and by what used to be the Head Post Office, opposite what used to be The Roxy.... It probably says something about the people I associate with but most of them navigate by pubs, or sadly by former pubs. |
|
ian48
Non-Aligned
Posts: 58
|
Post by ian48 on Jun 29, 2020 11:36:03 GMT
The Welsh ones mentioned in this thread are interesting because of the use of "Clwyd" which does not exist as a local authority, and the non-use of "Flintshire" which is. The Welsh Boundary Commission recommended dual names (or official names with translations at least) during both Zombie reviews, of course. Since boundaries in the area didn't change in the last real review, why change names? (Same in Dyfed.) Also of course the "preserved counties" of Wales functioned as a basis of apportionment in that review, so Clwyd (unlike Dinefwr and Preseli Pembrokeshire) kind of still existed. The really remarkable thing is Aberconwy, newly named for an already abolished 74 district, though an exactly coterminous one. Someone suggested it at the local hearing and nobody intervened. (The commission had suggested to keep Conwy.) They chose not to rename the constituency Conwy as the old Conwy constituency included Bangor but not places like Llanrwst so was quite different from the new constituency. The new Aberconwy constituency was exactly the same as the old borough so that's why they chose the name, which is very historic anyway, going back to the Treaty of Aberconwy of 1277. Conwy was felt to be difficult to use as it would otherwise be in use for a former constituency, a council ward, a town council and a county council, none of which were the same area exactly as a the new constituency. In terms of profile of settlement, the largest and most well-known town is Llandudno, which would probably be located by and have been heard of by a fair amount of the population. More so than either Conwy or Colwyn Bay (which look likely to be the main element of the name of the successor constituency at the next review). Llandudno and Colwyn Bay would be most accurate name in terms of population. |
|
|
|
Post by Wisconsin on Jul 30, 2020 18:45:08 GMT
Paisley and Renfrewshire North
and
Paisley and Renfrewshire South
Very confusing.
|
|
