bsjmcr
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,593 
|
Post by bsjmcr on Jun 22, 2021 21:00:40 GMT
I object to the fact that there is a constituency called Richmond Park which doesn't specify whether it refers to Ronaldshay Park or The Batts. I must be the only one, or one of very few, that wouldn't mind 'London' preceding the name of Greater London constituencies as they do in Birmingham, Manchester, etc. London Richmond would solve that problem instantly (and make the other one Richmond and Northallerton if you like). Granted, some London names would need shortening, and most London constituency name elements are reasonably well known, but before I was into this and as a northerner I wouldn't have known where Mitcham or Morden is (Merton yes but for some reason that isn't in a constituency name), but the new London proposals have some real jokers (at least for a Northerner) - how did 'Westbourne' get to be mentioned with a name as prestigious as Kensington? There is a 'High Barnet' but not a low one, an East Barnet but no other compass point Barnet, same goes for Hampstead, which only has a West it appears. Oh wait, Hampstead Town itself is in... 'Camden Town and St John's Wood', the latter of which sounds more like something you would hear Roger Tilling shout out on University Challenge... |
|
|
|
Post by 🏴☠️ Neath West 🏴☠️ on Jun 22, 2021 21:01:08 GMT
Most people have heard of Tilehurst and it has the advantage of spanning the boundary between the two relevant local authorities. Personally I would go for Bradfield as this constituency closely corresponds to the boundaries of the old Bradfield Rural District I disagree. I doubt if 80% of the British electorate has ever heard of Tilehurst or that 10% could find it on a map where all place names had been omitted. I wonder what the percentage would be for Eddisbury. Or Blackley and Broughton. |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jun 22, 2021 21:04:45 GMT
I object to the fact that there is a constituency called Richmond Park which doesn't specify whether it refers to Ronaldshay Park or The Batts. I must be the only one, or one of very few, that wouldn't mind 'London' preceding the name of Greater London constituencies as they do in Birmingham, Manchester, etc. London Richmond would solve that problem instantly (and make the other one Richmond and Northallerton if you like). Granted, some London names would need shortening, and most London constituency name elements are reasonably well known, but before I was into this and as a northerner I wouldn't have known where Mitcham or Morden is (Merton yes but for some reason that isn't in a constituency name), but the new London proposals have some real jokers (at least for a Northerner) - how did 'Westbourne' get to be mentioned with a name as prestigious as Kensington? There is a 'High Barnet' but not a low one, an East Barnet but no other compass point Barnet, same goes for Hampstead, which only has a West it appears. Oh wait, Hampstead Town itself is in... 'Camden Town and St John's Wood', the latter of which sounds more like something you would hear Roger Tilling shout out on University Challenge... You might be telling the wrong person that Westbourne is a 'joker' |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Jun 22, 2021 21:07:36 GMT
Not really as I regularly get emails from people living in Westbourne Grove under the misapprehension that I represent them. Westbourne Grove is in Bayswater ward which would be in the new Westminster and Chelsea East seat.
|
|
bsjmcr
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,593
|
Post by bsjmcr on Jun 22, 2021 21:08:21 GMT
Does anyone know why Runnymede has now disappeared in favour of Weighbridge, sorry, 'Weybridge and Chertsey', when it still includes the entirety of Runnymede? The changes that did occur are an addition from the non-Runnymede bit anyway, so I'm confused as to why the name has gone, when Runnymede is well known in itself (even I know it, thanks to the Magna Carta) and not a massively obscure local authority name.
|
|
bsjmcr
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,593
|
Post by bsjmcr on Jun 22, 2021 21:12:28 GMT
When I google 'Westbourne', all that comes up on the first page is one in West Sussex and one in Dorset, and no less than three schools with that name, none of which are in London, which says it all, really.
On a vaguely similar note, but perhaps on the other side of the coin, I wonder how many people in Greater London (and environs) might think that Colne Valley constituency is somewhere near them?
|
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Jun 22, 2021 21:14:31 GMT
I object to the fact that there is a constituency called Richmond Park which doesn't specify whether it refers to Ronaldshay Park or The Batts. I must be the only one, or one of very few, that wouldn't mind 'London' preceding the name of Greater London constituencies as they do in Birmingham, Manchester, etc. London Richmond would solve that problem instantly (and make the other one Richmond and Northallerton if you like). Granted, some London names would need shortening, and most London constituency name elements are reasonably well known, but before I was into this and as a northerner I wouldn't have known where Mitcham or Morden is (Merton yes but for some reason that isn't in a constituency name), but the new London proposals have some real jokers (at least for a Northerner) - how did 'Westbourne' get to be mentioned with a name as prestigious as Kensington? There is a 'High Barnet' but not a low one, an East Barnet but no other compass point Barnet, same goes for Hampstead, which only has a West it appears. Oh wait, Hampstead Town itself is in... 'Camden Town and St John's Wood', the latter of which sounds more like something you would hear Roger Tilling shout out on University Challenge... I like the idea of 'Low Barnet'. |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Jun 22, 2021 21:18:32 GMT
Does anyone know why Runnymede has now disappeared in favour of Weighbridge, sorry, 'Weybridge and Chertsey', when it still includes the entirety of Runnymede? The changes that did occur are an addition from the non-Runnymede bit anyway, so I'm confused as to why the name has gone, when Runnymede is well known in itself (even I know it, thanks to the Magna Carta) and not a massively obscure local authority name. It's lost Egham Hythe and Egham Town. CORRECTION Part of the historic Magna Carta meadow site is in Egham Hythe. |
|
bsjmcr
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,593
|
Post by bsjmcr on Jun 22, 2021 21:22:06 GMT
Does anyone know why Runnymede has now disappeared in favour of Weighbridge, sorry, 'Weybridge and Chertsey', when it still includes the entirety of Runnymede? The changes that did occur are an addition from the non-Runnymede bit anyway, so I'm confused as to why the name has gone, when Runnymede is well known in itself (even I know it, thanks to the Magna Carta) and not a massively obscure local authority name. It's lost Egham Hythe and Egham Town. CORRECTION Part of the historic Magna Carta meadow site is in Egham Hythe. Ah - that is quite a big deal, if geographically small, I didn't see the small boundary there at all, (with all the layers on!) my eyes were only focussed on the boundary change on the other end of the seat. |
|
bsjmcr
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,593
|
Post by bsjmcr on Jun 22, 2021 21:43:42 GMT
I must be the only one, or one of very few, that wouldn't mind 'London' preceding the name of Greater London constituencies as they do in Birmingham, Manchester, etc. London Richmond would solve that problem instantly (and make the other one Richmond and Northallerton if you like). Granted, some London names would need shortening, and most London constituency name elements are reasonably well known, but before I was into this and as a northerner I wouldn't have known where Mitcham or Morden is (Merton yes but for some reason that isn't in a constituency name), but the new London proposals have some real jokers (at least for a Northerner) - how did 'Westbourne' get to be mentioned with a name as prestigious as Kensington? There is a 'High Barnet' but not a low one, an East Barnet but no other compass point Barnet, same goes for Hampstead, which only has a West it appears. Oh wait, Hampstead Town itself is in... 'Camden Town and St John's Wood', the latter of which sounds more like something you would hear Roger Tilling shout out on University Challenge... I think there was a time when some London seats had a London prefix although I'm not sure whether it was official or not. Ooh, I didn't know that. I know London borough* names preceded many London constituencies, and Lewisham Deptford and Ealing Southall are I guess hangovers from that era (which will now be removed next review) * Which reminds me of another odd London one to me - Bermondsey and 'Borough'. What borough? Sounds like a placeholder name. |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Jun 22, 2021 22:00:21 GMT
I think there was a time when some London seats had a London prefix although I'm not sure whether it was official or not. They were referred to in the PA list, so in most TV coverage, newspapers and reference books, from 1964 up to 1974 (when the London Borough names were used as prefixes). |
|
ilerda
Conservative
Posts: 1,101
|
Post by ilerda on Jun 22, 2021 22:02:30 GMT
I think there was a time when some London seats had a London prefix although I'm not sure whether it was official or not. Ooh, I didn't know that. I know London borough* names preceded many London constituencies, and Lewisham Deptford and Ealing Southall are I guess hangovers from that era (which will now be removed next review) * Which reminds me of another odd London one to me - Bermondsey and 'Borough'. What borough? Sounds like a placeholder name. Borough is a very longstanding and historic name for the part of Southwark immediately over the river from the City, across London Bridge. Having said that, I do think the current form of Bermondsey and Old Southwark better represents the area covered. |
|
|
|
Post by islington on Jun 22, 2021 22:06:34 GMT
I think there was a time when some London seats had a London prefix although I'm not sure whether it was official or not. Ooh, I didn't know that. I know London borough* names preceded many London constituencies, and Lewisham Deptford and Ealing Southall are I guess hangovers from that era (which will now be removed next review) * Which reminds me of another odd London one to me - Bermondsey and 'Borough'. What borough? Sounds like a placeholder name. This is a London thing. Historically, of the three main settlements in what is now the middle of London, you had London proper, which was a city of course, and Westminster, also usually described as a city. That left Southwark as the only one that was a mere borough, and it came to be informally referred to as such to distinguish it from the two cities. And this habit has stuck, so that the original settlement of Southwark (as opposed to the much larger modern London borough of that name), is routinely referred to as 'Borough' and there is a tube station of that name as well as Borough High Street, Borough Market, &c. If you're not a Londoner I don't see how you'd be expected to know this. The Westbourne is one of London's ancient rivers, now conduited and invisible at street level. It's entirely unsuitable as a constituency name. |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Jun 22, 2021 22:46:19 GMT
Suspect the PBCE fairly randomly stuck three north Paddington wards in the Kensington seat and decided to name it after one of them. Queen's Park would be confusing because the actual Queen's Park is in Brent; Harrow Road would be confusing because it's odd to name a constituency after a road, so that just left Westbourne.
|
|
|
|
Post by therealriga on Jun 22, 2021 22:53:37 GMT
Some of the papers describing the preparation of the initial proposals are now on the BCE website, linked from the meetings page under 22 and 23 March 2021. Some of them contain vague descriptions of alternative options which were considered. I found this bit interesting "Mr Byrne asked about progress with his enquiry about a study to examine the feasibility of initially machine-generating all possible and legally valid initial proposals. Mr Bellringer confirmed that he had ascertained that such a study could be undertaken within the £10k procurement limit for a statement of work. There was insufficient funding for this in the current financial year, but the Commission could look to have the work done and paid for early in the 2020/2021 financial year." We had machine generated proposals on here last year and the results were a mix of hilarious and horrible. Not sure this is the best use of their time, some of their solutions are already too creative. |
|
bsjmcr
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,593
|
Post by bsjmcr on Jun 22, 2021 23:29:33 GMT
Suspect the PBCE fairly randomly stuck three north Paddington wards in the Kensington seat and decided to name it after one of them. Queen's Park would be confusing because the actual Queen's Park is in Brent; Harrow Road would be confusing because it's odd to name a constituency after a road, so that just left Westbourne. Kensington and Westminster North West, anyone?  |
|
ricmk
Lib Dem
Posts: 2,629
Member is Online
|
Post by ricmk on Jun 22, 2021 23:40:21 GMT
Some of the papers describing the preparation of the initial proposals are now on the BCE website, linked from the meetings page under 22 and 23 March 2021. Some of them contain vague descriptions of alternative options which were considered. I found this bit interesting "Mr Byrne asked about progress with his enquiry about a study to examine the feasibility of initially machine-generating all possible and legally valid initial proposals. Mr Bellringer confirmed that he had ascertained that such a study could be undertaken within the £10k procurement limit for a statement of work. There was insufficient funding for this in the current financial year, but the Commission could look to have the work done and paid for early in the 2020/2021 financial year." We had machine generated proposals on here last year and the results were a mix of hilarious and horrible. Not sure this is the best use of their time, some of their solutions are already too creative. I wrote a program to compute all the options for Milton Keynes on the previous review - I sometimes got hilarious and horrible on the same combination. in general there are far more legal combinations than you might expect so I would expect the output to be well into the thousands for all but the most tightly defined areas. And that's before you get into ward splits. Perhaps useful in a sticky corner where no-one can find a half-decent solution but I suspect that you'd be so overwhelmed with output otherwise that you'd be no better off than using judgement from the start. |
|
Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 12,038
|
Post by Khunanup on Jun 22, 2021 23:42:00 GMT
Suspect the PBCE fairly randomly stuck three north Paddington wards in the Kensington seat and decided to name it after one of them. Queen's Park would be confusing because the actual Queen's Park is in Brent; Harrow Road would be confusing because it's odd to name a constituency after a road, so that just left Westbourne. Kensington and Westminster North West, anyone? Central London Inner Central North West shurely?! |
|
|
|
Post by islington on Jun 23, 2021 19:48:00 GMT
Does anyone know why Runnymede has now disappeared in favour of Weighbridge, sorry, 'Weybridge and Chertsey', when it still includes the entirety of Runnymede? The changes that did occur are an addition from the non-Runnymede bit anyway, so I'm confused as to why the name has gone, when Runnymede is well known in itself (even I know it, thanks to the Magna Carta) and not a massively obscure local authority name. Runnymede is a name we're well rid of. It's firmly in the category of terrible 1970s names that still blight the local government map. In this instance it was a case of desperately looking for a name that people would have heard of as a way of avoiding the petty local jealousies that might have been stirred up if they had named the LA after its principal town and obvious centre, namely Chertsey.
Runnymede (the actual place) is right at the northern end of the district and as for the only thing for which Runnymede is famous, namely the signing of Magna Carta, it is not entirely certain that this even took place on the Surrey side of the river; it may have been on the other side, thus not in Runnymede district at all. And just to add to the general confusion, the course of the river may have changed in the last eight centuries so what was on the south side of the river back then may be on the north side now, or vice versa. |
|
|
|
Post by islington on Jun 23, 2021 19:53:38 GMT
I object to the fact that there is a constituency called Richmond Park which doesn't specify whether it refers to Ronaldshay Park or The Batts. I must be the only one, or one of very few, that wouldn't mind 'London' preceding the name of Greater London constituencies as they do in Birmingham, Manchester, etc. London Richmond would solve that problem instantly (and make the other one Richmond and Northallerton if you like). Granted, some London names would need shortening, and most London constituency name elements are reasonably well known, but before I was into this and as a northerner I wouldn't have known where Mitcham or Morden is (Merton yes but for some reason that isn't in a constituency name), but the new London proposals have some real jokers (at least for a Northerner) - how did 'Westbourne' get to be mentioned with a name as prestigious as Kensington? There is a 'High Barnet' but not a low one, an East Barnet but no other compass point Barnet, same goes for Hampstead, which only has a West it appears. Oh wait, Hampstead Town itself is in... 'Camden Town and St John's Wood', the latter of which sounds more like something you would hear Roger Tilling shout out on University Challenge... The two main places in Merton are Mitcham and Wimbledon: Merton is a relatively small place in the middle, chosen as a compromise name.
'High Barnet' is the original settlement of Barnet, a classic hilltop village. It's called that because of its elevated position to distinguish it from East Barnet and Friern Barnet.
|
|
