|
|
Post by ClevelandYorks on Jun 27, 2023 14:00:05 GMT
Last minute predictions- which areas of the country do we think will have some changes from the Revised Proposals to the final recommendations? I think they'll probably try to do something about the Pencoed salient in Rhondda. For those who can remember past Boundary Commission reviews, were there many (any?) changes between the revised and final recommendations? |
|
|
|
Post by John Chanin on Jun 27, 2023 14:20:57 GMT
Last minute predictions- which areas of the country do we think will have some changes from the Revised Proposals to the final recommendations? I think they'll probably try to do something about the Pencoed salient in Rhondda. For those who can remember past Boundary Commission reviews, were there many (any?) changes between the revised and final recommendations? Very few and mostly just ward swaps. I remember two occasions on which they reverted to their original proposals, the revised ones having generated more complaints than the original ones. Never has there been anything entirely new. There were however name changes - it always amazes me that so many people are much more concerned about this than the actual boundaries. |
|
|
|
Post by Penddu on Jun 27, 2023 14:56:54 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by mattb on Jun 27, 2023 15:03:36 GMT
For those who can remember past Boundary Commission reviews, were there many (any?) changes between the revised and final recommendations? Very few and mostly just ward swaps. I remember two occasions on which they reverted to their original proposals, the revised ones having generated more complaints than the original ones. Never has there been anything entirely new. There were however name changes - it always amazes me that so many people are much more concerned about this than the actual boundaries. There was definitely some completely new stuff at this stage in the abortive reviews. (e.g. proposal to create an orphan ward of Watford Borough in the St.Albans constituency - which afaik had not been raised by anyone at any stage in the process before the final recs). But I would not expect anything completely new this time round. |
|
nyx
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,034
|
Post by nyx on Jun 27, 2023 18:11:43 GMT
For those who can remember past Boundary Commission reviews, were there many (any?) changes between the revised and final recommendations? Very few and mostly just ward swaps. I remember two occasions on which they reverted to their original proposals, the revised ones having generated more complaints than the original ones. Never has there been anything entirely new. There were however name changes - it always amazes me that so many people are much more concerned about this than the actual boundaries. I still hold out hope for "North West Cambridgeshire", which contains none of historic Cambridgeshire, being changed to something reflecting Peterborough in some way. The commission's reasoning of "there's no better name" for keeping the current name feels rather weak. And in general a lot of constituency names could be shortened. We shall see if that happens |
|
|
|
Post by islington on Jun 27, 2023 18:17:06 GMT
Last minute predictions- which areas of the country do we think will have some changes from the Revised Proposals to the final recommendations? I think they'll probably try to do something about the Pencoed salient in Rhondda. The bit they most need to change is the unnecessary riding roughshod over county boundaries in the SW region, but they clearly won't.
Leicestershire is a mess too, and avoidably so, but again I don't expect that to change.
The area where there might conceivably be an improvement is Northants, where they've split wards in a way that completely ignores their own guidelines. But my hopes aren't high even here.
I think the Commission would be subject to serious criticism if it made a major change at this stage because opponents would argue very plausibly that they had been presented with a fait accompli with no opportunity to make representations against it. The only exception to this is that it would probably be acceptable for the Commission to revert to its initial plan, or something close to it, if it had received strong representations that the revised proposal was worse.
Edited to add: On checking back I see I made very limited proposals at this stage, affecting Nhants and Leics as mentioned above plus three seats in Wilts and seven in S London. I don't hold out much hope, but nous verrons.
|
|
|
|
Post by islington on Jun 27, 2023 18:18:52 GMT
Very few and mostly just ward swaps. I remember two occasions on which they reverted to their original proposals, the revised ones having generated more complaints than the original ones. Never has there been anything entirely new. There were however name changes - it always amazes me that so many people are much more concerned about this than the actual boundaries. I still hold out hope for "North West Cambridgeshire", which contains none of historic Cambridgeshire, being changed to something reflecting Peterborough in some way. The commission's reasoning of "there's no better name" for keeping the current name feels rather weak. And in general a lot of constituency names could be shortened. We shall see if that happens They could, but they won't be. Au contraire (as the ship passenger crossing the Bay of Biscay replied when asked whether he'd dined). |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Jun 27, 2023 19:42:26 GMT
This must be a record for how long it's taken between a stage of the review being finalised and it leaking.
|
|
pl
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,665 
|
Post by pl on Jun 27, 2023 20:04:02 GMT
This must be a record for how long it's taken between a stage of the review being finalised and it leaking. As far as I'm aware, MPs haven't been given a pre-release copy yet, which may account for this! |
|
|
|
Post by islington on Jun 27, 2023 20:31:24 GMT
This must be a record for how long it's taken between a stage of the review being finalised and it leaking. As far as I'm aware, MPs haven't been given a pre-release copy yet, which may account for this! According to the Speaker's office MPs get their copies at 1130 tomorrow so stand by for leaks a New York second after that. |
|
|
|
Post by parlconst on Jun 27, 2023 21:41:01 GMT
As far as I'm aware, MPs haven't been given a pre-release copy yet, which may account for this! According to the Speaker's office MPs get their copies at 1130 tomorrow so stand by for leaks a New York second after that. My understanding is that it is formally being laid before Parliament at 1130 tomorrow, whereupon the Boundary Commissions will also publish the details. So no there should be no need for leaks after 1130. |
|
|
|
Post by Wisconsin on Jun 28, 2023 10:15:53 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Wisconsin on Jun 28, 2023 10:17:19 GMT
Potentially that’s a false alarm. I can’t see anything on the website itself.
|
|
|
|
Post by Wisconsin on Jun 28, 2023 10:17:55 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Wisconsin on Jun 28, 2023 10:19:22 GMT
And now it’s gone.
|
|
|
|
Post by Wisconsin on Jun 28, 2023 10:20:55 GMT
|
|
nyx
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,034
|
Post by nyx on Jun 28, 2023 10:28:20 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jun 28, 2023 10:38:08 GMT
Looksm like the only boundary changes in the East are in Southend with a couple of minor name changes elsewhere (giving recognition to Ely and Stowmarket)
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jun 28, 2023 10:40:06 GMT
I see they've also listened to islington about not splitting Kentish Town. Kentish Town North stays with H&SP while Gospel Oak moves the other way and they've split Primrose Hill ward - good choice |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jun 28, 2023 10:43:29 GMT
Very little else changed in London - some minor changes in the Uxbridge/Ruislip area and a bit more in the area of Richmond/Kingston/Wimbledon (reversion to initial proposals there). Otherwise, again a couple of name changes - Croydon West without the unnecessary South Norwood
Oh and they've screwed up the boundaries in Enfield even more..
|
|
