|
|
Post by Penddu on Jun 28, 2023 19:44:57 GMT
no 'of'.  Grammatically implied. But more importantly Ynys Môn is an island so technically not on the British mainland. |
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Jun 28, 2023 19:52:55 GMT
At any rate, this was the most drastic and significant review since that for the 1983 general election; by my estimates only 85 constituencies will survive unchanged or with changes <5% to their current boundaries, and so many historic constituency names have been abolished.
|
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Jun 28, 2023 19:59:53 GMT
no 'of'. Grammatically implied I disagree. Just because the equivalent English (and Romance languages) phrase includes such a meaningless filler particle? Lots of languages do without. There's nothing to imply. |
|
|
|
Post by doktorb🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️ on Jun 28, 2023 20:22:18 GMT
There must be a record number of place names included in constituency names for the first time.
|
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Jun 28, 2023 20:25:12 GMT
In terms of long-established constituency names (pre-1983), we say goodbye to:
Saffron Walden (first created 1885)
(City of) Chester (1545)
Southend West (1950)
Streatham (1918)
Wakefield (1832)
Harborough (1885)
Bosworth (1885)
Nottingham North (1955)
Wellingborough (1918)
Bury St Edmunds (1614)
Beckenham (1950)
Croydon Central (1974)
Edmonton (1918)
Lewisham Deptford (1974)
(Enfield) Southgate (1950)
Vauxhall (1950)
Blaydon (1885)
Jarrow (1885)
Middlesbrough (1974)
Newcastle-upon-Tyne Central (1918)
North West Durham (1950, also existed 1885-1918)
Berwick-upon-Tweed (1512)
Penrith & The Border (1950)
Workington (1918)
Manchester Gorton (1918)
Leigh (1918)
Buckingham (1542)
Fareham (1974)
Henley (1918)
Hove (1950)
Isle of Wight (1885)
Bristol West (1885)
Devizes (1331)
Wells (1295)
Birmingham Hall Green (1950)
Burton (1885)
Coventry North East (1974)
Solihull (1945)
Walsall North (1955)
Walsall South (1955)
West Bromwich East (1974)
West Bromwich West (1974)
Wolverhampton South West (1950)
Dewsbury (1885)
Don Valley (1918)
(Great) Grimsby (1295)
Keighley (1885)
Pudsey (1950)
Leeds West (1918)
Ludlow (1473)
Richmond (1585)
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,771 
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Jun 28, 2023 20:25:20 GMT
Would anyone like to suggest specific examples where the 'least change' rule has led to undesirable results? Sheffield Attercliffe South East that has kept creeping further and further towards Mosborough all due to "least change", making fixing it each time a greater and greater change. At some point the bullet has to be grasped by the horns and Darnall has to be jettisoned. |
|
xenon
Forum Regular
Posts: 426
|
Post by xenon on Jun 28, 2023 20:44:32 GMT
In terms of long-established constituency names (pre-1983), we say goodbye to: Saffron Walden (first created 1885) (City of) Chester (1545) Southend West (1950) Streatham (1918) Wakefield (1832) Harborough (1885) Bosworth (1885) Nottingham North (1955) Wellingborough (1918) Bury St Edmunds (1614) Beckenham (1950) Croydon Central (1974) Edmonton (1918) Lewisham Deptford (1974) (Enfield) Southgate (1950) Vauxhall (1950) Blaydon (1885) Jarrow (1885) Middlesbrough (1974) Newcastle-upon-Tyne Central (1918) North West Durham (1950, also existed 1885-1918) Berwick-upon-Tweed (1512) Penrith & The Border (1950) Workington (1918) Manchester Gorton (1918) Leigh (1918) Buckingham (1542) Fareham (1974) Henley (1918) Hove (1950) Isle of Wight (1885) Bristol West (1885) Devizes (1331) Wells (1295) Birmingham Hall Green (1950) Burton (1885) Coventry North East (1974) Solihull (1945) Walsall North (1955) Walsall South (1955) West Bromwich East (1974) West Bromwich West (1974) Wolverhampton South West (1950) Dewsbury (1885) Don Valley (1918) (Great) Grimsby (1295) Keighley (1885) Pudsey (1950) Leeds West (1918) Not many in Scotland, furthest back I can find is Dundee East and Dundee West (both 1950). There's a few historic ones that were reprieved in 2005 with the reduction in Scottish seats, but nothing apart from the aforementioned pair that have existed continuously since before 1983. |
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,908
|
Post by YL on Jun 28, 2023 21:29:15 GMT
Would anyone like to suggest specific examples where the 'least change' rule has led to undesirable results? Sheffield Attercliffe South East that has kept creeping further and further towards Mosborough all due to "least change", making fixing it each time a greater and greater change. At some point the bullet has to be grasped by the horns and Darnall has to be jettisoned. But where else does Darnall go? The initial proposals for the Fifth Review put it into Heeley, which was absurd. It could go into Brightside, but the Lower Don Valley is quite a strong boundary, while with Central becoming an Inner West constituency that'd be just as bad as Heeley. Or it could go into Rotherham... ... speaking of which, if you swapped Sitwell and Wickersley North between Rotherham and Rother Valley you'd have better boundaries: all of Rotherham proper in one seat, and greater Wickersley only split between two rather than three. But the BCE didn't seriously consider that, because minimum change (from constituencies drawn using an awful ward map for building blocks). |
|
ilerda
Conservative
Posts: 1,097
|
Post by ilerda on Jun 28, 2023 21:59:40 GMT
Would anyone like to suggest specific examples where the 'least change' rule has led to undesirable results? Warwickshire. Insisting on keeping the existing pattern in N Warks, Nuneaton and Rugby when each has significant flaws has also lead to problems in the south of the county and further distortion of the already undesirable Kenilworth & Southam. |
|
|
|
Post by westmercian on Jun 28, 2023 22:06:18 GMT
In terms of long-established constituency names (pre-1983), we say goodbye to: Saffron Walden (first created 1885) (City of) Chester (1545) Southend West (1950) Streatham (1918) Wakefield (1832) Harborough (1885) Bosworth (1885) Nottingham North (1955) Wellingborough (1918) Bury St Edmunds (1614) Beckenham (1950) Croydon Central (1974) Edmonton (1918) Lewisham Deptford (1974) (Enfield) Southgate (1950) Vauxhall (1950) Blaydon (1885) Jarrow (1885) Middlesbrough (1974) Newcastle-upon-Tyne Central (1918) North West Durham (1950, also existed 1885-1918) Berwick-upon-Tweed (1512) Penrith & The Border (1950) Workington (1918) Manchester Gorton (1918) Leigh (1918) Buckingham (1542) Fareham (1974) Henley (1918) Hove (1950) Isle of Wight (1885) Bristol West (1885) Devizes (1331) Wells (1295) Birmingham Hall Green (1950) Burton (1885) Coventry North East (1974) Solihull (1945) Walsall North (1955) Walsall South (1955) West Bromwich East (1974) West Bromwich West (1974) Wolverhampton South West (1950) Dewsbury (1885) Don Valley (1918) (Great) Grimsby (1295) Keighley (1885) Pudsey (1950) Leeds West (1918) Ludlow (1473) too  I hope the BCE are happy. |
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Jun 28, 2023 22:30:46 GMT
In terms of long-established constituency names (pre-1983), we say goodbye Ludlow (1473) too I hope the BCE are happy. The de-Ludlowification of Ludlow constituency, and the Shropshire-Southification thereof, is the correct decision. The fact that the constituency included Bridgnorth (population 11,000) as well as Ludlow (population 11,000), as well as billions of tiny villages spread out over millions of cubic miles of countryside, meant that the name “Ludlow” was an abomination. The abolition of some of those other names is regrettable. I suspect that the BCE is not necessarily “happy” but is content that it has fulfilled its mission according to the statutary criteria. However, on a human and individual level, I suspect that the members of the Commission are as frustrated and annoyed as the rest of us about the need to make such changes, manyof which are directly or indirectly due to the 5% margin. |
|
|
|
Post by westmercian on Jun 28, 2023 23:14:10 GMT
Do "Conservatives" wish to conserve anything?
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,771
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Jun 28, 2023 23:36:58 GMT
Sheffield Attercliffe South East that has kept creeping further and further towards Mosborough all due to "least change", making fixing it each time a greater and greater change. At some point the bullet has to be grasped by the horns and Darnall has to be jettisoned. But where else does Darnall go? The initial proposals for the Fifth Review put it into Heeley, which was absurd. It could go into Brightside, but the Lower Don Valley is quite a strong boundary, while with Central becoming an Inner West constituency that'd be just as bad as Heeley. Or it could go into Rotherham... At some point the populations numbers will be such that Darnall goes in with the Brightside wards - possibly with Hillsborough being jettisoned out of the other side on the other side of the strong Upper Don Valley. |
|
ilerda
Conservative
Posts: 1,097
|
Post by ilerda on Jun 29, 2023 6:46:54 GMT
Do "Conservatives" wish to conserve anything? I’m not sure “the existence of Coventry North East” is or should be anywhere near the top of a list of things the Conservative Party should be fighting to conserve. |
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,908
|
Post by YL on Jun 29, 2023 7:02:14 GMT
Do "Conservatives" wish to conserve anything? I’m not sure “the existence of Coventry North East” is or should be anywhere near the top of a list of things the Conservative Party should be fighting to conserve. I think it was specifically a reference to the replacement of "Ludlow" with "South Shropshire" and johnloony's support for that. |
|
|
|
Post by islington on Jun 29, 2023 7:22:17 GMT
If our discussion is primarily about naming policy, does that imply that we think the actual boundaries aren't that bad?
|
|
|
|
Post by doktorb🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️ on Jun 29, 2023 7:26:42 GMT
If our discussion is primarily about naming policy, does that imply that we think the actual boundaries aren't that bad? Under the circumstances, with such little wiggle room, the actual boundaries are not that bad. Pitchfork sales steady. |
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,908
|
Post by YL on Jun 29, 2023 7:43:38 GMT
If our discussion is primarily about naming policy, does that imply that we think the actual boundaries aren't that bad? The actual boundaries are little changed from what we’ve seen before, unlike the names. But yes, for the most part I don’t think the Commissions have done that bad a job given the rules they were told to work to. There are some things I don’t like (of course there are) but on balance I think the map is way better than what the zombie reviews produced and not so much worse than what past reviews gave us. I also think the criticisms of the names are overblown, though of course there are some I don’t like. It often seems to me that some have an obsession with brevity over other criteria for a good name, and don’t like it that the Commissions don’t share that approach. |
|
|
|
Post by Rutlander on Jun 29, 2023 8:41:57 GMT
They're all right - an improvement, I think, on the 2013 and 2018 zombies.
And the current boundaries are based on electorates from 23 years ago, so an update is definitely needed.
Of course I can find plenty of things I don't like about the final outcome of the review, but it could definitely be worse. For instance, I've yet to find anything remotely as bad as Lancaster & Fleetwood. Even the Clackmannan monstrosity from the revised proposals has been tweaked so as to be noticeably less bad.
Actually, which is the worst seat (purely in terms of the boundary, ignoring names)? Harwich & N Essex must be a candidate. Or Rutland & Stamford. The Chester split is pretty grim, too. Any other suggestions?
The inclusion of Leicester suburbs in a seat including Stamford is the grimmest in my view. I'm none too keen on Stone & Penkridge either. The Rutland and Stamford constituency stretches "from Thurlby to Thurnby" (from a village near Bourne, Lincs, to a satellite of Leicester) www.google.com/maps/dir/Thurlby,+Bourne/Thurnby,+Leicester/@52.6649218,-0.9930193,10z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m14!4m13!1m5!1m1!1s0x48781f9c88533689:0x8fb14b64e517d78!2m2!1d-0.3802246!2d52.7382641!1m5!1m1!1s0x48776390cb83e72b:0xa48a288c4dca95c!2m2!1d-1.0455286!2d52.62889!3e0?entry=ttu |
|
|
|
Post by David Ashforth on Jun 29, 2023 9:32:06 GMT
|
|
