|
Post by Andrew_S on Feb 24, 2021 16:40:48 GMT
My project to put everyones plans into a spreadsheet is on hold at the moment because although I wouldnt mind manually typing in the numbers for a small number of split wards there appear to be rather a lot of them and although I like doing that sort of repetitive job this would be taking it a bit too far even for me. Ill have to see if I can think of a better way of doing it.
|
|
|
Post by islington on Feb 25, 2021 11:00:30 GMT
My project to put everyones plans into a spreadsheet is on hold at the moment because although I wouldnt mind manually typing in the numbers for a small number of split wards there appear to be rather a lot of them and although I like doing that sort of repetitive job this would be taking it a bit too far even for me. Ill have to see if I can think of a better way of doing it. I was wondering how you envisaged this would work (apart from the split-ward issue).
A number of contributors including myself have posted a number of plans for the same area without necessarily indicating a definite preference for any one of them. Would you ask each of us to settle on a definite preferred scheme?
|
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,726
|
Post by Adrian on Mar 1, 2021 22:21:18 GMT
I've worked my way through 15 counties now. The videos are at www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLvik_ibVkC2IjjqRthsxnWiuR3bMj_Zr7 and the summaries are at ukelect.wordpress.com . Maybe my will has been broken slightly by two zombie reviews, but I find myself doing my best (hopefully) to create seats without splitting wards even if significant boundaries are breached (eg. Surrey/West Sussex or City of Leicester). I still won't tolerate bacon strips though, or seats that split small towns. (Crookham is the exception that proves the rule...)
|
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,283
|
Post by YL on Mar 2, 2021 18:33:21 GMT
I've worked my way through 15 counties now. The videos are at www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLvik_ibVkC2IjjqRthsxnWiuR3bMj_Zr7 and the summaries are at ukelect.wordpress.com . Maybe my will has been broken slightly by two zombie reviews, but I find myself doing my best (hopefully) to create seats without splitting wards even if significant boundaries are breached (eg. Surrey/West Sussex or City of Leicester). I still won't tolerate bacon strips though, or seats that split small towns. (Crookham is the exception that proves the rule...) You are aware that the wards we have data for in Northamptonshire and Buckinghamshire (and some other places, but those are the two you've got) aren't the ones the Commission will actually be using? Apart from that, I think you'll get more feedback if you post links in the various regional threads rather than in this one.
|
|
|
Post by evergreenadam on Mar 4, 2021 8:30:08 GMT
It won’t affect the electorate figures for this review but will be interesting to see what impact this has in future, I would guess that it would disproportionately boost the electorate of more affluent seats. Long-term expats 'to get vote in UK elections' www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-56265898
|
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,726
|
Post by Adrian on Mar 4, 2021 14:30:40 GMT
I've worked my way through 15 counties now. The videos are at www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLvik_ibVkC2IjjqRthsxnWiuR3bMj_Zr7 and the summaries are at ukelect.wordpress.com . Maybe my will has been broken slightly by two zombie reviews, but I find myself doing my best (hopefully) to create seats without splitting wards even if significant boundaries are breached (eg. Surrey/West Sussex or City of Leicester). I still won't tolerate bacon strips though, or seats that split small towns. (Crookham is the exception that proves the rule...) You are aware that the wards we have data for in Northamptonshire and Buckinghamshire (and some other places, but those are the two you've got) aren't the ones the Commission will actually be using? Apart from that, I think you'll get more feedback if you post links in the various regional threads rather than in this one. Thanks for raising this. I'm actually pleased that the Commission is going to use the new boundaries - it's something I've argued for. I'll revise my plans accordingly when we get the details.
|
|
|
Post by islington on Mar 11, 2021 14:49:10 GMT
Inspired by exchanges between Andrew_S and Pete Whitehead in the regional threads, I thought some numbers might be useful.
For the purposes of the 2023 review, the total UK electorate is 47558398. The five protected constituencies, and the 220132 electors they contain, are treated separately in the review and are completely disregarded in the remainder of this post.
So that leaves us with 47338266 electors to be divided between 645 seats. This gives an average of 73392.66, or 73393 to the nearest whole number. The table shows, for the UK as a whole, for each country, and for each English region (in all cases excluding any protected seats): the electorate; the entitlement (i.e. the electorate divided by 73393); and the number of seats awarded.
United Kingdom | 47338266
| 645.00
| 645 | Northern Ireland | 1295688
| 17.65
| 18
| Scotland
| 4023611
| 54.82
| 55
| Wales
| 2270262
| 30.93
| 31
| England | 39748705
| 541.59
| 541
| North East
| 1952999
| 26.61
| 27
| North West
| 5381549
| 73.33
| 73
| Yorks & Humber
| 3966500
| 54.04
| 54
| East Midlands
| 3481126
| 47.43
| 47
| West Midlands
| 4169012
| 56.80
| 57
| Eastern
| 4482127
| 61.07
| 61
| London
| 5550454
| 75.63
| 75
| South East
| 6522802
| 88.87
| 89
| South West
| 4242136
| 57.80
| 58
|
What this shows is that England as a whole loses out slightly because it receives only 541 seats when its entitlement is slightly nearer to 542. This is a marginal disadvantage, but its impact is more acutely felt in the apportionment within England. Each region receives its due allowance (to the nearest whole number) with the exception of London, which is awarded only 75 seats even though its entitlement is much closer to 76.
And once you drill down within London, and assuming you want to avoid a cross-Thames seat, it gets even worse. London south of the Thames has 2122000 electors, an entitlement of 28.91 = 29 seats. This means the entitlement of the rest of London is 46.71, with only 46 seats available. This will have significant implications for boundaries in this area.
Of course this is all specific to the numbers for the 2023 review. Assuming the same system is used again, at the next review (2031) it may be some other part of the country that finds itself the victim of this kind of mathematical disadvantage.
|
|
|
Post by greatkingrat on Mar 11, 2021 15:39:47 GMT
An alternative system would simply be to give each region its entitlement to the nearest whole number. That may end up leading to 651 seats one review and 649 the next, but I don't think that is a major issue.
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Mar 11, 2021 15:59:28 GMT
An alternative system would simply be to give each region it's entitlement to the nearest whole number. That may end up leading to 651 seats one review and 649 the next, but I don't think that is a major issue. and/or calculate the allowed range separately for each nation and (if they're to be treated as absolutely sacrosanct, as appears to be policy) region.
|
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Long may it rain
Posts: 5,507
|
Post by Foggy on Mar 12, 2021 9:32:53 GMT
An alternative system would simply be to give each region its entitlement to the nearest whole number. That may end up leading to 651 seats one review and 649 the next, but I don't think that is a major issue. I think there's a similar formula in use in Australia. The House of Representatives is supposed to be fixed at 150 members, but something about the way the law on apportionment among the states and territories is written means it currently has 151 MPs.
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 36,540
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Mar 12, 2021 12:26:48 GMT
An alternative system would simply be to give each region its entitlement to the nearest whole number. That may end up leading to 651 seats one review and 649 the next, but I don't think that is a major issue. And given that IMO all legislative bodies *should* have an odd number of members..... (as opposed, perhaps, to a number of odd members)
|
|
|
Post by Wisconsin on Mar 18, 2021 13:40:05 GMT
BCE requesting volunteers for feedback boundarycommissionforengland.independent.gov.uk/online-consultation-and-how-you-can-help-us-improve/Online consultation and how you can help us improve18 March, 2021 During the previous review of constituencies, the Commission used an interactive online consultation website to gather the public’s views. The service was used by the vast majority of consultation respondents, and user feedback was generally very positive, so the Commission is planning to use a similar service for the 2023 Review consultations. The Commission has therefore begun work on the reactivation and updating of the previous online consultation service, but during that process we are very keen to gather and incorporate the views of potential users, so as to improve and enhance the end user experience. We are therefore actively seeking volunteers to participate in user research, primarily over the next few months prior to launch of our initial proposals, but potentially also to form a panel for any user testing of subsequent service design enhancements. No previous familiarity with the constituency design process or geospatial technologies is required. If you would like to register your initial interest in helping us improve this aspect of our consultation process, please drop us an email as soon as possible: information@boundarycommissionengland.gov.uk
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Mar 18, 2021 15:02:42 GMT
Latest on the ward electorate figures:
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Mar 24, 2021 19:24:39 GMT
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Mar 24, 2021 22:17:56 GMT
Speaking of which, I have noticed that the new Camden ward electorates mean I can no longer find a solution where Camden has exactly two constituencies on the new ward boundaries that meet the quota requirements, which are contiguous, and which are viable. The Barnet-Camden pairing will have to be revived.
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Apr 7, 2021 14:56:45 GMT
From another thread: Thinking about the Highlands... A starting point is the following groupings of wards, which would provide three seats within the electorate range if it weren't for the fact that one of them has too large an area: Caithness, Sutherland & Ross (electorate 75,031, area 14,142 km 2): all Caithness and Sutherland wards; Dingwall & Seaforth, Cromarty Firth, Black Isle, Tain & Easter Ross; Wester Ross, Strathpeffer & Lochalsh. Inverness, Skye & Lochaber (electorate 75,534, area 9,470 km 2): all Inverness wards; Aird & Loch Ness, Eilean a' Cheò (i.e. Skye), Fort William & Ardnamurchan, Caol & Mallaig. Elgin, Nairn & Strathspey (electorate 69,750, area obviously small enough): remaining three Highland wards; four Moray wards). which makes me think: we (and the Boundary Commissions) know whether a constituency has an electorate which goes beyond the permitted +/- 5% range (because the number of electors is defined precisely and is easy to count), but how do they "know" whether a proposed constituency goes beyond the permitted area of 13,000 km^2? Is there an official database of the defined area of each ward? The coastline is a fractal shape and therefore the area of coastal areas is a matter of definition (in terms of fractal shapes and high/low tide lines) as well as being a matter of precise measurement. Has the relevant legislation defined how the area is to be determined?
|
|
|
Post by 🏴☠️ Neath West 🏴☠️ on Apr 7, 2021 16:27:38 GMT
From another thread: Thinking about the Highlands... A starting point is the following groupings of wards, which would provide three seats within the electorate range if it weren't for the fact that one of them has too large an area: Caithness, Sutherland & Ross (electorate 75,031, area 14,142 km 2): all Caithness and Sutherland wards; Dingwall & Seaforth, Cromarty Firth, Black Isle, Tain & Easter Ross; Wester Ross, Strathpeffer & Lochalsh. Inverness, Skye & Lochaber (electorate 75,534, area 9,470 km 2): all Inverness wards; Aird & Loch Ness, Eilean a' Cheò (i.e. Skye), Fort William & Ardnamurchan, Caol & Mallaig. Elgin, Nairn & Strathspey (electorate 69,750, area obviously small enough): remaining three Highland wards; four Moray wards). which makes me think: we (and the Boundary Commissions) know whether a constituency has an electorate which goes beyond the permitted +/- 5% range (because the number of electors is defined precisely and is easy to count), but how do they "know" whether a proposed constituency goes beyond the permitted area of 13,000 km^2? Is there an official database of the defined area of each ward? The coastline is a fractal shape and therefore the area of coastal areas is a matter of definition (in terms of fractal shapes and high/low tide lines) as well as being a matter of precise measurement. Has the relevant legislation defined how the area is to be determined? Area is often an easier calculation than perimeter. Ellipses for instance, where the area is πab, but the perimeter is π(a+b)Σ[(a-b)²/4(a+b)²]ⁿ for n=0 to infinity.
|
|
|
Post by andrewteale on Apr 7, 2021 18:46:50 GMT
From another thread: Thinking about the Highlands... A starting point is the following groupings of wards, which would provide three seats within the electorate range if it weren't for the fact that one of them has too large an area: Caithness, Sutherland & Ross (electorate 75,031, area 14,142 km 2): all Caithness and Sutherland wards; Dingwall & Seaforth, Cromarty Firth, Black Isle, Tain & Easter Ross; Wester Ross, Strathpeffer & Lochalsh. Inverness, Skye & Lochaber (electorate 75,534, area 9,470 km 2): all Inverness wards; Aird & Loch Ness, Eilean a' Cheò (i.e. Skye), Fort William & Ardnamurchan, Caol & Mallaig. Elgin, Nairn & Strathspey (electorate 69,750, area obviously small enough): remaining three Highland wards; four Moray wards). which makes me think: we (and the Boundary Commissions) know whether a constituency has an electorate which goes beyond the permitted +/- 5% range (because the number of electors is defined precisely and is easy to count), but how do they "know" whether a proposed constituency goes beyond the permitted area of 13,000 km^2? Is there an official database of the defined area of each ward? The coastline is a fractal shape and therefore the area of coastal areas is a matter of definition (in terms of fractal shapes and high/low tide lines) as well as being a matter of precise measurement. Has the relevant legislation defined how the area is to be determined? The British coastline is infinitely wiggly but the area within it is clearly finite and can be estimated with a fair degree of accuracy. The Ordnance Survey have been hard at work determining land areas for years; area figures are already available for each ward in terms of both land and tidal water, to accuracies of 0.001 hectares (10 square metres) iirc.
|
|
|
Post by kevinlarkin on Apr 7, 2021 20:52:11 GMT
From another thread: which makes me think: we (and the Boundary Commissions) know whether a constituency has an electorate which goes beyond the permitted +/- 5% range (because the number of electors is defined precisely and is easy to count), but how do they "know" whether a proposed constituency goes beyond the permitted area of 13,000 km^2? Is there an official database of the defined area of each ward? The coastline is a fractal shape and therefore the area of coastal areas is a matter of definition (in terms of fractal shapes and high/low tide lines) as well as being a matter of precise measurement. Has the relevant legislation defined how the area is to be determined? The British coastline is infinitely wiggly but the area within it is clearly finite and can be estimated with a fair degree of accuracy. The Ordnance Survey have been hard at work determining land areas for years; area figures are already available for each ward in terms of both land and tidal water, to accuracies of 0.001 hectares (10 square metres) iirc. A complete list by ward is available here: geoportal.statistics.gov.uk/datasets/standard-area-measurements-latest-for-administrative-areas-in-the-united-kingdom., including both 'extent of the realm' and 'clipped to coastline' measurements.
|
|
|
Post by tiberius on May 2, 2021 9:43:21 GMT
How much more sensible would the situation be if they allowed 10 percent deviation as opposed to 5 percent?
|
|