2023 Review - Yorkshire and the Humber

[YL]

edgbaston may wish to avert his gaze.

I had a go at doing my own West and North Yorkshire map with no split wards:


North Yorkshire

(well, less one ward and plus crossover bits)

Scarborough & Whitby (73,862). Let's start with an easy one: unchanged.
Thirsk & Malton (76,697). Gains Stokesley and Great Ayton, loses some rural Vale of York wards.
Richmond (Yorkshire) (72,670). Loses Stokesley and Great Ayton.
Skipton & Ripon (76,266). Loses Washburn.
Harrogate & Knaresborough (72,850). Reduces to the two towns.
Wetherby & Boroughbridge (75,768). New seat: Wetherby, the northern part of Selby district, and areas to the north and west of York. A bit of a "York Outer Outer" or "Mid Yorkshire"...
Selby & Pontefract (73,857). The rest of Selby district, plus three wards from Wakefield. NB you could include Barlby Village here without other changes if it's felt that it shouldn't be separated from Selby town.

City of York

Another easy bit.

York Central (74,854)
York Outer (72,720)

Bradford

The current South is too small. As with Coventry, it's possible to get all seats in quota by a simple swap, but in this case (at least with the swaps I tried) the result is ugly. So I went for a more radical rearrangement, but the city gets 5 seats to itself.

Bradford South East (70,689)
Bradford South West (70,476)
Bradford North (72,680)
Shipley (74,548). Could be unchanged, but I thought the above seat was neater if this one took Heaton rather than Windhill & Wrose.
Keighley (72,954). Unchanged.

Leeds

I've used district names rather than the traditional compass points, because for some of these there wasn't a great choice of the latter. There are five seats wholly within the city. See above for Wetherby.

Leeds Horsforth (71,053). The north-western seat, but half of its wards come from Pudsey, not Leeds NW
Leeds Wharfedale (71,295). The northern ruralish seat (maroon). Includes Washburn ward from N Yorks; the need for this sort of tacking is one of the reasons I dislike the non-split approach in cities with big wards.
Leeds Roundhay (70,677). The orangish seat to the south of the latter, effectively the new Leeds NE.
Leeds Headingley (75,238). The greenish seat in north central Leeds. The enormous electorate of Headingley & Hyde Park (I thought Broomhill & Sharrow Vale was big!) helps with some of the smaller wards.
Leeds Pudsey (70,270). The pink seat in west Leeds.
Leeds Holbeck (70,007). The rather curved orange seat south and west of the city centre.
Leeds Metropolitan & Stanley (73,653). Maybe not quite as bad as the notorious proposal which inspires the name, but not very good.
Castleford & Garforth (73,357). The light blue seat crossing into Wakefield.
Batley & Morley (75,393). Also includes Birstall & Birkenshaw.

And the rest...

Hemsworth (75,388). Loses Wakefield South, gains Normanton. This area got off lightly.
Wakefield North & Thornhill (72,258). Ugh.
Wakefield South & Holmfirth (75,719). Oops.
Dewsbury & Brighouse (76,415). But part of Dewsbury is missing.
Huddersfield East (76,264). Includes Rastrick from Calderdale, another ugly tack.
Huddersfield West & Elland (73,128). At least the two Calderdale wards here go together.
Halifax (72,043). Actually OK.
Valleys of Colne & Calder (71,765). Had to be done.

[edgbaston]

Jan 21, 2021 17:12:58 GMT YL said:

edgbaston may wish to avert his gaze.

I had a go at doing my own West and North Yorkshire map with no split wards:


North Yorkshire

(well, less one ward and plus crossover bits)

Scarborough & Whitby (73,862). Let's start with an easy one: unchanged.
Thirsk & Malton (76,697). Gains Stokesley and Great Ayton, loses some rural Vale of York wards.
Richmond (Yorkshire) (72,670). Loses Stokesley and Great Ayton.
Skipton & Ripon (76,266). Loses Washburn.
Harrogate & Knaresborough (72,850). Reduces to the two towns.
Wetherby & Boroughbridge (75,768). New seat: Wetherby, the northern part of Selby district, and areas to the north and west of York. A bit of a "York Outer Outer" or "Mid Yorkshire"...
Selby & Pontefract (73,857). The rest of Selby district, plus three wards from Wakefield. NB you could include Barlby Village here without other changes if it's felt that it shouldn't be separated from Selby town.

City of York

Another easy bit.

York Central (74,854)
York Outer (72,720)

Bradford

The current South is too small. As with Coventry, it's possible to get all seats in quota by a simple swap, but in this case (at least with the swaps I tried) the result is ugly. So I went for a more radical rearrangement, but the city gets 5 seats to itself.

Bradford South East (70,689)
Bradford South West (70,476)
Bradford North (72,680)
Shipley (74,548). Could be unchanged, but I thought the above seat was neater if this one took Heaton rather than Windhill & Wrose.
Keighley (72,954). Unchanged.

Leeds

I've used district names rather than the traditional compass points, because for some of these there wasn't a great choice of the latter. There are five seats wholly within the city. See above for Wetherby.

Leeds Horsforth (71,053). The north-western seat, but half of its wards come from Pudsey, not Leeds NW
Leeds Wharfedale (71,295). The northern ruralish seat (maroon). Includes Washburn ward from N Yorks; the need for this sort of tacking is one of the reasons I dislike the non-split approach in cities with big wards.
Leeds Roundhay (70,677). The orangish seat to the south of the latter, effectively the new Leeds NE.
Leeds Headingley (75,238). The greenish seat in north central Leeds. The enormous electorate of Headingley & Hyde Park (I thought Broomhill & Sharrow Vale was big!) helps with some of the smaller wards.
Leeds Pudsey (70,270). The pink seat in west Leeds.
Leeds Holbeck (70,007). The rather curved orange seat south and west of the city centre.
Leeds Metropolitan & Stanley (73,653). Maybe not quite as bad as the notorious proposal which inspires the name, but not very good.
Castleford & Garforth (73,357). The light blue seat crossing into Wakefield.
Batley & Morley (75,393). Also includes Birstall & Birkenshaw.

And the rest...

Hemsworth (75,388). Loses Wakefield South, gains Normanton. This area got off lightly.
Wakefield North & Thornhill (72,258). Ugh.
Wakefield South & Holmfirth (75,719). Oops.
Dewsbury & Brighouse (76,415). But part of Dewsbury is missing.
Huddersfield East (76,264). Includes Rastrick from Calderdale, another ugly tack.
Huddersfield West & Elland (73,128). At least the two Calderdale wards here go together.
Halifax (72,043). Actually OK.
Valleys of Colne & Calder (71,765). Had to be done.

Quite a nice map for Labour in west yorks compared to others. Obviously not much difference in 2019 but in a good year we could win all but your Wakefield south seat. And in a landslide we could win that too (big swings required in Denby and Holmfirth but we do have Cllrs in both places)

Compare this to my schemes that had 2 & 4 fairly safe Tory seats respectively.

[ilerda]

Jan 21, 2021 17:12:58 GMT YL said:

edgbaston may wish to avert his gaze.

I had a go at doing my own West and North Yorkshire map with no split wards:


North Yorkshire

(well, less one ward and plus crossover bits)

Scarborough & Whitby (73,862). Let's start with an easy one: unchanged.
Thirsk & Malton (76,697). Gains Stokesley and Great Ayton, loses some rural Vale of York wards.
Richmond (Yorkshire) (72,670). Loses Stokesley and Great Ayton.
Skipton & Ripon (76,266). Loses Washburn.
Harrogate & Knaresborough (72,850). Reduces to the two towns.
Wetherby & Boroughbridge (75,768). New seat: Wetherby, the northern part of Selby district, and areas to the north and west of York. A bit of a "York Outer Outer" or "Mid Yorkshire"...
Selby & Pontefract (73,857). The rest of Selby district, plus three wards from Wakefield. NB you could include Barlby Village here without other changes if it's felt that it shouldn't be separated from Selby town.

City of York

Another easy bit.

York Central (74,854)
York Outer (72,720)

Bradford

The current South is too small. As with Coventry, it's possible to get all seats in quota by a simple swap, but in this case (at least with the swaps I tried) the result is ugly. So I went for a more radical rearrangement, but the city gets 5 seats to itself.

Bradford South East (70,689)
Bradford South West (70,476)
Bradford North (72,680)
Shipley (74,548). Could be unchanged, but I thought the above seat was neater if this one took Heaton rather than Windhill & Wrose.
Keighley (72,954). Unchanged.

Leeds

I've used district names rather than the traditional compass points, because for some of these there wasn't a great choice of the latter. There are five seats wholly within the city. See above for Wetherby.

Leeds Horsforth (71,053). The north-western seat, but half of its wards come from Pudsey, not Leeds NW
Leeds Wharfedale (71,295). The northern ruralish seat (maroon). Includes Washburn ward from N Yorks; the need for this sort of tacking is one of the reasons I dislike the non-split approach in cities with big wards.
Leeds Roundhay (70,677). The orangish seat to the south of the latter, effectively the new Leeds NE.
Leeds Headingley (75,238). The greenish seat in north central Leeds. The enormous electorate of Headingley & Hyde Park (I thought Broomhill & Sharrow Vale was big!) helps with some of the smaller wards.
Leeds Pudsey (70,270). The pink seat in west Leeds.
Leeds Holbeck (70,007). The rather curved orange seat south and west of the city centre.
Leeds Metropolitan & Stanley (73,653). Maybe not quite as bad as the notorious proposal which inspires the name, but not very good.
Castleford & Garforth (73,357). The light blue seat crossing into Wakefield.
Batley & Morley (75,393). Also includes Birstall & Birkenshaw.

And the rest...

Hemsworth (75,388). Loses Wakefield South, gains Normanton. This area got off lightly.
Wakefield North & Thornhill (72,258). Ugh.
Wakefield South & Holmfirth (75,719). Oops.
Dewsbury & Brighouse (76,415). But part of Dewsbury is missing.
Huddersfield East (76,264). Includes Rastrick from Calderdale, another ugly tack.
Huddersfield West & Elland (73,128). At least the two Calderdale wards here go together.
Halifax (72,043). Actually OK.
Valleys of Colne & Calder (71,765). Had to be done.

Very fair play to you for managing to come up with this scheme, but my God it’s depressing. In fact it’s worse than depressing, it’s nightmare inducing.

If ever proof were needed that even though you can make a plan without splitting wards it doesn’t mean you should, then this is it.

[East Anglian Lefty]

Yes, I think the various non-split plans are fascinating, but they do constitute a strong argument for splitting some wards. I've found that with one split in Calderdale, two splits in Kirklees and two splits in Leeds you can draw a very nice map that minimises changes to existing seats, with all the splits following clear divisions between settlements/neighbourhoods and with most of them following polling district boundaries.

I'll post it later once I've finished tinkering, but it pairs Wakefield with North Yorkshire and Leeds with Kirklees, with both Calderdale and Bradford standing alone, which also means you're working with coherent subregions.

[YL]

Jan 22, 2021 14:23:27 GMT East Anglian Lefty said:

Yes, I think the various non-split plans are fascinating, but they do constitute a strong argument for splitting some wards. I've found that with one split in Calderdale, two splits in Kirklees and two splits in Leeds you can draw a very nice map that minimises changes to existing seats, with all the splits following clear divisions between settlements/neighbourhoods and with most of them following polling district boundaries.

I'll post it later once I've finished tinkering, but it pairs Wakefield with North Yorkshire and Leeds with Kirklees, with both Calderdale and Bradford standing alone, which also means you're working with coherent subregions.

I agree with those subregions. I've worked out Wakefield/North Yorkshire in full (and I suspect what I have is very similar to yours, because there aren't that many options if staying close to existing seats) and am pretty sure what I want to do in Calderdale, but I haven't worked out the details in Kirklees and Leeds yet, and am not really sure which arrangement I like best in Bradford.

[edgbaston]

Jan 22, 2021 15:04:32 GMT YL said:

Jan 22, 2021 14:23:27 GMT East Anglian Lefty said:

Yes, I think the various non-split plans are fascinating, but they do constitute a strong argument for splitting some wards. I've found that with one split in Calderdale, two splits in Kirklees and two splits in Leeds you can draw a very nice map that minimises changes to existing seats, with all the splits following clear divisions between settlements/neighbourhoods and with most of them following polling district boundaries.

I'll post it later once I've finished tinkering, but it pairs Wakefield with North Yorkshire and Leeds with Kirklees, with both Calderdale and Bradford standing alone, which also means you're working with coherent subregions.

I agree with those subregions. I've worked out Wakefield/North Yorkshire in full (and I suspect what I have is very similar to yours, because there aren't that many options if staying close to existing seats) and am pretty sure what I want to do in Calderdale, but I haven't worked out the details in Kirklees and Leeds yet, and am not really sure which arrangement I like best in Bradford.

I think the return of Bradford north would be the best solution. With west extending down to wyke and east taking in the city centre. I will be interested to see what EAL does.

[East Anglian Lefty]

Honestly I think the only real question in Bradford is whether Great Horton gets swapped for Thornton & Allerton or Clayton & Fairweather Green. I agree a North constituency would be a much more elegant solution, but I'm pretty sure least change is going to win out.

The only interesting Bradford map I've got is a draft where I was ignoring subgroupings and decided to stick Ilkley in Craven district, Keighley with Bingley, Tong and Wyke in with the Spen Valley, Baildon and Wharfedale with Horsforth and then three Bradford constituencies arranged NE/central/SW. It looks good but I'm pretty sure it doesn't help anywhere else even a little.

[East Anglian Lefty]

Wakefield 70419 - unchanged
Hemsworth 73706
Castleford & Outwood 74775 - loses Pontefract and Knottingley, gains the two Outwood wards
Pontefract & Selby 73857 - gets as far north as Selby itself
Tadcaster & Thirks 73548 - Mid Yorkshire?
York Outer 72720 - unchanged
City of York 74854 - unchanged, though I could see a case for a ward swap or two
Harrogate & Knaresborough 70334 - contracts
Skipton & Ripon 75954 - can't quite lose Ripon this time, but it's surely likely next review
Richmond 70154 - loses Great Ayton
Ryedale 71243 - loses Thirsk, gains Great Ayton. Internal connectivity isn't great
Scarborough & Whitby 73862 - unchanged


And here's Leeds, Kirklees and Calderdale. Numbers for ward splits are based on the December 2019 polling district figures, except in Leeds where they're based on December 2015 figures and crossing my fingers those are still serviceable.



Leeds NW 76005 - unchanged (after re-alignment, obviously)
Pudsey 74605 - unchanged
Leeds W 76814 - gains the Holbeck parts of Beeston & Holbeck. Now that I look at it I may have got the figures the wrong way round for Beeston and Holbeck. If this split with Central doesn't work, there are several other options
Leeds Central 73290 - loses Holbeck, otherwise unchanged after realignment to new boundaries
Leeds NW 70976 - unchanged
Elmet & Leeds E 76298 - Garforth and Swillington are too large and too small respectively to be added to Leeds E, so I realigned Leeds E and Elmet & Rothwell north/south. Crossgates & Whinmoor is split. In retrospect, a less disruptive alternative would be splitting Harewood.
Leeds SE & Rothwell 73010 - Temple Newsam and Crossgates are the Leeds portions
Morley & Spen Valley 72461 - from Kirklees, Cleckheaton ward and the Birkenshaw portions of Birstall & Birkenshaw. Not pretty, but I couldn't make Morley & Batley work and it improves the neighbouring seats. Probably safe Tory?
Batley & Dewsbury 74581 - includes Birstall
Mirfield 73330 - happy to hear suggestions for a better name. Includes the Fenay Bridge area of Almondbury. Takes slightly more electors from Dewsbury than Batley & Dewsbury does and certainly the one I'd pick were I the Tory incumbent
Colne Valley 71518 - loses Crosland Moor & Netherton
Huddersfield - gains Crosland Moor & Netherton, loses Fenay Bridge
Calder Valley 74634 - includes the Lightcliffe portions of Hipperholme & Lightcliffe
Halifax 75916 - includes the Hipperholme portions of Hipperholme & Lightcliffe

[Pete Whitehead]

I'm surprised you've gone for the 'packed gerrymander' Batley & Dewsbury. I was having a little play around with this area after I saw your sub-regions and figured you'd draw Colne Valley and Huddersfield like that, with Almondsbury split. But I thought besides adding half of Almondsbury you'd take out Mirfield leaving Dewsbury intact and a more reliable Labour seat, then recreate a Batley & Morley which would at least be tricky for the Tories, with Mirfield then being added to the Spen Valley for a relatively safe Tory seat. Certainly looks like you've packed the Labour support in the three seats heavily into one, where you could have done that to the Tories (you'd have to split Batley West in that case - I guess Birstall & Birkenshaw is a more logical ward to split, as it covers a more diffuse area)

[East Anglian Lefty]

Yes, I wasn't thinking in partisan terms, just in terms of how I could make the numbers work whilst minimising ward splits - only realised the likely partisan consequences when I cam to add things up. Now I look at it, I see that the numbers would work if you swap Mirfield, Heckmondwike and Liversedge for the Dewsbury wards (caveat: that would put the Batley seat about 150 under the limit, so it does assume I got the polling district figures accurate enough.) That would be less change, so probably easier to sell to the BCE. And whilst Batley & Dewsbury is a very natural-seeming combination, that Mirfield seat doesn't have good internal connectivity, so I think that tweak is one I'd adopt. I can't see any way you could convincingly get the BCE to go for a split of Batley West when Birkstall & Birkenshaw is so much more obvious a split.

EDIT: Although actually, if you were trying to make Batley & Morley work with three Leeds wards, I wonder if the easier split to see might be to put Drighlington and Adwalton in with the Spen Valley. It'd mean crossing the local authority twice, but they are at least physically separate settlements.

[edgbaston]

Well it’s very interesting but it definitely won’t be my final submission for the reasons Pete outlines..

You’re right the batley and Dewsbury wards do form one very coherent conurbation, but as you suggested the consequence is a dreaded mid Derbyshire style ‘leftovers’ seat.


On a minor point if the numbers allow for it (haven’t checked) it would be much better to take Kirkheaton out of Hudds on a ward split

[East Anglian Lefty]

Kirkheaton would work if you were doing Dewsbury and Batley, but not if you wanted to keep the current Dewsbury seat minus Mirfield plus part of a Huddersfield ward.

[YL]

Your Wakefield and North Yorkshire plan is indeed virtually identical to mine, except I think for one Selby ward.

I haven’t looked in detail at your Kirklees and Leeds because I want to try to come up with my own attempt.

[edgbaston]

Building on EAL's plan, how about this.

imgur.com/a/tuK1sMU

A return of the Normanton seat. Still only 5 WY ward splits. Allows for minimum change elsewhere. A more Natural 'Weatherby and Thirsk' seat. (I can't find the poll district data for the new Leeds wards, so the split there is a best guess of how the ward divides.)

[East Anglian Lefty]

Where would Selby get its extra electorate from? I'm presuming you want to send it in to East Yorkshire and have the Bridlington seat add Filey? Would also be interested to see how you manage the rest of Leeds. Is there room for a whole number of seats, or do you need to reach into Bradford or Harrogate to get the numbers?

[emidsanorak]

To have a North and West Yorkshire with only one cross-county seat, there would need to be ward splits. But I think we only need two. One in Kirklees:

ibb.co/VqVwdk6

And one in Leeds:

ibb.co/RNjbf1P

[edgbaston]

Jan 23, 2021 12:18:04 GMT emidsanorak said:

To have a North and West Yorkshire with only one cross-county seat, there would need to be ward splits. But I think we only need two. One in Kirklees:

ibb.co/VqVwdk6

And one in Leeds:

ibb.co/RNjbf1P

Do show us your full map

[edgbaston]

Jan 23, 2021 11:20:19 GMT East Anglian Lefty said:

Where would Selby get its extra electorate from? I'm presuming you want to send it in to East Yorkshire and have the Bridlington seat add Filey? Would also be interested to see how you manage the rest of Leeds. Is there room for a whole number of seats, or do you need to reach into Bradford or Harrogate to get the numbers?

Yes rest of Leeds works nicely and is largely unchanged from your plan.. Harehills is a better fit in central anyway. Bradford I moved to to a north/west/east configuration as I mentioned upthread. Selby takes in a rural ward from York, similar pre-2010, forcing an east/west split there that I again think is a better fit anyway.

On a partisan note this map keeps all the seats entirely in West Yorkshire either safe labour or competitive, which would be the best outcome for the party as marginals elsewhere disappear or move away demographically.

[evergreenadam]

Harrogate reducing to circa 70-72k voters would presumably make it a close marginal? Are the areas to be removed heavily Conservative?

[East Anglian Lefty]

The area likely to be removed are extremely Conservative, but there are only about 8000 electors in them and the Tory majority was just short of 10000. So until the Lib Dems start polling in the mid-teens nationally, it's probably more of a semi-marginal.