|
|
Post by evergreenadam on Jan 23, 2021 17:32:58 GMT
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. Ok, so probably about 4k off the Tory majority then. Tories seem to lead Lib Dems by a ratio of 4:1 in the removed wards |
|
|
|
Post by andrewp on Jan 23, 2021 17:43:21 GMT
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. Ok, so probably about 4k off the Tory majority then. Tories seem to lead Lib Dems by a ratio of 4:1 in the removed wards Possibly a bit less than that. A core Harrogate seat would have stayed Lib Dem in. 2010 and then been a Conservative gain in 2015 instead. |
|
|
|
Post by emidsanorak on Jan 24, 2021 13:52:26 GMT
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/VqVwdk6And one in Leeds: ibb.co/RNjbf1PDo show us your full map I thought you would have worked it out by now. Seats with ward splits: Dewsbury (69590 + part of 12494) loses Denby Dale, Kirkburton; gains Heckmondwyke, part of Dalton Huddersfield (66635 + part of 12494) loses part of Dalton; gains Crosland Moor & Netherton Leeds Central (64072 + part of 15797) loses Middleton Park; gains part of Gipton & Harehills Leeds East (68613 + part of 15797) loses part of Gipton & Harehills; gains Garforth & Swillington Seats without ward splits wholly within Calderdale and/or Kirklees: Batley & Hipperholme (75955) (Batley & Spen) loses Heckmondwyke; gains Hipperholme & Lightcliffe Colne Valley (71518) loses Crosland Moor & Netherton Halifax (70802) loses Sowerby Bridge, Warley; gains Brighouse, Rastrick Sowerby (70638) (Calder Valley) loses Brighouse, Hipperholme & Lightcliffe, Rastrick; gains Sowerby Bridge, Warley ibb.co/3ydm4CwSeats wholly or partly in Wakefield: Hemsworth (75388) loses Wakefield South, gains Normanton Pontefract & Castleford (72751) (Normanton Pontefract & Castleford) loses Normanton Wakefield North & Rothwell (73968) Rothwell, Stanley & Outwood East, Wakefield East, Wakefield North, Wakefield West, Wrenthorpe & Outwood West Wakefield South & Kirkburton (74470) Denby Dale, Kirkburton, Horbury & South Ossett, Ossett, Wakefield Rural, Wakefield South ibb.co/C95vvSxSeats without ward splits wholly within Leeds: Guiseley (71607) Adel & Wharfedale, Guiseley & Rawdon, Horsforth, Otley & Yeadon Leeds North East (70976) unchanged other than to realign with local government wards Leeds North West (73935) Armley, Headingley & Hyde Park, Kirkstall, Weetwood Leeds South & Morley (72457) Ardsley & Robin Hood, Middleton Park, Morley x 2 Leeds West & Pudsey (72224) Bramley & Stanningley, Calverley & Farsley, Farnley & Wortley, Pudsey ibb.co/QP2rr2FSeats wholly or partly within North Yorkshire: Harrogate & Knaresborough (72850) loses Boroughbridge, Claro Richmond (72670) loses Great Ayton, Stokesley Scarborough & Whitby (73862) unchanged Selby & Easingwold (75805) (Selby & Ainsty) loses Byram & Brotherton, Camblesforth & Carlton, Eggborough, Hambleton, Monk Fryston, Sherburn in Elmet, South Milford. Whitley; gains Easingwold, Huby, Raskelf & White Horse, Bishop Monkton & Newby, Boroughbridge, Claro Skipton & Ripon (76758) loses Bishop Monkton & Newby Thirsk & Malton (76697) loses Easingwold, Huby, Raskelf & White Horse; gains Great Ayton, Stokesley Wetherby & Sherburn in Elmet (73361) (Elmet & Rothwell) loses Garforth & Swillington, Rothwell; gains Byram & Brotherton, Camblesforth & Carlton, Eggborough, Hambleton, Monk Fryston, Sherburn in Elmet, South Milford. Whitley ibb.co/f26W8YZBradford is good for five seats and York for two. |
|
|
|
Post by islington on Jan 24, 2021 14:06:47 GMT
To while away a snowy Sunday, here's a non-split Yorkshire plan that allows Bradford to be treated separately.
Just be be clear - this is not my preferred non-split plan for Y&H: I still prefer the one I posted upthread. But I thought I'd run it up the flagpole to see whether anyone salutes it.
I feel the amount of boundary-crossing this scheme involves is too high a price to pay for treating Bradford separately. It has other drawbacks too, including the maltreatment of Halifax. On the other hand, the east-west division of Huddersfield is an idea with some potential, allowing us to get rid of the unsatisfactory Kirkburton seat from my preferred scheme. It also offers yet another take on Sheffield, this time not crossing the Barnsley boundary at all and taking all the supplementary wards from Rotherham.
|
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,915
|
Post by YL on Jan 25, 2021 12:15:01 GMT
I've now had a look at Leeds and Kirklees. My conclusions aren't very different from East Anglian Lefty's, and some of them are dependent on details of polling district electorates for which we only have estimates, so I'm not going to post full details or a map. In Kirklees, Colne Valley loses Crosland Moor & Netherton to Huddersfield, which then loses the Fenay Bridge part of Almondbury ward to Dewsbury. In turn, Dewsbury loses Mirfield. This gets all three seats comfortably in quota. Mirfield joins the wards in the current Batley & Spen, and from this group about one and a half wards join the Leeds wards currently in Morley & Outwood. I think the best option is the one EAL posted -- splitting Birstall & Birkenshaw, with the Birkenshaw part joining Cleckheaton in the cross border seat -- assuming the numbers work, and based on the estimates they do, but it's close. Much of Leeds is fairly easy: after realignment, Pudsey, Leeds NE and Leeds NW are all fine, and splitting a single ward in Leeds Central between it and West gets both in quota. I split Little London & Woodhouse, but EAL's choice of Beeston & Holbeck should work too. Especially with my suggestion, Central might be renamed as Leeds South. That leaves Leeds East and Elmet & Rothwell, looking like part of one ward needs to be transferred from the latter to the former. The only possibilities are Garforth & Swillington and Harewood, and the distribution of the electorate in G & S looks unhelpful (basically too much of it is Garforth). So I'm minded to move the villages of Scholes, Shadwell and Thorner in Harewood ward to Leeds East; this is not a wonderful choice, but it keeps both seats in quota with little change. |
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,915
|
Post by YL on Jan 28, 2021 18:54:06 GMT
This is about as good as a non-split plan for the East Riding is going to get, but it has a problem: South West Holderness is not a good fit with Hull East and adding it was controversial when it was suggested in one of the zombie reviews. What I'd like to do would be to have three Hull seats covering the city plus the five "Haltemprice" wards, and three seats in the rest of the East Riding. I suspect others have also tried this and realised that the non-Hull/Haltemprice area just doesn't work with the East Riding's enormous wards and the way they fit together. In fact if there were a border between Howdenshire and Pocklington Provincial wards there'd be a relatively simple solution staying fairly close to the existing seats: transfer North Holderness to the Bridlington seat, and then Pocklington to the Howden seat (which of course also needs to lose Haltemprice and gain Goole). So I'd like to float splitting Wolds Weighton ward, including six of its 28 parishes (Everingham and the area to the west) with Pocklington in Goole & Howden. |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Jan 28, 2021 19:46:19 GMT
How would you divide the wards up between the three Hull seats then? I can't find a way to do that that isn't unnecessarily disruptive. I'm not convinced that including SW Holderness was controversial when it was suggested before because it doesn't fit with the city, I think it might have been one of those cases where it was controversial because locals don't want to admit that it does fit.
|
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,915
|
Post by YL on Jan 29, 2021 7:45:57 GMT
How would you divide the wards up between the three Hull seats then? I can't find a way to do that that isn't unnecessarily disruptive. I'm not convinced that including SW Holderness was controversial when it was suggested before because it doesn't fit with the city, I think it might have been one of those cases where it was controversial because locals don't want to admit that it does fit. There is almost certainly something of that, but it's not urban spillover like Haltemprice, rather smallish towns and rural areas on the way to Spurn, and I don't think that's a very good fit in a city constituency even if quite a few of the residents commute. Put it this way, if I were re-drawing local government boundaries, Haltemprice would be going into Hull without hesitation, but I wouldn't move Hedon etc. The least disruptive way I've found of getting three seats into Hull+Haltemprice puts Cottingham into North and the rest of Haltemprice into West. There's another one which keeps Hessle in West but puts the others into North. Putting all five Haltemprice wards in the same seat is more disruptive (inevitably, because it's quite a big area); I can't find one I like which puts them all in West, but you can put them all (including Hessle) into North and turn West into a sort of Hull Central. Note that the result is rather less disruptive in the East Riding, and in particular avoids Driffield going with Goole (which I think is inevitable in a non-splitting plan for this subregion, but don't like). |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Jan 29, 2021 9:50:22 GMT
How would you divide the wards up between the three Hull seats then? I can't find a way to do that that isn't unnecessarily disruptive. I'm not convinced that including SW Holderness was controversial when it was suggested before because it doesn't fit with the city, I think it might have been one of those cases where it was controversial because locals don't want to admit that it does fit. There is almost certainly something of that, but it's not urban spillover like Haltemprice, rather smallish towns and rural areas on the way to Spurn, and I don't think that's a very good fit in a city constituency even if quite a few of the residents commute. Put it this way, if I were re-drawing local government boundaries, Haltemprice would be going into Hull without hesitation, but I wouldn't move Hedon etc. The least disruptive way I've found of getting three seats into Hull+Haltemprice puts Cottingham into North and the rest of Haltemprice into West. There's another one which keeps Hessle in West but puts the others into North. Putting all five Haltemprice wards in the same seat is more disruptive (inevitably, because it's quite a big area); I can't find one I like which puts them all in West, but you can put them all (including Hessle) into North and turn West into a sort of Hull Central. Note that the result is rather less disruptive in the East Riding, and in particular avoids Driffield going with Goole (which I think is inevitable in a non-splitting plan for this subregion, but don't like). My view is that the major thing stopping Hedon joining up with Hull like Haltemprice has it that the areas on the boundary are industrial rather than residential. Though I would suspect a decent wodge of the commuting in both directions is to said industrial areas. The rest of the ward is certainly worse connected to Hull, but it's a minority of the electorate. I'd also note that Driffield doesn't have to go with Goole anyway. Haltemprice & Howden can take Goole in return for Tranby and Willbery & Kirk Ella and Driffield can go with Beverley. |
|
ilerda
Conservative
Posts: 1,112
|
Post by ilerda on Feb 1, 2021 17:20:57 GMT
 It may not be popular with those who fetishise prioritise minimum change, but is there any merit in adopting a completely different model for York? The LGBCE has for a long time had a general disposition against donut seats, and this sort of combination keeps community links and follows strong boundaries like the river and railway lines. |
|
edgbaston
Labour
Posts: 4,454
Member is Online
|
Post by edgbaston on Feb 1, 2021 18:53:08 GMT
It may not be popular with those who fetishise prioritise minimum change, but is there any merit in adopting a completely different model for York? The LGBCE has for a long time had a general disposition against donut seats, and this sort of combination keeps community links and follows strong boundaries like the river and railway lines. It’s the perfect solution but likely to be unpopular, I suspect. Sometimes good governance does have to be imposed onto an area. |
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,840 
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Feb 1, 2021 19:34:42 GMT
It may not be popular with those who fetishise prioritise minimum change, but is there any merit in adopting a completely different model for York? The LGBCE has for a long time had a general disposition against donut seats, and this sort of combination keeps community links and follows strong boundaries like the river and railway lines. I like it! Neat, simple, sticks to the river almost entirely - and where it doesn't it follows the railway - gives both seats a balance of town & country. Which is why people will be agin it.  Ooo! And looking at the ward map - a proper quadripoint! |
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Feb 1, 2021 19:58:44 GMT
It may not be popular with those who fetishise prioritise minimum change, but is there any merit in adopting a completely different model for York? The LGBCE has for a long time had a general disposition against donut seats, and this sort of combination keeps community links and follows strong boundaries like the river and railway lines. I like it! Neat, simple, sticks to the river almost entirely - and where it doesn't it follows the railway - gives both seats a balance of town & country. Which is why people will be agin it. Ooo! And looking at the ward map - a proper quadripoint! sounds like a shame to waste it. Somebody draw four York seats meeting there. |
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Feb 3, 2021 2:22:02 GMT
In order to deal with the ridiculously large ward electorates in Sheffield and Leeds, and to avoid going outside the 5% limit, I ended up with a few exclaves and detached wards in the Barnsley area  |
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Feb 3, 2021 3:13:52 GMT
A plan in which no electorate is smaller than 71,000  |
|
|
|
Post by bjornhattan on Feb 3, 2021 16:39:02 GMT
I like it! Neat, simple, sticks to the river almost entirely - and where it doesn't it follows the railway - gives both seats a balance of town & country. Which is why people will be agin it. Ooo! And looking at the ward map - a proper quadripoint! sounds like a shame to waste it. Somebody draw four York seats meeting there. Readers with connections to North Yorkshire may want to look away now, it's not pretty! Not a serious submission of course, but as always it might inspire something of value.  York inset:  1. York North East 2. York West and Knaresborough 3. Elmet (includes two wards from West Yorkshire - though these fit the constituency well) 4. York South and Selby 5. Harrogate 6. Yorkshire Dales 7. Ripon and Northallerton 8. Whitby and the Moors 9. Scarborough Some of these came out quite well - Harrogate is a genuinely nice seat, neatly replacing Knaresborough and Boroughbridge with the rural western part of the district. But I'll freely admit there are some monstrosities on there - the fact two of my York constituencies are more natural than some of the rural ones should be a massive red flag. If you want to go for minimal change, then the latter two can be rearranged to a virtually unchanged Scarborough and Whitby (you just have to lose Cayton), but then seat 8 stretches from west of Northallerton all the way to Filey. This map might be horrible but that's a bridge too far! |
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,915
|
Post by YL on Feb 3, 2021 21:51:29 GMT
It may not be popular with those who fetishise prioritise minimum change, but is there any merit in adopting a completely different model for York? The LGBCE has for a long time had a general disposition against donut seats, and this sort of combination keeps community links and follows strong boundaries like the river and railway lines. I don't really get the objection to doughnut seats, and I don't think there's much mileage in persuading the BCE to make major change in York, but that looks like a decent alternative. As for more minor change, I wonder if there's a way of getting Dringhouses & Woodthorpe, which looks the most out of place ward in the current arrangement, into Central. It'd need a ward in the east to move the other way, perhaps the currently split Hull Road. |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Feb 5, 2021 13:24:23 GMT
I've come up with a non-split ward South Yorkshire which doesn't seem too ridiculous (apologies if it replicates other previously posted plans). The problem I had was with low electorate sizes in the West of the area and I solved this by pushing one of the Axholme wards back into the North Lincolnshire group of seats. Not entirely ideal but not hugely problematic either IMO This meant just one Doncaster ward needed to link with Rotherham. Initially I had a neater set of seats in the Rotherham area but this involved linking Conisborough for a Dearne Valley seat which I realised comprised parts of three different boroughs. This seems to preserve the existing pattern of seats fairly well  |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Feb 7, 2021 21:17:02 GMT
I suppose it would not be acceptable to have a seat combining parts of East Yorkshire, North Yorkshire and West Yorkshire (even though all parts of it are truly part of the West Riding)? It's a shame if not as it enables quite a good solution to the problems presented by the large ward sizes in the East Riding and the connected problems with Hull. I've shamelessly borrowed East Anglian Lefty 's plan for using Pontefract and Knottingley as the part of West Yorkshire used to cross the border. I think somebody else suggested the Bridlington/Filey link as well  For 'Yorkshire and the Humber 005' read Howdenshire |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Feb 7, 2021 21:22:04 GMT
You can alternatively split York Outer and have more sensible seats to the North and South of York  |
|
