|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Feb 11, 2021 17:05:25 GMT
Inspired by a relatively ancient post on the Leeds NW thread (Almanac), if you rearrange the Leeds NW, Leeds West and Pudsey seats in a way which in some ways makes them more logical, you can get them all in quota. Leeds Central then just needs to donate part of the Burmantofts & Richmond Hill ward to Leeds East (basically the Burmantofts part of the ward, north of York Road) Wakefield and Hemsworth are unchanged, Normanton etc just loses Knottingley and the Outwood wards currently linked with Morley instead link with Rothwell, Garforth, Kippax etc. Knottingley links with the whole of Selby district less Tadcaster. Tadcaster joins Wetherby and Harewood with the various leftover bits from North Yorkshire
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Feb 11, 2021 17:06:29 GMT
From the Leeds NW Almanac thread: Interestingly this arrangement would see all three of these seats in quota (where on the current arrangements Leeds West is under quota). It makes a good deal of sense actually but I'm sure our old friends minimum change and established arrangements would prevent that being entertained At first it seems it doesn't help that much because if Leeds less the Morley area, which has 30 wards, is to be divided into 7 seats we only need three seats made up of four whole wards, with two wards being split to give the other four seats each containing four whole wards and part of one of the split wards. And three of the current seats are in quota, so we don't need any more. However, it might allow a better arrangement in the east. In the plan I previously posted, I split Harewood ward, with a few villages being added to Leeds East, which doesn't seem the best arrangement. It might be a better fit if bits of Harewood could be added to Leeds NE instead, where they'd join the rest of Harewood parish and the also more peripheral Alwoodley. The other split ward would be Burmantofts & Richmond Hill, between Central and East; it looks like this ward can be split cleanly along the A64. It might also help if you want to split fewer than two Leeds wards, but I don't think two is excessive given the sizes of the city and its wards. Snap
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Feb 11, 2021 19:33:33 GMT
Inspired by a relatively ancient post on the Leeds NW thread (Almanac), if you rearrange the Leeds NW, Leeds West and Pudsey seats in a way which in some ways makes them more logical, you can get them all in quota. Leeds Central then just needs to donate part of the Burmantofts & Richmond Hill ward to Leeds East (basically the Burmantofts part of the ward, north of York Road) Wakefield and Hemsworth are unchanged, Normanton etc just loses Knottingley and the Outwood wards currently linked with Morley instead link with Rothwell, Garforth, Kippax etc. Knottingley links with the whole of Selby district less Tadcaster. Tadcaster joins Wetherby and Harewood with the various leftover bits from North Yorkshire For the 2013 "Zombie Review" the boundary commission came up with a relatively similar plan for much of Leeds.
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Feb 11, 2021 19:43:33 GMT
Inspired by a relatively ancient post on the Leeds NW thread (Almanac), if you rearrange the Leeds NW, Leeds West and Pudsey seats in a way which in some ways makes them more logical, you can get them all in quota. Leeds Central then just needs to donate part of the Burmantofts & Richmond Hill ward to Leeds East (basically the Burmantofts part of the ward, north of York Road) Wakefield and Hemsworth are unchanged, Normanton etc just loses Knottingley and the Outwood wards currently linked with Morley instead link with Rothwell, Garforth, Kippax etc. Knottingley links with the whole of Selby district less Tadcaster. Tadcaster joins Wetherby and Harewood with the various leftover bits from North Yorkshire For the 2013 "Zombie Review" the boundary commission came up with a relatively similar plan for much of Leeds. I thought that was when they came up with the fabled Leeds Metroplitan & Ossett - one of the most egregious Parliamentary boundaries ever proposed
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Feb 11, 2021 20:15:27 GMT
For the 2013 "Zombie Review" the boundary commission came up with a relatively similar plan for much of Leeds. I thought that was when they came up with the fabled Leeds Metroplitan & Ossett - one of the most egregious Parliamentary boundaries ever proposed It was. They also came up with Otley, Leeds West, Pudsey & Tong, and Leeds North.
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Feb 11, 2021 20:23:52 GMT
It doesn't sound that similar tbh..
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Feb 12, 2021 11:22:31 GMT
Does anyone have a map of the Polling Districts for Sheffield ( J.G.Harston) ? Usually I can find these on the LGBCE site for councils which have had recent ward boundary changes. I guess the issue is that the one in Sheffield isn't that recent, though there is a still a link to the electoral figures spreadsheet. Potentially the polling district boundaries have changed following that review (in which case I may be able to find them on the Sheffield Council website, but you know if someone has them readily to hand...). I'm basically looking to split the Richmond ward (or possibly Birley which looks like it might split a bit more logically)
|
|
ilerda
Conservative
Posts: 1,026
|
Post by ilerda on Feb 12, 2021 11:27:40 GMT
Does anyone have a map of the Polling Districts for Sheffield ( J.G.Harston ) ? Usually I can find these on the LGBCE site for councils which have had recent ward boundary changes. I guess the issue is that the one in Sheffield isn't that recent, though there is a still a link to the electoral figures spreadsheet. Potentially the polling district boundaries have changed following that review (in which case I may be able to find them on the Sheffield Council website, but you know if someone has them readily to hand...). I'm basically looking to split the Richmond ward (or possibly Birley which looks like it might split a bit more logically) Sheffield City Council has an interactive polling district map on their website: www.sheffield.gov.uk/home/your-city-council/polling-stations There's been a PD review in recent years though so it might not match up with the codes used for the last LGBCE review. In terms of splitting Richmond (I think that's our vague consensus plan?) then it looks like giving UA, UD and UG to Sheffield SE would be a clean split of the ward and give both seats the integrity they need.
|
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,287
Member is Online
|
Post by YL on Feb 12, 2021 11:53:24 GMT
Does anyone have a map of the Polling Districts for Sheffield ( J.G.Harston ) ? Usually I can find these on the LGBCE site for councils which have had recent ward boundary changes. I guess the issue is that the one in Sheffield isn't that recent, though there is a still a link to the electoral figures spreadsheet. Potentially the polling district boundaries have changed following that review (in which case I may be able to find them on the Sheffield Council website, but you know if someone has them readily to hand...). I'm basically looking to split the Richmond ward (or possibly Birley which looks like it might split a bit more logically) Sheffield City Council has an interactive polling district map on their website: www.sheffield.gov.uk/home/your-city-council/polling-stations There's been a PD review in recent years though so it might not match up with the codes used for the last LGBCE review. In terms of splitting Richmond (I think that's our vague consensus plan?) then it looks like giving UA, UD and UG to Sheffield SE would be a clean split of the ward and give both seats the integrity they need. Also J.G.Harston has a spreadsheet linked from this page with approximate electorates; the page also has maps, though unfortunately the one we want isn't one of the ones he's updated the map for yet. If Heeley contains the five wards from Beauchief & Greenhill to Manor Castle, it needs to lose 6455 electors in Richmond, so I think we need another PD on top of those three. (UD is tiny.) I'd gone for UC, but I guess you could persuade me of the case for UF instead. (Or even both UF and UH, putting the whole of Woodthorpe in SE. That shouldn't put SE over the top.)
|
|
ilerda
Conservative
Posts: 1,026
|
Post by ilerda on Feb 12, 2021 13:05:32 GMT
Yes if those three don’t provide enough then I think moving the whole of Woodthorpe into SE would be the best option. Although there are some links between UC and Binley, so that would work too if numbers were tight. UC and UF have good links to the rest of Richmond proper which I think would essentially result in the transfer of Richmond as a whole community into SE, rathe than splitting it between Henley and SE. The bits left to Heeley would then just be Intake and Frecheville.
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 13,620
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Feb 12, 2021 20:15:19 GMT
Does anyone have a map of the Polling Districts for Sheffield ( J.G.Harston ) ? Usually I can find these on the LGBCE site for councils which have had recent ward boundary changes. I guess the issue is that the one in Sheffield isn't that recent, though there is a still a link to the electoral figures spreadsheet. Potentially the polling district boundaries have changed following that review (in which case I may be able to find them on the Sheffield Council website, but you know if someone has them readily to hand...). I'm basically looking to split the Richmond ward (or possibly Birley which looks like it might split a bit more logically)
I've been updating them with the 2020 figures, as you can see I haven't got to Richmond yet.
|
|
|
Post by islington on Apr 2, 2021 12:25:30 GMT
It seems split wards are inevitable in Scotland so I've been trying to think how they might work. I'd prefer not to split a ward more than two ways and I'd also want to avoid having any seat with parts of more than one split ward. So while we await the Scottish update on BA, I've been practising in part of England where there is, I acknowledge, a decent case to be made for a limited amount of ward-splitting: to wit, Y&H and specifically W Yorks. I'm new at this game so I'd welcome comments from more practised ward-splitters, but I thought a logical approach would be to look for points where the other objectives of the review (i.e. minimizing LA boundary crossings and changes to current seats) might be easier to meet if a ward is split; and in these areas to draw up a limited number of seats on BA that are twice the normal size. These 'double seats' can then be divided in two by the judicious split of a single ward somewhere in the middle. This map shows the sort of thing I mean. The lightly-shaded areas are orthodox single seats; the 'doubles' are heavily shaded (opacity 100%).
Calderdale - 150550. Reason for ward split - So LA boundary can be respected. Ward to be split - Probably Hipperholme, to allow minimum change to existing seats. Huddersfield - 150647. Reason - Without crossing the LA boundary it is impossible to draw two non-split seats in this area. Ward - Lindley. Dewsbury - 149477. Reason - Same as Huddersfield. Ward - Mirfield, where about 6000 voters need to be put in the southern (Dewsbury) seat and it would be nice (but optimistic) to think that that number might live south of the very tempting division along the Calder. Morley - 145035. Reason - To manage Leeds border-crossings. Ward - Either Ardsley or Middleton Park, so as (in either case) to split the 'double' east and west into seats of Morley and Rothwell & Outwood. Leeds East - 148169. Reason - To make two quorate seats wholly in Leeds and avoid raiding wards from Selby. Ward - Either Temple Newsam or Killingbeck, to allow a division into a seats of Leeds East and (shrugs) whatever you'd want to call the less urban eastern one.
Please don't too much troubled by the merits of these specific boundaries. I'm very much at the 'proof of concept' stage here. The question I'm asking is, if split wards we must, does this sound like a sensible approach?
|
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,287
Member is Online
|
Post by YL on Apr 2, 2021 13:27:34 GMT
It's not far from what I normally do in these circumstances. E.g. in Sheffield, you can note that Hallam, Brightside & Hillsborough and Penistone & Stocksbridge are all within quota after ward realignment, and Sheffield Central comes into quota by losing Manor Castle. That leaves you with an 11 ward block in the south and east of the city to be divided into two, with one split ward.
But some wards just don't split very well... (I fear Mirfield is a case in point, which is a shame because otherwise I like that approach to Kirklees.)
|
|
|
Post by islington on Apr 2, 2021 14:17:45 GMT
It's not far from what I normally do in these circumstances. E.g. in Sheffield, you can note that Hallam, Brightside & Hillsborough and Penistone & Stocksbridge are all within quota after ward realignment, and Sheffield Central comes into quota by losing Manor Castle. That leaves you with an 11 ward block in the south and east of the city to be divided into two, with one split ward. But some wards just don't split very well... (I fear Mirfield is a case in point, which is a shame because otherwise I like that approach to Kirklees.) Thanks for this.
As I say, my map was of an experimental nature so don't worry too much about the detail of it. Although, if we did use this approach, the other option would be to split Heckmondwike along the Spen and combine the northeastern half with Dewsbury and Batley, while the rest would go into what would then be a long, thin seat with Mirfield in the middle.
A further point I forgot to mention is that, whereas in drawing conventional seats I don't care if they land right at the top or bottom of the range so long as they are within it, with 'doubles' I'd try to steer clear of the theoretical maximum or minimum because you need a bit of wiggle room to split the chosen ward in a sensible way. As a rule of thumb, keeping it between say 141500 and 152000 should be all right.
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Apr 2, 2021 14:31:14 GMT
It's worth noting that the 2015 electorate figures also provide figures for polling districts. Not that helpful where there's been a significant change in electorate since then, but if change has been minimal then it may allow you to get away with doubles nearer the upper or lower limit.
|
|
|
Post by edgbaston on Apr 2, 2021 21:10:28 GMT
islington it is good to consider too of course where you are splitting a ward specifically. Grouping two seats together and stating there will be a split somewhere may result in two awkward seats, to the point where the whole point of the exercise is defeated. This was where I thought the splits should be in Y&H (as well as the 2 very good solutions in Sheffield and Calderdale already mentioned, and a split in Leeds west - for 6 total) imgur.com/a/tuK1sMU
|
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,726
|
Post by Adrian on Apr 20, 2021 21:43:00 GMT
I've been looking at Yorkshire from the point of view of leaving Doncaster alone (ish) with 3 seats, ie. grouping Sheffield, Rotherham, Barnsley and Wakefield. Has anyone found a way of doing this? In theory it's possible... The best(?) I've come up with (with 2 split wards in Sheffield) has a ward left over. This could be Knottingley, which could be added to Selby.
|
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,287
Member is Online
|
Post by YL on Apr 21, 2021 8:28:24 GMT
I've been looking at Yorkshire from the point of view of leaving Doncaster alone (ish) with 3 seats, ie. grouping Sheffield, Rotherham, Barnsley and Wakefield. Has anyone found a way of doing this? In theory it's possible... The best(?) I've come up with (with 2 split wards in Sheffield) has a ward left over. This could be Knottingley, which could be added to Selby. I've found a way of doing it with no ward left over and only one Sheffield ward split, but I'm not sure "Wakefield East, Cudworth & Darton" is even close to being presentable. Oh, and it splits Outwood. Perhaps there's a better arrangement... TBH while it's nice to treat Doncaster on its own I'm not convinced the knock on effects of doing so make it worth it. If you treat Axholme with Doncaster the East Riding and Hull make a neat grouping, and "Humberside" really isn't a concept worth taking into account any more.
|
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,287
Member is Online
|
Post by YL on Apr 21, 2021 9:45:50 GMT
This is a little better than what I had before (edit: for that group, I haven't changed my preference for the Doncaster/Axholme link) but has an extra ward split (Wakefield Rural): All Sheffield seats and Penistone & Stocksbridge exactly as before (i.e. P & S, B & H, Hallam unchanged, transfer Manor Castle to Heeley, split Richmond between Heeley and SE/Attercliffe). Rother Valley re-aligned to new ward boundaries. Rotherham gains Wickersley North and Bramley & Ravenfield from Wentworth & Dearne, which in turn gains Darfield and Stairfoot in Barnsley. Barnsley Central loses both Darton wards and Royston, but gains Wombwell, Worsbrough and the two Hoyland wards. A new cross-border seat ("Hemsworth & Darton"?) contains the remaining Barnsley wards (Darton x2, Royston, Cudworth, North East) plus Hemsworth, Crofton et al and all of Wakefield Rural except Crigglestone parish. Wakefield contains the two Ossett wards, the four Wakefield compass point wards (hi islington) and the Crigglestone part of Wakefield Rural. That leaves Castleford & Outwood, a strip along the northern border of Wakefield borough, and Pontefract & Normanton, including the Elmsalls.
|
|
ilerda
Conservative
Posts: 1,026
|
Post by ilerda on Apr 21, 2021 11:14:47 GMT
A new cross-border seat ("Hemsworth & Darton"?) contains the remaining Barnsley wards (Darton x2, Royston, Cudworth, North East) plus Hemsworth, Crofton et al and all of Wakefield Rural except Crigglestone parish. I think Hemsworth and Royston might be a better name for this seat. Royston is recognised by Barnsley Council as one of their so-called "principal towns", and sits in the middle of the five wards you're moving across. I would say don't be fooled by the fact two wards are named after Darton. They cover a collection of differently named communities that just happened to be part of the old Darton Urban District and also share Darton station. Most of the area covered isn't the core of Darton itself.
|
|