Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 11,543
Member is Online
|
Post by Khunanup on Jun 9, 2021 21:31:26 GMT
Just to get the ball rolling on trying to make the NW less messy, how about this?
It covers the exact same area as four corresponding seats in the BCE plan so there are no knock-on implications elsewhere. Compared with the BCE plan it keeps Chester together and puts the whole of Winsford in the Northwich seat. And everything is good on the numbers. Chester - 70992. West Cheshire - 73006. Yes it sprawls. But it's not much worse, in that respect, than the BCE's S Cheshire seat, and it has the merit of not cutting Chester and Winsford in half. Runcorn - 69771. Northwich - 74459.
Neston to the Staffordshire border is, arguably, even worse! And West Cheshire is an awful name for a seat that sprawls to the south eastern corner of the county. (Cheshire Rural?) But I'll grant that your Chester seat is oodles better! It's an horrific proposal. Neston has no links with anywhere east or south of Chester other than via Chester or Ellesmere Port. It's effectively an suburban/exurban island stuck out on a limb in a sea of ruralness.
|
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,726
|
Post by Adrian on Jun 9, 2021 22:08:03 GMT
Generally speaking, I'm dead against splitting towns in the way that the initial proposals split Chester. I think a reasonably sized West Cheshire seat including Neston would be a small price to pay to avoid it. However, a seat stretching from Neston to Wychwood Park isn't reasonably sized. Also, the Commission's plan has certain good features that rejigging the county will probably remove, eg. a proper Northwich seat, and having Lymm in Tatton.
So, in the end I can just about live with the Chester split. The geography of the county is a reasonable excuse for it. Whether the citizens can live with it, we'll wait and see.
In order to reunite Over with the rest of Winsford in the Northwich seat, I'd suggest adding Marbury ward to Runcorn, and adding the Gowy and Sandstone wards to Cheshire South, which can be named Eddisbury :-)
|
|
|
Post by mattb on Jun 9, 2021 22:13:05 GMT
Just to get the ball rolling on trying to make the NW less messy, how about this?
It covers the exact same area as four corresponding seats in the BCE plan so there are no knock-on implications elsewhere. Compared with the BCE plan it keeps Chester together and puts the whole of Winsford in the Northwich seat. And everything is good on the numbers. Chester - 70992. West Cheshire - 73006. Yes it sprawls. But it's not much worse, in that respect, than the BCE's S Cheshire seat, and it has the merit of not cutting Chester and Winsford in half. Runcorn - 69771. Northwich - 74459.
Looks reasonable - think I posted something very similar on about p3 (certainly those Runcorn and Northwich seats look very familiar )
|
|
|
Post by pepperminttea on Jun 11, 2021 7:37:37 GMT
I had a go at the North West. I'm reasonably happy with it although I don't know the area all that well so I'm sure there's at least something that would invite the pitchforks. There are two split wards: Upton (on the Wirral, same as commission) and Charlestown (Manchester). These are not shown on the map. Cheshire
1)Birkenhead - 76,271 2)Wallasey - 66,806 (+ part of Upton) 3)Wirral West - 78,374 (- part of Upton) 4)Ellesmere Port - 71,027 5)City of Chester - 70,992 6)West Cheshire - 72,066 7)Northwich & Winsford (or just Northwich) - 70,406 8)Runcorn - 69,771 9)Warrington West - 70,269 10)Warrington East - 74,789 11)Crewe & Nantwich - 73,219 12)Sandbach - 70,699 13)Wilmslow - 75,424 14)Macclesfield & Congleton - 69,993 Greater Manchester
15)Cheadle - 73,775 16)Hazel Grove - 72,941 17)Stockport - 74,769 18)Altrincham & Sale West - 73,934 19)Wythenshawe & Sale East - 76,971 20)Stretford & Urmston - 73,212 21)Manchester Withington - 71,614 22)Manchester Longsight - 71,094 23)Manchester Central - 73,037 24)Manchester Blackley - 77,673 (-part of Charlestown) 25)Failsworth & Droylsden - 72,082 (+part of Charlestown) 26)Ashton & Stalybridge (or just Ashton-under-Lyne) - 71,134 27)Denton & Hyde - 72,657 28)Oldham West & Royton - 73,240 29)Oldham East & Saddleworth - 72,997 30)Rochdale - 72,290 31)Heywood & Middleton - 72,969 32)Westhoughton & Horwich (or Bolton West) - 73,149 33)Bolton North (or Bolton North East) - 77,020 34)Bolton South (or Bolton South east) - 76,861 35)Bury (or Bury North) - 75,652 36)Radcliffe & Prestwich (or Bury South) - 75,955 37)Wigan - 75,607 38)Makerfield - 75,069 39)Leigh - 76,747 40)Salford - 72,169 41)Worsley & Eccles - 75,810 Merseyside
42)St Helens East - 75,176 43)St Helens West - 76,917 44)Huyton - 70,121 45)Liverpool Fazakerley - 70,355 46)Liverpool Garston - 70,372 47)Liverpool Wavertree - 71,076 48)Liverpool Central - 70,318 49)Liverpool West Derby - 74,345 50)Widnes & Halewood - 72,259 51)Bootle - 75,194 52)Formby & Maghull - 70,085 53)Southport - 71,037 Lancashire
54)Chorley & Darwen - 73,701 55)Penwortham & Preston East - 74,974 56)Leyland - 76,878 57)Skelmersdale & Ormskirk - 75,458 58)Blackburn - 76,323 59)Accrington & Rawtenstall - 76,882 60)Burley & Bacup - 72,933 61)Nelson & Colne - 70,221 62)Clitheroe - 74,433 63)Preston - 74,586 64)Blackpool North & Fleetwood - 75,396 65)Blackpool South - 76,071 66)Fylde - 75,114 67)Lancaster - 75,469 68)Morecambe - 75,498 Cumbria
69)Barrow & Furness - 74,699 70)Westmorland - 76,624 71)Workington & Whitehaven - 76,615 72)Penrith & Solway - 76,017 73)Carlisle - 75,868
|
|
|
Post by islington on Jun 11, 2021 8:44:58 GMT
Actually that doesn't look too bad overall, although Lancs looks quite messy in some areas.
But if I were having a crack at Gtr Manchester, I'd definitely try to get rid of the three-borough Droylesden thing.
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 36,657
|
Post by The Bishop on Jun 11, 2021 10:14:58 GMT
Those seats in Cumbria are a big improvement on what has actually been proposed.
|
|
|
Post by rivers10 on Jun 11, 2021 14:27:11 GMT
OK so I felt compelled to actually propose to the Comission an alteration to the Liverpool Norris Green seat.
Only a small tweak but if they were to split the one Sefton ward (Molyneux) thats included in the proposed Liverpool Norris Green neatly along the M57 and keep the southern areas (Aintree and Old Roan) in the proposed Liverpool NG seat while transferring the Northern areas (Melling, Waddicar and a slice of Maghull) back into Sefton Central it creates two vastly more harmonious seats by removing the connectivity issues that plague the current Liveprool NG not to mention the sharp contrast of a small village like Melling being added into an urban seat like Liverpool Norris Green, it also has the bonus of keeping Maghull in one piece
I obviously dont have exact electoral figures re the effect of this ward split but the proposed Sefton C has 70,000 electors while the proposed Liveprool NG has 76,000 so they could easily add the few thousand electors above mentioned from NG (Molyneux ward) back into Sefton C and both seats would remain in quota
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Jun 11, 2021 14:38:40 GMT
OK so I felt compelled to actually propose to the Comission an alteration to the Liverpool Norris Green seat. Only a small tweak but if they were to split the one Sefton ward (Molyneux) thats included in the proposed Liverpool Norris Green neatly along the M57 and keep the southern areas (Aintree and Old Roan) in the proposed Liverpool NG seat while transferring the Northern areas (Melling, Waddicar and a slice of Maghull) back into Sefton Central it creates two vastly more harmonious seats by removing the connectivity issues that plague the current Liveprool NG not to mention the sharp contrast of a small village like Melling being added into an urban seat like Liverpool Norris Green, it also has the bonus of keeping Maghull in one piece I obviously dont have exact electoral figures re the effect of this ward split but the proposed Sefton C has 70,000 electors while the proposed Liveprool NG has 76,000 so they could easily add the few thousand electors above mentioned from NG (Molyneux ward) back into Sefton C and both seats would remain in quota That makes sense. Aintree and Old Roan are odd anyway - they are in Sefton or at least, half of the area is, and the other half in Liverpool. The change won't make any difference at all, politically.
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Jun 11, 2021 14:47:38 GMT
OK so I felt compelled to actually propose to the Comission an alteration to the Liverpool Norris Green seat. Only a small tweak but if they were to split the one Sefton ward (Molyneux) thats included in the proposed Liverpool Norris Green neatly along the M57 and keep the southern areas (Aintree and Old Roan) in the proposed Liverpool NG seat while transferring the Northern areas (Melling, Waddicar and a slice of Maghull) back into Sefton Central it creates two vastly more harmonious seats by removing the connectivity issues that plague the current Liveprool NG not to mention the sharp contrast of a small village like Melling being added into an urban seat like Liverpool Norris Green, it also has the bonus of keeping Maghull in one piece I obviously dont have exact electoral figures re the effect of this ward split but the proposed Sefton C has 70,000 electors while the proposed Liveprool NG has 76,000 so they could easily add the few thousand electors above mentioned from NG (Molyneux ward) back into Sefton C and both seats would remain in quota The BCE website has a spreadsheet containing ward and polling district for the entirety of England bar a few areas with very new wards. Unhelpfully the polling districts aren't named, so you have to know the codes for them, but the information is there.
|
|
Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 11,543
Member is Online
|
Post by Khunanup on Jun 11, 2021 23:26:38 GMT
Just to get the ball rolling on trying to make the NW less messy, how about this?
It covers the exact same area as four corresponding seats in the BCE plan so there are no knock-on implications elsewhere. Compared with the BCE plan it keeps Chester together and puts the whole of Winsford in the Northwich seat. And everything is good on the numbers. Chester - 70992. West Cheshire - 73006. Yes it sprawls. But it's not much worse, in that respect, than the BCE's S Cheshire seat, and it has the merit of not cutting Chester and Winsford in half. Runcorn - 69771. Northwich - 74459.
Looks reasonable - think I posted something very similar on about p3 (certainly those Runcorn and Northwich seats look very familiar ) I assume that's a definition of reasonable that I'm unfamiliar with. I'll repeat again, Neston being in a seat with east of Whitchurch is an utter abomination. It has absolutely nothing to do with anywhere in Cheshire other than other southern Wirral areas (including the bits in Wirral MB) and Chester. The split of Chester is a small price to pay to not have an area that would be immediately completely marginalised and alienated from the rest of a constituency that it has zero realistic links to. Hell, Neston & Parkgate would make more sense to put in a constituency with the Welsh Deeside than the Shropshire borders. Dee Banks anyone... 🤔
|
|
European Lefty
Labour
Can be bribed with salted liquorice
Posts: 5,617
|
Post by European Lefty on Jun 11, 2021 23:39:07 GMT
Is there any way to avoid Barrow going in the same seat as Grange-Over-Sands?
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jun 11, 2021 23:43:07 GMT
Is there any way to avoid Barrow going in the same seat as Grange-Over-Sands? I hope not.
|
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,341
|
Post by YL on Jun 12, 2021 6:05:19 GMT
OK so I felt compelled to actually propose to the Comission an alteration to the Liverpool Norris Green seat. Only a small tweak but if they were to split the one Sefton ward (Molyneux) thats included in the proposed Liverpool Norris Green neatly along the M57 and keep the southern areas (Aintree and Old Roan) in the proposed Liverpool NG seat while transferring the Northern areas (Melling, Waddicar and a slice of Maghull) back into Sefton Central it creates two vastly more harmonious seats by removing the connectivity issues that plague the current Liveprool NG not to mention the sharp contrast of a small village like Melling being added into an urban seat like Liverpool Norris Green, it also has the bonus of keeping Maghull in one piece I obviously dont have exact electoral figures re the effect of this ward split but the proposed Sefton C has 70,000 electors while the proposed Liveprool NG has 76,000 so they could easily add the few thousand electors above mentioned from NG (Molyneux ward) back into Sefton C and both seats would remain in quota To be honest I'd be looking at getting rid of the Sefton boundary crossings altogether and keeping its three seats unchanged. Several plans (most recently by pepperminttea) have been posted on here which achieve that. I feel this region has done badly by comparison with most in the initial proposals. Copeland & Windermere back from the dead (and with a misleading name), West Pennine Moors, that Norris Green seat, several split towns in Greater Manchester...
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Jun 12, 2021 6:30:51 GMT
Generally speaking, I'm dead against splitting towns in the way that the initial proposals split Chester. I think a reasonably sized West Cheshire seat including Neston would be a small price to pay to avoid it. However, a seat stretching from Neston to Wychwood Park isn't reasonably sized. Also, the Commission's plan has certain good features that rejigging the county will probably remove, eg. a proper Northwich seat, and having Lymm in Tatton. So, in the end I can just about live with the Chester split. The geography of the county is a reasonable excuse for it. Whether the citizens can live with it, we'll wait and see. In order to reunite Over with the rest of Winsford in the Northwich seat, I'd suggest adding Marbury ward to Runcorn, and adding the Gowy and Sandstone wards to Cheshire South, which can be named Eddisbury :-) I was gonna say, islington's redraw of Northwich and Runcorn works even if you don't do anything about Chester and Neston (and vice versa - except of course that that wouldn't be contiguous) but it turns out that's just what you're proposing here. Either Chester or Neston is going to have to swallow a bullet. There's going to be a pitched pitchfork battle to see who it is. I'll make some popcorn.
|
|
|
Post by andrewteale on Jun 12, 2021 6:36:42 GMT
I had a go at the North West. I'm reasonably happy with it although I don't know the area all that well so I'm sure there's at least something that would invite the pitchforks. There are two split wards: Upton (on the Wirral, same as commission) and Charlestown (Manchester). These are not shown on the map. Greater Manchester
15)Cheadle - 73,775 16)Hazel Grove - 72,941 17)Stockport - 74,769 18)Altrincham & Sale West - 73,934 19)Wythenshawe & Sale East - 76,971 20)Stretford & Urmston - 73,212 21)Manchester Withington - 71,614 22)Manchester Longsight - 71,094 23)Manchester Central - 73,037 24)Manchester Blackley - 77,673 (-part of Charlestown) 25)Failsworth & Droylsden - 72,082 (+part of Charlestown) 26)Ashton & Stalybridge (or just Ashton-under-Lyne) - 71,134 27)Denton & Hyde - 72,657 28)Oldham West & Royton - 73,240 29)Oldham East & Saddleworth - 72,997 30)Rochdale - 72,290 31)Heywood & Middleton - 72,969 32)Westhoughton & Horwich (or Bolton West) - 73,149 33)Bolton North (or Bolton North East) - 77,020 34)Bolton South (or Bolton South east) - 76,861 35)Bury (or Bury North) - 75,652 36)Radcliffe & Prestwich (or Bury South) - 75,955 37)Wigan - 75,607 38)Makerfield - 75,069 39)Leigh - 76,747 40)Salford - 72,169 41)Worsley & Eccles - 75,810 Lancashire
54)Chorley & Darwen - 73,701 55)Penwortham & Preston East - 74,974 56)Leyland - 76,878 57)Skelmersdale & Ormskirk - 75,458 58)Blackburn - 76,323 59)Accrington & Rawtenstall - 76,882 60)Burley & Bacup - 72,933 61)Nelson & Colne - 70,221 62)Clitheroe - 74,433 63)Preston - 74,586 64)Blackpool North & Fleetwood - 75,396 65)Blackpool South - 76,071 66)Fylde - 75,114 67)Lancaster - 75,469 68)Morecambe - 75,498 35-39 is what I was going to counterpropose, thanks for checking that works. Your Oldham West and Royton seat splits Rochdale town between three constituencies, I don't think that's going to work. Chorley and Darwen - no, this is basically the objection to the West Pennine Moors seat.
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 36,657
|
Post by The Bishop on Jun 12, 2021 11:21:12 GMT
Generally speaking, I'm dead against splitting towns in the way that the initial proposals split Chester. I think a reasonably sized West Cheshire seat including Neston would be a small price to pay to avoid it. However, a seat stretching from Neston to Wychwood Park isn't reasonably sized. Also, the Commission's plan has certain good features that rejigging the county will probably remove, eg. a proper Northwich seat, and having Lymm in Tatton. So, in the end I can just about live with the Chester split. The geography of the county is a reasonable excuse for it. Whether the citizens can live with it, we'll wait and see. In order to reunite Over with the rest of Winsford in the Northwich seat, I'd suggest adding Marbury ward to Runcorn, and adding the Gowy and Sandstone wards to Cheshire South, which can be named Eddisbury :-) I was gonna say, islington's redraw of Northwich and Runcorn works even if you don't do anything about Chester and Neston (and vice versa - except of course that that wouldn't be contiguous) but it turns out that's just what you're proposing here. Either Chester or Neston is going to have to swallow a bullet. There's going to be a pitched pitchfork battle to see who it is. I'll make some popcorn. In that case, Neston (as a significantly smaller place) has to get the "honour" I'm afraid.
|
|
|
Post by rivers10 on Jun 12, 2021 14:07:23 GMT
OK so I felt compelled to actually propose to the Comission an alteration to the Liverpool Norris Green seat. Only a small tweak but if they were to split the one Sefton ward (Molyneux) thats included in the proposed Liverpool Norris Green neatly along the M57 and keep the southern areas (Aintree and Old Roan) in the proposed Liverpool NG seat while transferring the Northern areas (Melling, Waddicar and a slice of Maghull) back into Sefton Central it creates two vastly more harmonious seats by removing the connectivity issues that plague the current Liveprool NG not to mention the sharp contrast of a small village like Melling being added into an urban seat like Liverpool Norris Green, it also has the bonus of keeping Maghull in one piece I obviously dont have exact electoral figures re the effect of this ward split but the proposed Sefton C has 70,000 electors while the proposed Liveprool NG has 76,000 so they could easily add the few thousand electors above mentioned from NG (Molyneux ward) back into Sefton C and both seats would remain in quota To be honest I'd be looking at getting rid of the Sefton boundary crossings altogether and keeping its three seats unchanged. Several plans (most recently by pepperminttea) have been posted on here which achieve that. I feel this region has done badly by comparison with most in the initial proposals. Copeland & Windermere back from the dead (and with a misleading name), West Pennine Moors, that Norris Green seat, several split towns in Greater Manchester... I keep meaning to respond to Pepps Merseyside proposals but can't find the time Suffice to say while I agree keeping the Sefton seats unchanged is definitely preferable it has massive knock on effects elsewhere not least for Liverpool Pepps proposed boundaries for Liverpool are really a hot mess (no offence to him he did the best he could given the rigidity of the quota) and given the choice between a Southport seat that stretches into rural Lancashire or his proposed Liverpool Fazakerley I'd take the former even though from a partisan perspective his Merseyside boundaries are better for Labour than what the commission came up with
|
|
Disgusted Of Tunbridge Wells
Independent
Standing for election to the position of Chief Cyber Yob of VUK Forum
Posts: 2,145
Member is Online
|
Post by Disgusted Of Tunbridge Wells on Jun 12, 2021 21:21:03 GMT
I had a go at the North West. I'm reasonably happy with it although I don't know the area all that well so I'm sure there's at least something that would invite the pitchforks. There are two split wards: Upton (on the Wirral, same as commission) and Charlestown (Manchester). These are not shown on the map. Greater Manchester
15)Cheadle - 73,775 16)Hazel Grove - 72,941 17)Stockport - 74,769 18)Altrincham & Sale West - 73,934 19)Wythenshawe & Sale East - 76,971 20)Stretford & Urmston - 73,212 21)Manchester Withington - 71,614 22)Manchester Longsight - 71,094 23)Manchester Central - 73,037 24)Manchester Blackley - 77,673 (-part of Charlestown) 25)Failsworth & Droylsden - 72,082 (+part of Charlestown) 26)Ashton & Stalybridge (or just Ashton-under-Lyne) - 71,134 27)Denton & Hyde - 72,657 28)Oldham West & Royton - 73,240 29)Oldham East & Saddleworth - 72,997 30)Rochdale - 72,290 31)Heywood & Middleton - 72,969 32)Westhoughton & Horwich (or Bolton West) - 73,149 33)Bolton North (or Bolton North East) - 77,020 34)Bolton South (or Bolton South east) - 76,861 35)Bury (or Bury North) - 75,652 36)Radcliffe & Prestwich (or Bury South) - 75,955 37)Wigan - 75,607 38)Makerfield - 75,069 39)Leigh - 76,747 40)Salford - 72,169 41)Worsley & Eccles - 75,810 Lancashire
54)Chorley & Darwen - 73,701 55)Penwortham & Preston East - 74,974 56)Leyland - 76,878 57)Skelmersdale & Ormskirk - 75,458 58)Blackburn - 76,323 59)Accrington & Rawtenstall - 76,882 60)Burley & Bacup - 72,933 61)Nelson & Colne - 70,221 62)Clitheroe - 74,433 63)Preston - 74,586 64)Blackpool North & Fleetwood - 75,396 65)Blackpool South - 76,071 66)Fylde - 75,114 67)Lancaster - 75,469 68)Morecambe - 75,498 35-39 is what I was going to counterpropose, thanks for checking that works. Your Oldham West and Royton seat splits Rochdale town between three constituencies, I don't think that's going to work. Chorley and Darwen - no, this is basically the objection to the West Pennine Moors seat. Chorley to Darwen is better than Chorley to Waterfoot and it results in a relatively logical mostly urban Accy and Rawtenstall seat being created, which is a bonus for the area. Most of the area in-between the 2 making up the majority of the seat has little connection to anywhere specific anyway, apart from Darwen and Chorley themselves but you can't put the former with Blackburn unless you want to completely screw them over too and the same case with the latter and Leyland.
|
|
|
Post by andrewteale on Jun 12, 2021 21:37:19 GMT
35-39 is what I was going to counterpropose, thanks for checking that works. Your Oldham West and Royton seat splits Rochdale town between three constituencies, I don't think that's going to work. Chorley and Darwen - no, this is basically the objection to the West Pennine Moors seat. Chorley to Darwen is better than Chorley to Waterfoot and it results in a relatively logical mostly urban Accy and Rawtenstall seat being created, which is a bonus for the area. Most of the area in-between the 2 making up the majority of the seat has little connection to anywhere specific anyway, apart from Darwen and Chorley themselves but you can't put the former with Blackburn unless you want to completely screw them over too and the same case with the latter and Leyland. I've just got back from an evening's hiking in the area between Chorley and Darwen. It's desolate, barren and rather beautiful moorland. Chorley and Darwen simply doesn't work as a constituency on any level whatsoever. Even keeping the current Rossendale and Darwen seat is preferable as that would satisfy the minimum change rule.
|
|
Disgusted Of Tunbridge Wells
Independent
Standing for election to the position of Chief Cyber Yob of VUK Forum
Posts: 2,145
Member is Online
|
Post by Disgusted Of Tunbridge Wells on Jun 12, 2021 21:51:29 GMT
Chorley to Darwen is better than Chorley to Waterfoot and it results in a relatively logical mostly urban Accy and Rawtenstall seat being created, which is a bonus for the area. Most of the area in-between the 2 making up the majority of the seat has little connection to anywhere specific anyway, apart from Darwen and Chorley themselves but you can't put the former with Blackburn unless you want to completely screw them over too and the same case with the latter and Leyland. I've just got back from an evening's hiking in the area between Chorley and Darwen. It's desolate, barren and rather beautiful moorland. Chorley and Darwen simply doesn't work as a constituency on any level whatsoever. Even keeping the current Rossendale and Darwen seat is preferable as that would satisfy the minimum change rule. What are the other consequences of not keeping that one horrible constituency though? I agree it's shit, it's a long way round from the edge of Haslingden to Chorley, but Rossendale and Darwen screws up Burnley and Bacup and we'll end up with something like Burnley and Nelson perhaps with Colne and the rest of Pendle heading into a Clitheroe/Ribble Valley seat to clear up numbers-wise. It wouldn't be easy to sell, but I wonder if a Rossendale and Darwen minus Bacup and Whitworth plus Padiham and Hapton would hit the quota instead?
|
|