|
|
Post by edgbaston on Jun 28, 2023 10:51:02 GMT
Only boundary change in the final proposals compared to revised proposals appears to be Penrith and Solway swapping a few wards with Whitehaven and Workington. There are also a few name changes. Which are? They’ve moved the northern bit of Workington back into the seat which has its namesake, a good change as Keswick Will now be in the more rural seat. And the W&W MP won’t be constantly contacted by people in north Workington that they don’t represent |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 39,067
|
Post by The Bishop on Jun 28, 2023 10:53:22 GMT
Yes that makes sense, though it might make the Penrith/Solway seat slightly tougher for Labour to win (but Keswick is quite good for us these days)
|
|
nyx
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,065
|
Post by nyx on Jun 28, 2023 10:53:53 GMT
Only boundary change in the final proposals compared to revised proposals appears to be Penrith and Solway swapping a few wards with Whitehaven and Workington. There are also a few name changes. Which are? Seaton and Northside, and Flimby, moved into Whitehaven and Workington. Keswick, and Crummock and Derwent Valley, moved into Penrith and Solway. I had proposed precisely that albeit with a couple more ward swaps too- but this is still an improvement. Northern suburbs of Workington no longer in a different seat to the rest of the town, and Keswick fits better in the same constituency as Cockermouth and Penrith along the A66. |
|
|
|
Post by greatkingrat on Jun 28, 2023 11:21:54 GMT
Three seats renamed
Manchester Blackley -> Blackley and Middleton South
Heywood -> Heywood and Middleton North
Oldham West and Royton -> Oldham West, Chadderton and Royton
|
|
jamie
Top Poster
Posts: 7,069 
|
Post by jamie on Jun 28, 2023 12:07:20 GMT
Oldham West and Royton -> Oldham West, Chadderton and Royton If it ain’t broke, why fix it? |
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,915
|
Post by YL on Jun 30, 2023 7:15:29 GMT
Oldham West and Royton -> Oldham West, Chadderton and Royton If it ain’t broke, why fix it? Here's the BCE's justification: |
|
ilerda
Conservative
Posts: 1,112
|
Post by ilerda on Jun 30, 2023 8:30:08 GMT
Oldham West and Royton -> Oldham West, Chadderton and Royton If it ain’t broke, why fix it? The far better solution would be the accept that Royton is redundant and proceed on the basis of naming after the part of the local authority to which it relates. Nobody in Chadderton or Royton can reasonably claim that they don't live in the western part of the Metropolitan Borough of Oldham, so Oldham West is the ideal name. It's yet another example of how maintaining legacy decisions makes things worse in the present day. Alright Royton and Saddleworth may have had their own local authorities pre-1974, but that's verging on ancient history now in local government terms. There's absolutely no justifiable reason to keep them in the name and yet because we always have therefore we always must continue so to do. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2023 8:30:34 GMT
Would just Chadderton & Royton have worked? Or even just Oldham West, as it's the western half of the borough
|
|
|
|
Post by doktorb🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️ on Jun 30, 2023 10:04:09 GMT
If it ain’t broke, why fix it? The far better solution would be the accept that Royton is redundant and proceed on the basis of naming after the part of the local authority to which it relates. Nobody in Chadderton or Royton can reasonably claim that they don't live in the western part of the Metropolitan Borough of Oldham, so Oldham West is the ideal name. It's yet another example of how maintaining legacy decisions makes things worse in the present day. Alright Royton and Saddleworth may have had their own local authorities pre-1974, but that's verging on ancient history now in local government terms. There's absolutely no justifiable reason to keep them in the name and yet because we always have therefore we always must continue so to do. This post reminds me of my surprise at the Commission agreeing to ditch Richmond Yorks after years and years of just going on with 'precedent'. To just change it all of a sudden shows they don't always act the same region by region when it comes to legacy names. |
|
ilerda
Conservative
Posts: 1,112
|
Post by ilerda on Jun 30, 2023 10:18:46 GMT
The far better solution would be the accept that Royton is redundant and proceed on the basis of naming after the part of the local authority to which it relates. Nobody in Chadderton or Royton can reasonably claim that they don't live in the western part of the Metropolitan Borough of Oldham, so Oldham West is the ideal name. It's yet another example of how maintaining legacy decisions makes things worse in the present day. Alright Royton and Saddleworth may have had their own local authorities pre-1974, but that's verging on ancient history now in local government terms. There's absolutely no justifiable reason to keep them in the name and yet because we always have therefore we always must continue so to do. This post reminds me of my surprise at the Commission agreeing to ditch Richmond Yorks after years and years of just going on with 'precedent'. To just change it all of a sudden shows they don't always act the same region by region when it comes to legacy names. That's very true. In the same way that you can always find a statistic to prove whatever point you're trying to make, clearly the BCE can always find a precedent to justify whatever decision they've already chosen to take. |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Jun 30, 2023 10:43:43 GMT
The far better solution would be the accept that Royton is redundant and proceed on the basis of naming after the part of the local authority to which it relates. Nobody in Chadderton or Royton can reasonably claim that they don't live in the western part of the Metropolitan Borough of Oldham, so Oldham West is the ideal name. It's yet another example of how maintaining legacy decisions makes things worse in the present day. Alright Royton and Saddleworth may have had their own local authorities pre-1974, but that's verging on ancient history now in local government terms. There's absolutely no justifiable reason to keep them in the name and yet because we always have therefore we always must continue so to do. This post reminds me of my surprise at the Commission agreeing to ditch Richmond Yorks after years and years of just going on with 'precedent'. To just change it all of a sudden shows they don't always act the same region by region when it comes to legacy names. Yes, I think the solution with names is for the Commission to produce a set of uniform guidance for names and follow it region by region. It doesn't really matter what it says, but it's daft that they're making changes one way in one area, and entirely the other way 30 miles away. |
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,915
|
Post by YL on Jun 30, 2023 13:25:38 GMT
At least since 1983, the BCE has not been very consistent on what names of towns and cities which are also names of larger local authorities mean in constituency names. In Bury it means the whole borough, but in Oldham and Rochdale it seems to mean the town. It doesn’t help that removing “Saddleworth” from that constituency’s name would compete with splitting Sutton Coldfield, or renaming it as “Birmingham North”, as pitchfork bait.
|
|
bsjmcr
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,593
|
Post by bsjmcr on Jul 1, 2023 10:37:32 GMT
At least since 1983, the BCE has not been very consistent on what names of towns and cities which are also names of larger local authorities mean in constituency names. In Bury it means the whole borough, but in Oldham and Rochdale it seems to mean the town. It doesn’t help that removing “Saddleworth” from that constituency’s name would compete with splitting Sutton Coldfield, or renaming it as “Birmingham North”, as pitchfork bait. I guess if Bury followed the Oldham model it would have been Bury South and Prestwich, and Bury North and Ramsbottom. Then again, it would be interesting to get Ramsbottom on the national map. On that vain if we wanted more ‘amusing’ names on the map (probably could become a thread in itself), Bury South should just be Besses o’th Barn. The Chadderton decision just seems to be a case of “they suddenly woke up one morning” and decided to put it in, because there’s nothing new about the constituency or Chadderton or even the boundary. And yet, a non-Bury ward enters Bury South, with no acknowledgement. Extract from David Sumberg’s maiden speech in 1983. Remarkable how some things never change. |
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,915
|
Post by YL on Jul 1, 2023 10:44:58 GMT
Or Bury could follow the Rochdale model with "Bury" and "Prestwich & Radcliffe" (with apologies to Whitefield).
|
|
bsjmcr
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,593
|
Post by bsjmcr on Jul 1, 2023 11:18:00 GMT
Or Bury could follow the Rochdale model with "Bury" and "Prestwich & Radcliffe" (with apologies to Whitefield). I did suggest this (well, Bury and Radcliffe North and Prestwich and Radcliffe South) but alas it wasn’t accepted. Bury South, Kersal and Broughton Park would I guess be taking us into Cumbernauld territory… (I say in jest as most of the Salford ward has more affinity to Prestwich than Bury in any sense) Some consolation in that they did show some sense re Heywood/Blackley and Middleton north/south, despite the fact the Blackley name still remains without the necessary Manchester prefix. |
|
|
|
Post by doktorb🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️ on Jul 8, 2023 20:08:07 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Jul 8, 2023 23:47:26 GMT
this is remarkably badly written |
|
bsjmcr
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,593
|
Post by bsjmcr on Jul 9, 2023 0:15:17 GMT
this is remarkably badly written I don’t think it’s that bad but it is funny how it so happens that the Conservative group hasn’t responded and this has been especially highlighted - rightly so as they are just reporting it as a matter of fact, but anyone reading that sentence would just think it’s ‘blatant gerrymandering’ as the article doesn’t once mention that the Boundary Commission is (meant to be) independent. It doesn’t help that the government has a track record of boycotting the BBC (take Newsnight for example whenever there is a mild scandal). “The Conservative group has been asked for their thoughts but have not yet responded” It also doesn’t mention that there is no such town of village as Eddisbury. |
|
|
|
Post by doktorb🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️ on Jul 9, 2023 4:51:15 GMT
this is remarkably badly written The lack of specialist knowledge *and* the collapse of regional journalism really showing now. |
|
|
|
Post by edgbaston on Jul 9, 2023 11:40:26 GMT
« There was also an acceptance, albeit reluctant, that there was no other solution that did not either cause serious disruption across the whole area or require splitting multiple wards,» Lies - lies I tell you! |
|
