sirbenjamin
IFP
True fame is reading your name written in graffiti, but without the words 'is a wanker' after it.
Posts: 4,979
|
Post by sirbenjamin on Mar 23, 2021 16:49:38 GMT
Mitcham and Morden - 77118 approx. This is slightly over the limit but three of the wards involved (Figge's Marsh, Abbey, Merton Pk) are due to be slightly trimmed by ward changes, whereas little if any territory is to be added. So I'm reasonably confident that we shall lose more than the 56 electors necessary to get within range. Incidentally, the tightness of the numbers in this area reinforces the value of treating Graveney ward with Wandsworth/Lambeth. I'm still hopeful that the local review will accept my objections to the new Figges Marsh ward.
'The Marsh' is a smallish green space where I spent much time as a child. It's debatable whether it should continue to be the name for a ward at all, but if it is going to be:
Why is it right at the very edge of the ward with essentially NO electors in that area instead of being at its heart; and, more importantly,
Why should the few houses that do actually look out directly onto the Marsh, around Manship road be placed in A DIFFERENT FUCKING WARD?!?
It should not be against the law to physically beat up the people who make these decisions.
|
|
|
Post by islington on Mar 23, 2021 17:12:29 GMT
Mitcham and Morden - 77118 approx. This is slightly over the limit but three of the wards involved (Figge's Marsh, Abbey, Merton Pk) are due to be slightly trimmed by ward changes, whereas little if any territory is to be added. So I'm reasonably confident that we shall lose more than the 56 electors necessary to get within range. Incidentally, the tightness of the numbers in this area reinforces the value of treating Graveney ward with Wandsworth/Lambeth. I'm still hopeful that the local review will accept my objections to the new Figges Marsh ward.
'The Marsh' is a smallish green space where I spent much time as a child. It's debatable whether it should continue to be the name for a ward at all, but if it is going to be:
Why is it right at the very edge of the ward with essentially NO electors in that area instead of being at its heart; and, more importantly,
Why should the few houses that do actually look out directly onto the Marsh, around Manship road be placed in A DIFFERENT FUCKING WARD?!?
It should not be against the law to physically beat up the people who make these decisions.
Er... Yes it should.
Anyway, the Merton order was laid on 30 November so the new wards are now settled.
|
|
sirbenjamin
IFP
True fame is reading your name written in graffiti, but without the words 'is a wanker' after it.
Posts: 4,979
|
Post by sirbenjamin on Mar 23, 2021 17:43:48 GMT
I'm still hopeful that the local review will accept my objections to the new Figges Marsh ward.
'The Marsh' is a smallish green space where I spent much time as a child. It's debatable whether it should continue to be the name for a ward at all, but if it is going to be:
Why is it right at the very edge of the ward with essentially NO electors in that area instead of being at its heart; and, more importantly,
Why should the few houses that do actually look out directly onto the Marsh, around Manship road be placed in A DIFFERENT FUCKING WARD?!?
It should not be against the law to physically beat up the people who make these decisions.
Er... Yes it should.
Anyway, the Merton order was laid on 30 November so the new wards are now settled.
Well that's fucked that then. I'd no idea it had been that long. Fucking lockdown.
I assume that representation 61 in the final recs document is me. I do vaguely remember suggesting 'Eastfields' as a name. But I'm not a local resident now, and it misses the point that the only residents local to Figges Marsh aren't in the fucking ward. You cunting idiots.
What's the point of having consultations if you can't change the most leoproticly imbecilic aspects of the review? That's why we need to reserve the right to beat these fuckers to a bloody pulp, break their bones, and then use splinters of their bones to stir the pulp into a mush. And then a soup.
|
|
|
Post by No Offence Alan on Mar 23, 2021 17:54:10 GMT
Er... Yes it should. Anyway, the Merton order was laid on 30 November so the new wards are now settled.
Well that's fucked that then. I'd no idea it had been that long. Fucking lockdown.
I assume that representation 61 in the final recs document is me. I do vaguely remember suggesting 'Eastfields' as a name. But I'm not a local resident now, and it misses the point that the only residents local to Figges Marsh aren't in the fucking ward. You cunting idiots. What's the point of having consultations if you can't change the most leoproticly imbecilic aspects of the review? That's why we need to reserve the right to beat these fuckers to a bloody pulp, break their bones, and then use splinters of their bones to stir the pulp into a mush. And then a soup.
Thank you, Malcolm Tucker.
|
|
sirbenjamin
IFP
True fame is reading your name written in graffiti, but without the words 'is a wanker' after it.
Posts: 4,979
|
Post by sirbenjamin on Mar 23, 2021 17:54:17 GMT
They can't even spell it correctly without the apostrophe on their official and final ward map FFS. I feel a war coming on.
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Mar 23, 2021 17:57:33 GMT
They can't even spell it correctly without the apostrophe on their official and final ward map FFS. I feel a war coming on. I believe that councils still have the authority to change the names of their wards, so all may not be lost.
|
|
sirbenjamin
IFP
True fame is reading your name written in graffiti, but without the words 'is a wanker' after it.
Posts: 4,979
|
Post by sirbenjamin on Mar 23, 2021 18:02:57 GMT
They can't even spell it correctly without the apostrophe on their official and final ward map FFS. I feel a war coming on. I believe that councils still have the authority to change the names of their wards, so all may not be lost.
That may yet prove to be the saving grace. If they give the ward a sensible name, I'll have a big barbecue on the Marsh, which I'm probably not allowed to do, though we did it when I was a child.
Everyone invited. Except the obvious. Obviously.
|
|
|
Post by No Offence Alan on Mar 23, 2021 18:50:36 GMT
They can't even spell it correctly without the apostrophe on their official and final ward map FFS. I feel a war coming on. I believe that councils still have the authority to change the names of their wards, so all may not be lost. Some take their time - I once stood in Renfrewshire Ward 34.
|
|
|
Post by evergreenadam on Mar 23, 2021 22:58:37 GMT
Without peeking at your plans, I've done some preliminary calculations and I'm going to "do" London in 3 parts at 9 am Wed/Thu/Fri. The city seems to have got slightly easier compared with zombie reviews and pre-review plans, although the slight under-representation puts some pressure on the numbers. They will become out of date almost instantly as the BCE have confirmed they will have the electorate data for the prospective wards ready by the end of the week. Then we can all start again, finally with the correct wards and electorates that will be used for the review.
|
|
|
Post by Peter Wilkinson on Mar 25, 2021 1:54:13 GMT
Commenting here rather than where the message was placed, in the general 2023 Review thread, because it is really a specifically London matter: Speaking of which, I have noticed that the new Camden ward electorates mean I can no longer find a solution where Camden has exactly two constituencies on the new ward boundaries that meet the quota requirements, which are contiguous, and which are viable. The Barnet-Camden pairing will have to be revived. That depends on what you mean by viable. If you put Camden Square, Frognal, Gospel Oak, Hampstead Town, Highgate, Holborn & Covent Garden, Kentish Town North, Kentish Town South, King's Cross, and St Pancras & Somers Town wards in one constituency and all the other wards in the other one, the two constituencies meet the quota requirements and are contiguous. The two constituencies are admittedly pretty awful - the terms "gerrymander" and "pitchfork bait" come to mind - but no ward is completely isolated from the rest of its constituency. I would be pleasantly surprised if the review doesn't produce something at least this bad somewhere in the country. And I found this solution fairly quickly, with less than an hour's work, using the johnloony technique of starting off round the edges of the area to be divided into constituencies, then when the method produces a constituency that is either out of quota or non-contiguous, excluding the ward at which the offence happened from the current constituency, then trying out what would then be the next ward and excluding that if it produces an offending constituency. The method is far better as proof that there is a solution to some apparently intractable problem than at producing decent solutions, so I would be mildly surprised if a further really extensive look didn't produce something somewhat better (though quite probably still not really acceptable).
|
|
|
Post by lancastrian on Mar 25, 2021 20:17:37 GMT
Belsize, Camden Town, Fortune Green, Frognal, Hampstead Town, Highgate, Kentish Town North, Kilburn, Primrose Hill, South Hampstead, West Hampstead 70,086
Bloomsbury, Camden Square, Gospel Oak, Haverstock, Holborn & Covent Garden, Kentish Town South, Kings Cross, Regent's Park, St Pancras & Somers Town 70,212
That might be the best you can do in Camden.
|
|
|
Post by lancastrian on Mar 25, 2021 22:07:22 GMT
Belsize, Camden Town, Fortune Green, Frognal, Hampstead Town, Highgate, Kentish Town North, Kilburn, Primrose Hill, South Hampstead, West Hampstead 70,086Bloomsbury, Camden Square, Gospel Oak, Haverstock, Holborn & Covent Garden, Kentish Town South, Kings Cross, Regent's Park, St Pancras & Somers Town 70,212That might be the best you can do in Camden. Actually I think there's something wrong with the new figures for Camden. The figures for the whole borough add up, but at ward level something looks off. If you draw that Hampstead Highgate and Camden Town on the old boundaries it's in quota without Kentish Hill North. I'm not seeing where the boundary changes shift 6000 electors out. The most obvious issue is in Fortune Green. The only boundary change adds one side of a street, but it apparently loses 1500 electors. Regent's Park is unchanged, but has lost 26 electors. Can any of our more local contributors add anything on this situation? Edit: 26 was the number of attainers in Regent's Park in the January figures. Holborn & Covent Garden has also lost exactly the number of attainers, despite substantial boundary changes.
|
|
|
Post by islington on Mar 25, 2021 22:22:28 GMT
I too have been looking at London. The overriding problem is that north of the Thames there are too many electors chasing too few seats so Camden, with an entitlement of 1.91, can't be treated alone because it would simply worsen the problems elsewhere. I am taken, however, with the idea floated by greenhert of pairing it with Barnet. This combination comes to 5.11 = 5 seats, and here's a way of doing it that doesn't look too bad:
Hendon - 76673. Edgware, Mill Hill, Burnt Oak, Colindale x 2, Hendon, W Hendon, Cricklewood. Barnet - 76187. Barnet Vale, Brunswick Pk, E Barnet, Edgwarebury, High Barnet, Totteridge, Underhill, Whetstone. Finchley - 71134. Finchley x 3, Friern Barnet, Garden Suburb, Golders Gn, Woodhouse. Hampstead - 75420. Childs Hill, Belsize, Fortune Gn, Frognal, Hampstead Tn, Highgate, Kentish Tn x 2, Kilburn, S Hampstead, W Hampstead. Holborn and St Pancras - 75892. Remaining Camden wards.
|
|
|
Post by kevinlarkin on Mar 25, 2021 22:33:16 GMT
I should have the new London wards up by tomorrow afternoon and the remaining unitaries plus corrected electorates for Cambridge over the weekend. Hounslow is very awkward if you want to pair it with Richmond.
|
|
sirbenjamin
IFP
True fame is reading your name written in graffiti, but without the words 'is a wanker' after it.
Posts: 4,979
|
Post by sirbenjamin on Mar 25, 2021 22:52:31 GMT
I should have the new London wards up by tomorrow afternoon and the remaining unitaries plus corrected electorates for Cambridge over the weekend. Tiny issue - I've noticed that whatever changes I select in 'Settings > Colours and Borders' I can't get it to show either current constituency boundaries or LAs.
Is there something I've switched off accidentally? Happens in Firefox and Chrome, so presumably not a browser issue.
|
|
iain
Lib Dem
Posts: 10,788
Member is Online
|
Post by iain on Mar 25, 2021 23:29:57 GMT
I should have the new London wards up by tomorrow afternoon and the remaining unitaries plus corrected electorates for Cambridge over the weekend. Tiny issue - I've noticed that whatever changes I select in 'Settings > Colours and Borders' I can't get it to show either current constituency boundaries or LAs.
Is there something I've switched off accidentally? Happens in Firefox and Chrome, so presumably not a browser issue.
Once you've clicked on a region click on the weird stack icon in the bottom right of the map, and the options are there.
|
|
sirbenjamin
IFP
True fame is reading your name written in graffiti, but without the words 'is a wanker' after it.
Posts: 4,979
|
Post by sirbenjamin on Mar 25, 2021 23:32:39 GMT
Tiny issue - I've noticed that whatever changes I select in 'Settings > Colours and Borders' I can't get it to show either current constituency boundaries or LAs.
Is there something I've switched off accidentally? Happens in Firefox and Chrome, so presumably not a browser issue.
Once you've clicked on a region click on the weird stack icon in the bottom right of the map, and the options are there.
Thanks! That's even more obvious than I feared. I knew I should've asked earlier instead of trying everything but the one thing I needed to do... Don't tell anyone about this.
|
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,341
|
Post by YL on Mar 26, 2021 9:03:11 GMT
Belsize, Camden Town, Fortune Green, Frognal, Hampstead Town, Highgate, Kentish Town North, Kilburn, Primrose Hill, South Hampstead, West Hampstead 70,086Bloomsbury, Camden Square, Gospel Oak, Haverstock, Holborn & Covent Garden, Kentish Town South, Kings Cross, Regent's Park, St Pancras & Somers Town 70,212That might be the best you can do in Camden. Actually I think there's something wrong with the new figures for Camden. The figures for the whole borough add up, but at ward level something looks off. If you draw that Hampstead Highgate and Camden Town on the old boundaries it's in quota without Kentish Hill North. I'm not seeing where the boundary changes shift 6000 electors out. The most obvious issue is in Fortune Green. The only boundary change adds one side of a street, but it apparently loses 1500 electors. Regent's Park is unchanged, but has lost 26 electors. Can any of our more local contributors add anything on this situation? Edit: 26 was the number of attainers in Regent's Park in the January figures. Holborn & Covent Garden has also lost exactly the number of attainers, despite substantial boundary changes. You should raise this with the BCE.
|
|
|
Post by islington on Mar 26, 2021 9:59:15 GMT
I should have the new London wards up by tomorrow afternoon and the remaining unitaries plus corrected electorates for Cambridge over the weekend. Hounslow is very awkward if you want to pair it with Richmond. The Hounslow area is a bit brutal but I think the following works.
Twickenham - 75889. The current seat less Whitton. Hounslow and Feltham - 75749. Hanworth x 2, Feltham x 2, Bedfont, Cranford, all the wards with Hounslow in the name except South. This isn't great but it's an improvement on the current map, which slices right through the town centre. Brentford and Heston - 75831. Remaining wards of LB Hounslow, less the Chiswicks but plus Whitton. I never said it was going to be beautiful but it's contiguous and within range.
Hammersmith and Chiswick - 75172. Chiswick x 3 plus Hammersmith, Grove, Addison and all H&F wards north of these. Admittedly this does cut very close to Hammersmith town centre. Fulham - 74759. Remaining H&F wards plus Earl's Ct and Redcliffe from K&C. Kensington and Chelsea - 74946. The rest of K&C.
Obverve all six of these seats are well above average size.
|
|
|
Post by evergreenadam on Mar 26, 2021 10:17:35 GMT
I should have the new London wards up by tomorrow afternoon and the remaining unitaries plus corrected electorates for Cambridge over the weekend. Hounslow is very awkward if you want to pair it with Richmond. The Hounslow area is a bit brutal but I think the following works.
Twickenham - 75889. The current seat less Whitton. Hounslow and Feltham - 75749. Hanworth x 2, Feltham x 2, Bedfont, Cranford, all the wards with Hounslow in the name except South. This isn't great but it's an improvement on the current map, which slices right through the town centre. Brentford and Heston - 75831. Remaining wards of LB Hounslow, less the Chiswicks but plus Whitton. I never said it was going to be beautiful but it's contiguous and within range.
Hammersmith and Chiswick - 75172. Chiswick x 3 plus Hammersmith, Grove, Addison and all H&F wards north of these. Admittedly this does cut very close to Hammersmith town centre. Fulham - 74759. Remaining H&F wards plus Earl's Ct and Redcliffe from K&C. Kensington and Chelsea - 74946. The rest of K&C.
Obverve all six of these seats are well above average size.
Chiswick and Shepherds Bush would be a better name and I would have no objection in principle to a seat along the Goldhawk Road/Chiswick High Road axis. Chiswick wards have more in common with those to the east in H&F than to the west in Hounslow. The only potential improvement would be to see if the Southfield ward of Ealing, which is largely in the W4 postcode area could somehow be included as this was popular at the last review. Would Ravenscourt be in this seat?
|
|