2023 Review - North East

[J.G.Harston]

2023 Review - North East

[bjornhattan]

Right, here are the figures:

Northumberland 3.40
Newcastle 2.60
North Tyneside 2.13
Gateshead 1.97
Sunderland 2.83
South Tyneside 1.57
Durham 5.36
Darlington 1.07
Hartlepool 0.97
Stockton 1.96
Middlesbrough 1.31
Redcar and Cleveland 1.43

Personally, the way I'd divide up the region is as follows. Firstly, Northumberland, North Tyneside, and Newcastle pair nicely for eight seats, which is great and means no Tyne Bridge seat is needed. You can then combine the rest of Tyne and Wear with County Durham for twelve seats (though this only has 11.72 quotas, which combined with the awkward wards in parts of County Durham may not be ideal). Hartlepool can stand alone as it does now, and then the rest of the region gets six seats.

In Darlington, I'd have the constituency be identical to the local authority but with Sadberge & Middleton St George and Hurworth removed (and placed into a Stockton based seat). Ideally I wouldn't remove Hurworth but this should make it just about possible to create quorate seats in Stockton and Middlesbrough. It'd be a lot easier if we could just take Stokesley and Great Ayton from North Yorkshire, but I digress...

[La Fontaine]

Just first thoughts. The Tees Valley (less Hartlepool) entitlement of 5.77 could be a problem. Over-the-quota figures for Northumberland, Newcastle & North Tyneside may not be sustainable with the knock-on effect, so perhaps detaching Prudhoe could be sensible. But the last Commission wouldn't look at it, saying that they had decided not to cross Northumberland's boundary, for very weak reasons.

[La Fontaine]

Looking at the figures slightly differently, Northumberland, NT & Newcastle total 8.13. The rest of the region, less Hartlepool, totals 17.49. And if you have to add Sedgefield etc. to Tees Valley, then it won't work. Blaydon & Prudhoe constituency will run!

[minionofmidas]

The question is perhaps not so much whether you have to include Prudhoe in a Blaydon seat but whether you can stop there.

[La Fontaine]

Jan 6, 2021 12:48:38 GMT minionofmidas said:

The question is perhaps not so much whether you have to include Prudhoe in a Blaydon seat but whether you can stop there.

Well, yes. You could add, say, Bywell i.e. Wylam. My son lives at a Wylam postal address that is actually in Gateshead.

[The Bishop]

Yes, there's a decent argument that both Prudhoe and Wylam look at least as much towards the T&W conurbation than Hexham anyway.

[jamie]

I haven’t done a plan yet but the numbers do look tight so moving part of Northumberland into the south Tyne and Wear/Durham combo may be necessary. It may split a council area but in practice there is little differentiation between western Gateshead and south east Northumberland on the ground. Prudhoe is very similar to western Blaydon constituency and even Bywell + Stocksfield and Broomhaugh wards are reasonably well connected and they themselves are strongly linked to Prudhoe.

[J.G.Harston]

Jan 6, 2021 14:06:37 GMT jamie said:

I haven’t done a plan yet but the numbers do look tight so moving part of Northumberland into the south Tyne and Wear/Durham combo may be necessary. It may split a council area but in practice there is little differentiation between western Gateshead and south east Northumberland on the ground. Prudhoe is very similar to western Blaydon constituency and even Bywell + Stocksfield and Broomhaugh wards are reasonably well connected and they themselves are strongly linked to Prudhoe.

I know that arguing logic and county boundaries is a fool's errand, but the logical boundary of Northumberland is the Tyne, so those bits of Northumberland south of the Tyne could well quite easily go with bits of some County Durham or South-Tyne Tyne&Wear* seats.

* Arguably redundantly repetative.

[islington]

Jan 6, 2021 10:27:46 GMT La Fontaine said:

Looking at the figures slightly differently, Northumberland, NT & Newcastle total 8.13. The rest of the region, less Hartlepool, totals 17.49. And if you have to add Sedgefield etc. to Tees Valley, then it won't work. Blaydon & Prudhoe constituency will run!

Well, yes, but if you treat Gateshead (1.97) separately for 2, you are left with 15.52 for 16 seats, which should be just about possible.

[🏴‍☠️ Neath West 🏴‍☠️]

It would make things much easier to put Redcar and Middlesbrough back into Yorkshire.

[bjornhattan]

Jan 6, 2021 15:32:31 GMT islington said:

Jan 6, 2021 10:27:46 GMT La Fontaine said:

Looking at the figures slightly differently, Northumberland, NT & Newcastle total 8.13. The rest of the region, less Hartlepool, totals 17.49. And if you have to add Sedgefield etc. to Tees Valley, then it won't work. Blaydon & Prudhoe constituency will run!

Well, yes, but if you treat Gateshead (1.97) separately for 2, you are left with 15.52 for 16 seats, which should be just about possible.

It might be possible if we still had districts in County Durham, but the unitary wards there are large (and some, especially west of Durham city, are really unwieldy). Creating 16 horrible seats should be possible, but 16 decent seats? I'd have to see a plan to believe it possible.

[jamie]

Just because you can make a plan that doesn’t create cross-council constituencies doesn’t mean you should make a plan that doesn’t create cross-council constituencies. Obviously all else equal it is best to avoid them, but some of the inter council splits may well be bad enough to justify it, particularly when you look at some of the Durham council wards.

[broxi]

Jarrow and Wallsend??

[🏴‍☠️ Neath West 🏴‍☠️]

Jan 6, 2021 18:35:55 GMT bjornhattan said:

Jan 6, 2021 15:32:31 GMT islington said:

Well, yes, but if you treat Gateshead (1.97) separately for 2, you are left with 15.52 for 16 seats, which should be just about possible.

It might be possible if we still had districts in County Durham, but the unitary wards there are large (and some, especially west of Durham city, are really unwieldy). Creating 16 horrible seats should be possible, but 16 decent seats? I'd have to see a plan to believe it possible.

Well a good start is adding Cleadon and East Boldon ward to South Shields, which takes it over the lower bound by a grand total of 1 elector.

[Pete Whitehead]

It's 'just a bit of fun' more or less in this part of the world really, but you know.. it works and it doesn't cross the Tyne where it shouldn't..

[Deleted]

I've managed what I think is a reasonable plan with only 5 constituencies split across council areas. The idea was that creating mostly sensible seats would make up for the odd inevitable horror show


Newcastle, N Tyneside and Northumberland
1. Berwick, Hexham & the Border - all of Berwick minus Shillbottle, both Amble wards, Druridge Bay, Pegswood, Lynemouth and Longhorsley; all of Hexham minus Ponteland wards, Prudhoe wards and Bywell. Electorate 71999, notionally safe Conservative
2. Newcastle, Jesmond - Newcastle East realigned with ward boundaries, plus Monument & Arthur's Hill. Electorate 77,038, notionally safe Labour
3. Ashington & Morpeth - All of Wansbeck except the Bedlington wards, plus those wards removed from Berwick. Electorate 75,418, notionally marginal Conservative
4. Wallsend & Tynemouth - the N Tyneside wards of Wallsend, Riverside, Howdon, Chirton, Preston, Tynemouth, Northumberland, Cullercoats, Battle Hill and Collingwood. Electorate 76,894, notionally safe Labour
5. Whitley Bay - the rest of N Tyneside minus Weetslade. Electorate 71,452, notionally safe Labour
6. Newcastle Gosforth - Newcastle Central minus the two wards removed to Jesmond, plus Parklands and Lemington, and realigned with ward boundaries. Electorate 74,368, notionally safe Labour
7. Newcastle, Kingston Park & Ponteland - one of the horror show ones. The rest of Newcastle West, plus Weetslade (N Tyneside), and those wards removed from Hexham. Electorate 74,124, notionally I would think marginal Labour
8. Blyth & Bedlington - all of Blyth Valley plus the Bedlington wards. Electorate 75,485, notionally marginal Lab

Gateshead
1. Gateshead - the current Gateshead minus Dunston & Teams, plus Pelaw & Heworth and Wardley & Leam Lane. Electorate 70,553, notionally safe Labour
2. Blaydon - the current Blaydon plus Dunston & Teams. Electorate 74,066, notionally safe Labour

Sunderland, S Tyneside & Durham
1. Sunderland Central - The current seat minus St Anne's, Pallion, and wards north of the Wear, plus Sandhill, St Chands, Silksworth, Doxford. Electorate 71,317, notionally marginal Labour
2. Newton Aycliffe & Bishop Auckland - what it says plus Ferryhill & Chilton wards. Electorate 72,042, notionally I would guess marginal Conservative?
3. Boldon & Roker - Fulwell, St Peter's, Redhill from Sunderland, Boldon wards plus Fellgate, Whitburn, Whitleas, Cleadon Park and Harton from S Tyneside. Electorate 69,751, notionally reasonably safe Labour
4. Washington & Sunderland Castle - the current W&SW, minus Redhill, plus Southwick and Pallion. Electorate 73,864, notionally marginal Labour
5. Jarrow & South Shields - rest of S Tyneside. Electorate 70,647, notionally safe Labour
6. Houghton & Seaham - the rest of H&SS plus most of Shotton (c. 4500 voters), Seaham, Murton, Deneside, Dawdon, Easington. Electorate 70,607, notionally reasonably safe Labour
7. Consett & Stanley - N Durham except ClS, Sacriston, Lumley, plus Consett. Electorate 70,085, notionally marginal Labour ?
8. Durham West - the rest of NW Durham plus Evenwood, Barnard Castle, Brandon, and realigment with ward boundaries. Electorate 75,867, notionally safe Conservative
9. Sedgefield & Peterlee - Remiander of Sedgefield and Easington plus Tudhoe, Coxhoe, Durham South. Electorate 70,134, notionally marginal Conservative
10. City of Durham & Chester-le-Street
- Remainder of City, plus ClS, Sacriston, Lumley. Electorate 72,579, notionally marginal Labour?

Hartlepool
1. Hartlepool - unchanged. Electorate 71,228, notionally marginal Labour

Darlington, Stockton, Borough, R&C
1. Middlesbrough - the current seat realigned to ward boundaries, plus Marton East. Electorate 69,938, notionally safe Labour
2. Stockton South - as current, minus Mandale, Village, Stainsby Hill, plus Sadberge & Middleton St George, Hurworth. Electorate 70,854, notionally marginal Conservative
3. Redcar - as the current seat, minus part of Ormesby (c. 14-1500 voters), plus Saltburn. Electorate 69,864, notionally marginal Conservative
4. Darlington - Darlington borough minus the two wards removed to Stockton S. Electorate 70,446, notionally marginal Conservative
5. Stockton North - the current seat plus Mandale & Victoria. Electorate 71,093, notionally marginal Labour
6. Middlesbrough South & Guisborough - as the current MSEC, minus the areas removed to Redcar or Borough, plus Stainsby Hill and Village. Electorate 71,178, notionally safe Conservative

Total Con 9 (-1) Lab 18 (-1)

[East Anglian Lefty]

Redcar (71331) - current seat plus Saltburn
Middlesborough South & Cleveland (73183) - current seat minus Saltburn plus Trimdon and Kader
Middlesborough North & Thornaby (73641) - current Middlesborough seat minus Trimdon and Kader, plus the three Thornaby wards
Stockton South (70854) - loses Thornaby, gains Western parishes from Stockton North and Sadberge and Hurworth in Darlington district from Sedgefield
Darlington (70446) - gains Heighington
Stockton North (70288) - loses Western Parishes, gains Sedgefield
Hartlepool (71228) - unchanged
Easington (71653) - gains Sherburn and Wingate. Trimdon would have been preferable, but the numbers in the rest of Durham were too tight
Spennymoor (70182) - Aycliffe, Shildon, Chilton, Ferryhill, Bishop Middleham, Coundon, Spennymoor, Tudhoe, Willington
West Durham (70541) - the current Bishop Auckland seat minus Spennymoor and Shildon, but adding Weardale, Crook, Tow Law, Esh and Lanchester
City of Durham (72438) - compared to realigned boundaries, loses Sherburn and gains Trimdon
Consett (70085) - the six northernmost wards from NW Durham and the five westernmost from N Durham
Chester-le-Street & Houghton (70045) - the rest of North Durham and four wards from Sunderland South. The numbers would work for Washington instead of Houghton, but then you have to carve Sunderland seven ways to Sunday - if anybody can prove me wrong, I'd love to see it
Sunderland South (71317) - the other four wards from Houghton & Sunderland South, plus Ryhope, Hendon, St. Michael's, Millfield and Barnes
Washington & Sunderland West (73970) - gains Pallion
Sunderland North & South Shields East (70024) - you either need to carve up Jarrow, Washington or South Shields, and here South Shields has drawn the short straw. Three wards from Sunderland, six wards from South Shields and Cleadon & East Boldon
Jarrow & South Shields West (70268) - the rest of South Tyneside district
Gateshead (70553) - loses Dunston & Teams, gains Pelaw & Heworth and Wardley & Leam Lane
Blaydon (74066) - gains Dunston & Teams
Hexham (76530) - gains Callerton & Throckley and Chapel from Newcastle North
Newcastle West (72006) - successor to Central, loses Gosforth and Monument, gains Lemington, Denton & Westerhope and Kingston Park South
Newcastle East (71044) - gains Monument
Newcastle North (74087) - it's close, but I think this takes more electors from North Tyneside. Five wards from North Tyneside, three from Newcastle North and Gosforth from Newcastle Central
Tynemouth & Wallsend (76984) - the southern end of the North Tyneside and Tynemouth seats
Cramlington & Whitley Bay (74510) - Cramlington, Seaton Delaval, five wards from North Tyneside
Ashington & Blyth (75452) - compared to Wansbeck, loses Morpeth and adds Blyth
Berwick (76273) - adds Morpeth

Jan 7, 2021 21:53:32 GMT 🏴‍☠️ Neath West 🏴‍☠️ said:

Jan 6, 2021 18:35:55 GMT bjornhattan said:

It might be possible if we still had districts in County Durham, but the unitary wards there are large (and some, especially west of Durham city, are really unwieldy). Creating 16 horrible seats should be possible, but 16 decent seats? I'd have to see a plan to believe it possible.

Well a good start is adding Cleadon and East Boldon ward to South Shields, which takes it over the lower bound by a grand total of 1 elector.

Annoyingly, the rest of South Tyneside plus Castle, Redhill and Southwick from Sunderland are one elector short of quota. Indeed, given that 95% of 73393 is 69723.35 there's an argument it ought to round down, in which case it'd be an excellent option.

[La Fontaine]

Prudhoe is south of the Tyne.

[mattb]

Reasonably pleased with this