|
Post by islington on Jan 14, 2021 12:13:37 GMT
Here's my suggested Warwickshire map.
Solihull (75871) loses Blythe ward and exhanges two wards with Meriden. Meriden (75452) Stratford on Avon (74993) gains Blythe from Solihull and loses wards on its eastern flank to stay within range. Warwick and Leamington (72784) is unchanged apart from the loss of Budbrooke ward. South Warwickshire (74449) - I think the name change is reasonable given its new configuration. Rugby (75851) is now coterminous with the district. North Warwickshire (75341) gains Bulkington but otherwise unchanged. Nuneaton (70335) is unchanged (it could take Bulkington, in which case N Warwks would be unchanged).
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jan 14, 2021 12:48:13 GMT
I don't see why you wouldn't in that case put Bulkington into Nuneaton and put Arley & Whitacre back in North Warwickshire where it belongs. On a more pedantic point, Blythe is currently in the Meriden seat, not Solihull
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Jan 14, 2021 13:16:07 GMT
I note that a fair chunk of Arley and Whitacre's population appears to live in Ansley Common, which looks like it's now an extension of Nuneaton, so the case for keeping it in is stronger than it would otherwise be.
|
|
|
Post by mattb on Jan 16, 2021 11:52:42 GMT
My attempt at West Mids. Only one seat crossing West Midlands county boundary, which means in the other counties apart from Staffs, only 7 wards move.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Jan 16, 2021 12:02:04 GMT
My attempt at West Mids. Only one seat crossing West Midlands county boundary, which means in the other counties apart from Staffs, only 7 wards move. What are the details of the seat where the county boundary is crossed?
|
|
|
Post by mattb on Jan 16, 2021 12:10:36 GMT
South Staffs without the 8 most northerly wards plus 3 Kingswinford wards
|
|
|
Post by iainbhx on Jan 17, 2021 8:05:24 GMT
That "Hodge Hill" though. I think I preferred the Birchfield pimple and the amount of screaming from putting 2/3rds of Shirley in the same seat as Haymills and Sparkhill will be intense.
|
|
|
Post by emidsanorak on Jan 17, 2021 10:13:20 GMT
My attempt at West Mids. Only one seat crossing West Midlands county boundary, which means in the other counties apart from Staffs, only 7 wards move. It is possible to have only one seat crossing the West Midlands county boundary while also keeping Sandwell separate for three seats, Walsall/Wolverhampton for five, East Staffordshire/Lichfield/Tamworth for three, and Cannock Chase unchanged and coterminous. You do need to have a seat crossing the Birmingham/Dudley boundary. Four Dudley wards need to be in the Kingswinford & Wombourne constituency.
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Jan 17, 2021 13:02:21 GMT
My attempt at West Mids. Only one seat crossing West Midlands county boundary, which means in the other counties apart from Staffs, only 7 wards move. It is possible to have only one seat crossing the West Midlands county boundary while also keeping Sandwell separate for three seats, Walsall/Wolverhampton for five, East Staffordshire/Lichfield/Tamworth for three, and Cannock Chase unchanged and coterminous. You do need to have a seat crossing the Birmingham/Dudley boundary. Four Dudley wards need to be in the Kingswinford & Wombourne constituency. You mean the Black Country area boundary. Birmingham does not share a boundary with Dudley and never has done!
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Jan 17, 2021 13:03:44 GMT
That "Hodge Hill" though. I think I preferred the Birchfield pimple and the amount of screaming from putting 2/3rds of Shirley in the same seat as Haymills and Sparkhill will be intense. The BCE cannot satisfy everyone, I am afraid. Due to the radical redrawing of Birmingham's wards there will have to be some significant shifts somewhere amongst Birmingham's constituencies.
|
|
|
Post by emidsanorak on Jan 17, 2021 13:09:47 GMT
It is possible to have only one seat crossing the West Midlands county boundary while also keeping Sandwell separate for three seats, Walsall/Wolverhampton for five, East Staffordshire/Lichfield/Tamworth for three, and Cannock Chase unchanged and coterminous. You do need to have a seat crossing the Birmingham/Dudley boundary. Four Dudley wards need to be in the Kingswinford & Wombourne constituency. You mean the Black Country area boundary. Birmingham does not share a boundary with Dudley and never has done! I mean the boundary between Birmingham Metropolitan Borough and Dudley Metropolitan Borough
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Jan 17, 2021 13:31:13 GMT
You mean the Black Country area boundary. I mean the boundary between Birmingham Metropolitan Borough and Dudley Metropolitan Borough I would strongly advise against any Halesowen-Birmingham West seat. There is no need for one!
|
|
|
Post by iainbhx on Jan 17, 2021 13:45:29 GMT
That "Hodge Hill" though. I think I preferred the Birchfield pimple and the amount of screaming from putting 2/3rds of Shirley in the same seat as Haymills and Sparkhill will be intense. The BCE cannot satisfy everyone, I am afraid. Due to the radical redrawing of Birmingham's wards there will have to be some significant shifts somewhere amongst Birmingham's constituencies. Oddly enough, I know that, I can't possibly think why. However, as has been demonstrated on here, there is a better plan for the city which does not involve crossing the city boundaries at all and there are several other plans which do cross which involve rather less of an impact than that one.
|
|
|
Post by mattb on Jan 17, 2021 13:52:00 GMT
That "Hodge Hill" though. I think I preferred the Birchfield pimple and the amount of screaming from putting 2/3rds of Shirley in the same seat as Haymills and Sparkhill will be intense. Do you prefer this version ..?
|
|
|
Post by iainbhx on Jan 17, 2021 14:09:26 GMT
That "Hodge Hill" though. I think I preferred the Birchfield pimple and the amount of screaming from putting 2/3rds of Shirley in the same seat as Haymills and Sparkhill will be intense. Do you prefer this version ..? It's better, but connecting Castle Vale with the wards to the south is sub-optimal.
|
|
|
Post by mattb on Jan 18, 2021 9:41:54 GMT
Do you prefer this version ..? It's better, but connecting Castle Vale with the wards to the south is sub-optimal. Well Yes. (self-evidently). But the numbers mean the M6 has to be crossed somewhere east of Spaghetti Junction and any other option is much more disruptive of existing constituencies (which I was trying to avoid). This at least retains recognisable Erdington and Hodge Hill seats.
|
|
|
Post by islington on Jan 18, 2021 10:18:21 GMT
It's better, but connecting Castle Vale with the wards to the south is sub-optimal. Well Yes. (self-evidently). But the numbers mean the M6 has to be crossed somewhere east of Spaghetti Junction and any other option is much more disruptive of existing constituencies (which I was trying to avoid). This at least retains recognisable Erdington and Hodge Hill seats. I suggest that if you want an eastern crossing of the M6 then EAL's plan posted 10.47am on 9 Jan is a better way of doing it. Like your plan, it has the merit of keeping the Yardley wards together but it also has the great merit, compared with your plan, of completely respecting the Birmingham boundary (since EAL's Northfield seat is actually within range even without the two Rubery wards he has shown included in it).
Alternatively, my plan posted 6.15pm on 8 Jan not only completely respects the city boundary but also avoids any eastern crossing of the M6. It's also reasonably respectful of current boundaries inasmuch as each of the current ten seats has a clear successor, but on the debit side it separates Yardley East wards from Yardley West and South Yardley.
I do think we should avoid crossing the Birmingham boundary given that we now have a choice of at least three ways of doing it (YL also having posted a plan somewhere upthread).
|
|
|
Post by mattb on Jan 18, 2021 10:32:08 GMT
I suggest that if you want an eastern crossing of the M6 then EAL's plan posted 10.47am on 9 Jan is a better way of doing it. Like your plan, it has the merit of keeping the Yardley wards together but it also has the great merit, compared with your plan, of completely respecting the Birmingham boundary (since EAL's Northfield seat is actually within range even without the two Rubery wards he has shown included in it). Alternatively, my plan posted 6.15pm on 8 Jan not only completely respects the city boundary but also avoids any eastern crossing of the M6. It's also reasonably respectful of current boundaries inasmuch as each of the current ten seats has a clear successor, but on the debit side it separates Yardley East wards from Yardley West and South Yardley.
I do think we should avoid crossing the Birmingham boundary given that we now have a choice of at least three ways of doing it (YL also having posted a plan somewhere upthread). Fair enough - though my aim was to minimise crossings of the county boundary - my plan (either variant) has only a single crossing of the W.Mids county boundary (with S.Staffs), and also moves a only single ward in Warwicks and just two wards in Worcs, thereby keeping most seats in those counties unchanged. (that may or may not be sufficient justification for proposing a tenuous link between Castle Vale and the rest of its proposed seat).
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Jan 19, 2021 15:30:53 GMT
Trying to do the West Midlands is proving much harder than I was expecting.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Jan 19, 2021 19:25:49 GMT
To give an indication of how well things are going, my current Stourbridge seat includes parts of Bromsgrove, South Staffs and Shropshire, and only parts of Stourbridge.
|
|