|
|
Post by islington on Jan 27, 2022 22:46:28 GMT
Sinn Féin proposes three seats in Belfast. Outside Belfast, a Sperrin, a Loughside, a Glenshane. I'm no expert, but from afar, the constituencies seem appropriate. I thought they were a bit of a mess. Very ironic too that Sinn Féin are now arguing for 3 seats in Belfast. In the 1994/5 review when the commission initially proposed 3 seats in Belfast, making arguments identical to the ones SF are making now, SF fought strenuously for the retention of 4 seats. Every community organisation was co-opted into the fight to make submissions. It was so obvious that the commission themselves commented that there seemed to be an organised campaign. I guess it's a sign of the shifting political geography since 1995 (when Belfast North wasn't seriously in play for SF) that they've changed their tune. Their main counter-proposal in 1994 incidentally argued for 6 Greater Belfast seats (!) which would have included Bangor and Carrickfergus. Amazingly, from 1918 to 1922 Belfast sent nine (!!!!) MPs to Westminster. And in case (like me) you don't believe anything until you see it on a map, here's a map.  And that wasn't even 'Greater Belfast' - it was just the city proper.
|
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Jan 27, 2022 22:59:27 GMT
I thought they were a bit of a mess. Very ironic too that Sinn Féin are now arguing for 3 seats in Belfast. In the 1994/5 review when the commission initially proposed 3 seats in Belfast, making arguments identical to the ones SF are making now, SF fought strenuously for the retention of 4 seats. Every community organisation was co-opted into the fight to make submissions. It was so obvious that the commission themselves commented that there seemed to be an organised campaign. I guess it's a sign of the shifting political geography since 1995 (when Belfast North wasn't seriously in play for SF) that they've changed their tune. Their main counter-proposal in 1994 incidentally argued for 6 Greater Belfast seats (!) which would have included Bangor and Carrickfergus. Amazingly, from 1918 to 1922 Belfast sent nine (!!!!) MPS to Westminster. And in case (like me) you don't believe anything until you see it on a map, here's a map. And that wasn't even 'Greater Belfast' - it was just the city proper.
kind of amazing there's no city centre constituency in that, all heading off in one direction or other. |
|
therealriga
Non-Aligned
none
Posts: 2,855 
Member is Online
|
Post by therealriga on Jan 28, 2022 7:21:18 GMT
Amazingly, from 1918 to 1922 Belfast sent nine (!!!!) MPS to Westminster. And in case (like me) you don't believe anything until you see it on a map, here's a map. And that wasn't even 'Greater Belfast' - it was just the city proper.
kind of amazing there's no city centre constituency in that, all heading off in one direction or other. Northern Ireland had 30 MPs then. The city centre was very densely populated so wouldn't have fit into one but it's still odd they chose that. They went even further for the local parliament with all but two of Belfast's 16 constituencies starting near the centre and ending at the edge of town. EDITED TO ADD In saying that, when they split Belfast into 9 electoral areas for local elections in the early 1990s, most of the resultant districts began near the centre and ended at the outskirts, I guess the arterial routes and geography push it that way. www.ark.ac.uk/elections/lgbelfast.htm |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Jan 28, 2022 9:37:50 GMT
The DUP submission contains a shout-out to Boundary Assistant. Mostly it supports the commission recommendations (including a couple of seats where they complain a bit but say the numbers probably force it - I suspect this is about keeping local activists mollified whilst still ignoring them.) The major exception is Downpatrick, which they stick back into South Down at the cost of a ward split and a bit of rejigging with Lagan Valley and Upper Bann.
Both the Alliance and SDLP submissions only address a small number of seats, which I think in most cases are down to where they have members who had opinions one way or the other. There's no UUP submission.
Notably the SF submission states they oppose use of Rule 7 under any circumstances, whilst the other political parties favour its use.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jan 28, 2022 10:06:33 GMT
The DUP submission contains a shout-out to Boundary Assistant. Mostly it supports the commission recommendations (including a couple of seats where they complain a bit but say the numbers probably force it - I suspect this is about keeping local activists mollified whilst still ignoring them.) The major exception is Downpatrick, which they stick back into South Down at the cost of a ward split and a bit of rejigging with Lagan Valley and Upper Bann. Both the Alliance and SDLP submissions only address a small number of seats, which I think in most cases are down to where they have members who had opinions one way or the other. There's no UUP submission. Notably the SF submission states they oppose use of Rule 7 under any circumstances, whilst the other political parties favour its use. |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Jan 28, 2022 10:30:22 GMT
The DUP submission contains a shout-out to Boundary Assistant. Mostly it supports the commission recommendations (including a couple of seats where they complain a bit but say the numbers probably force it - I suspect this is about keeping local activists mollified whilst still ignoring them.) The major exception is Downpatrick, which they stick back into South Down at the cost of a ward split and a bit of rejigging with Lagan Valley and Upper Bann. Both the Alliance and SDLP submissions only address a small number of seats, which I think in most cases are down to where they have members who had opinions one way or the other. There's no UUP submission. Notably the SF submission states they oppose use of Rule 7 under any circumstances, whilst the other political parties favour its use. Apologies, I must have eye-skipped. It's a curate's egg. Makes some quite sensible comments about constituencies in the West, but doesn't seem to really understand how rule 7 works. It proposes splitting Newry in two in order to avoid Downpatrick moving in to Strangford, but one gets the impression that they really don't have a clear idea of what they actually want, just what they don't want. They do suggest splitting Quoile ward, which was also a suggestion made by the DUP. |
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,915
|
Post by YL on Jan 28, 2022 20:05:47 GMT
(Re the UUP submission) It's a curate's egg. Makes some quite sensible comments about constituencies in the West, but doesn't seem to really understand how rule 7 works. It proposes splitting Newry in two in order to avoid Downpatrick moving in to Strangford, but one gets the impression that they really don't have a clear idea of what they actually want, just what they don't want. They do suggest splitting Quoile ward, which was also a suggestion made by the DUP. I think my conclusion is that someone should have shown the UUP how to use Boundary Assistant. Their comments on the Commission's proposals seem sensible but their alternatives don't seem well thought out. They seem to think that Rule 7 allows West Tyrone to be retained unchanged well below even the lower Northern Ireland limit, and they seem to be suggesting that most of the constituency boundaries in the west are left completely unchanged ignoring the ward boundary changes. (Otherwise their electorates are wrong.) I'm not sure whether they're actually suggesting moving any of Newry into South Down, or just leaving the boundary where it is, splitting three wards. I don't think either option works: leaving the boundary where it is leaves Newry & Armagh too big, and moving all of those three wards into South Down leaves that way too big. Moving Ballymacbrennan ward into Belfast South seems just as bad as moving Saintfield. |
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,915
|
Post by YL on Jan 29, 2022 11:00:51 GMT
Representation 018, as mentioned previously, has a comprehensive counterproposal. I've mapped it in Boundary Assistant; see below. Some notes: - There appears to be a mistake regarding Hillsborough ward, which is shown as added to Mid Down (a renamed Strangford) but not listed as removed from Lagan Valley. I've mapped it in Mid Down, as otherwise that is too small. - There is a suggestion of splitting Hillfoot ward but the numbers given include it entirely within Belfast South. I've mapped it as entirely in South. - There are two applications of Rule 7, one for Belfast East and one for Belfast North. The one for East can be avoided by splitting Hillfoot as mentioned, the one for North by retaining the Commission's move of Forth River from West. I think there are some weaknesses but it's not a bad starting point.  |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jan 29, 2022 11:51:03 GMT
I don;t know why they've split Downpatrick which is unnecessary (just swap Quoile for Drumaness) but otherwise not a bad plan
|
|
colm
Non-Aligned
Posts: 69
|
Post by colm on Feb 3, 2022 19:57:06 GMT
Can someone with more local knowledge than me just review the Sinn Fein proposal. I assume the Glenshane seat would be a comfortable nationalist seat and the 2 belfast seats on the west side would be at least nationalist leaning, perhaps one safe and one marginal, or would both be safe. The 2 seats I would be most interested in besides the 2 Belfast ones, are Upper Bann and Loughside. I have the split at 9-9 Nationalist Unionist. Thanks
|
|
nyx
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,046
|
Post by nyx on Feb 4, 2022 18:19:43 GMT
Can someone with more local knowledge than me just review the Sinn Fein proposal. I assume the Glenshane seat would be a comfortable nationalist seat and the 2 belfast seats on the west side would be at least nationalist leaning, perhaps one safe and one marginal, or would both be safe. The 2 seats I would be most interested in besides the 2 Belfast ones, are Upper Bann and Loughside. I have the split at 9-9 Nationalist Unionist. Thanks I'm no expert but decided to do an analysis of that, going on where the Sinn Fein proposed constituencies come from, by population percentage (only approximate because of ward boundary changes): Fermanagh and Tyrone: 73% Fermanagh and South Tyrone, 27% West Tyrone Sperrin: 69% West Tyrone, 20% Mid Ulster, 8% East Londonderry, 3% Foyle Foyle: 100% Foyle Glenshane: 51% East Londonderry, 49% Mid Ulster Mid Ulster: 31% Fermanagh and South Tyrone, 30% Mid Ulster, 23% Upper Bann, 16% Newry and Armagh Newry and Armagh: 98% Newry and Armagh, 2% South Down South Down: 92% South Down, 8% Strangford Upper Bann: 82% Upper Bann, 12% Lagan Valley, 6% South Down Lagan Valley: 75% Lagan Valley, 25% Belfast South Strangford: 83% Strangford, 8% South Down, 3% Belfast East, 3% Belfast North, 3% North Down North Down: 86% North Down, 14% Belfast East East Belfast: 75% Belfast East, 25% Belfast South Southwest Belfast: 57% Belfast West, 43% Belfast South Northwest Belfast: 66% Belfast North, 34% Belfast West Loughside: 64% South Antrim, 16% Upper Bann, 14% Lagan Valley, 6% Belfast North East Antrim: 63% East Antrim, 23% Belfast North, 14% South Antrim Mid Antrim: 47% North Antrim, 28% South Antrim, 25% East Antrim North Antrim: 60% North Antrim, 37% East Londonderry, 3% East Antrim It's pretty impressive just how thoroughly they've torn up the current map for their proposal. Some constituencies are similar enough- I'd say Foyle and South Down remain Sinn Fein vs SDLP battlegrounds, Sperrin and Newry and Armagh stay safely Sinn Fein, Fermanagh and Tyrone remains a Sinn Fein vs UUP battleground albeit tilted maybe a little bit towards Sinn Fein compared to present; Strangford and North Down remain unionist DUP vs Alliance seats. Upper Bann stays DUP (probably getting a bit safer thanks to the fact the areas it loses seem to be more nationalist), Lagan Valley also stays DUP but I'd say Alliance gets quite competitive with the the constituency taking on more nationalists from South Belfast and Alliance being the main anti-DUP choice. East Belfast likely also sees Alliance strengthening for similar reasons. The two new western Belfast constituencies... well, Northwest Belfast should be safely Sinn Fein now, I'd say- perhaps only winning over the DUP by 10 or 15% but a pretty safe margin given how few swing voters there would be there! Southwest Belfast is pretty interesting... rock solid nationalist constituency, but I think it'd be an incumbent vs incumbent race with Sinn Fein's Paul Maskey from Belfast West against the SDLP's Claire Hanna from Belfast South. On paper Maskey should be favoured given the new constituency has more of his old one, but I don't think it's certain and with a bit of luck the SDLP would have chances of hanging on here. Loughside seems to be a bit of a sneaky move from Sinn Fein- it's like a modified South Antrim but it seems to pick up some of the more nationalist bits of Upper Bann and Lagan Valley and even Belfast North while losing some more unionist bits of Antrim... I think it has to still favour the unionist parties overall, but I can't help but think it must be a bit more competitive- especially if the unionist vote there stays divided between the DUP and UUP. Mid Ulster and Glenshane are, I think, both fairly safely nationalist seats- significant numbers of unionists but not enough to win. As co-successors to the old Mid Ulster, at least one of them would become an open seat free for Sinn Fein's taking. I don't think the DUP East Londonderry incumbent Gregory Campbell would have much of a shot at Glenshane- unless Sinn Fein and the SDLP manage to split the nationalist vote enough!- and so his best bet would likely be running for North Antrim (which a decent chunk of his old constituency has ended up in); if he did so, the DUP North Antrim incumbent Ian Paisley would stand in Mid Antrim, but if not then Paisley would be able to choose. East Antrim stays firmly DUP and I think that's it. So overall... I think I'd concur with you. Nine unionist and nine nationalist. With a nationalist seat being lost in Belfast (with Belfast West and South being merged) but gained in the west (with the Mid Ulster/Glenshane split). |
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,915
|
Post by YL on Feb 4, 2022 22:02:40 GMT
SF proposed seats by approximate Catholic percentage (2011 census)
Foyle 75%
Newry & Armagh 71%
Belfast SW 69%
Sperrin 67%
South Down 67%
Fermanagh Tyrone 60%
Glenshane 57%
Belfast NW 55%
Mid Ulster 54%
Loughside 40%
Upper Bann 39%
North Antrim 33%
Mid Antrim 26%
Lagan Valley 25%
Belfast E 22%
Strangford 22%
East Antrim 16%
North Down 12%
|
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,915
|
Post by YL on Feb 5, 2022 11:27:12 GMT
Same for the Initial Proposals:
Foyle 75%
Belfast W 75%
West Tyrone 69%
Newry & Armagh 68%
Mid Ulster 64%
South Down 61%
Fermanagh & South Tyrone 58%
Belfast N 49%
Belfast S & Mid Down 43%
Upper Bann 43%
East Derry 43%
South Antrim 31%
North Antrim 30%
Strangford & Quoile 29%
Lagan Valley 22%
East Antrim 21%
Belfast E 15%
North Down 12%
|
|
nyx
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,046
|
Post by nyx on Feb 6, 2022 17:22:57 GMT
I thought I'd see what could be achieved by incorporating the feedback of each of the parties. Sinn Fein's main point was the Belfast seats- and given that there had been other complaints about the new Belfast South seat, it seems like Sinn Fein's proposal is the simplest answer to this. The main other sticking points, mostly from the other parties, were- Ballymena being separated from its hinterlands, Downpatrick being transferred out of South Down, the excessively long Fermanagh and South Tyrone, and the Newry and Armagh seat having to give up much of Armagh's hinterland. (The review response from one party, I believe the UUP, even recommended dividing Newry itself to keep the Armagh area intact!) Additionally, the DUP wants to avoid too many excessive changes in general. Bearing all that in mind, here's what I came up with. While some significant changes are inevitable as a result of reducing Belfast to three seats, I tried to avoid too many of SF's proposed changes (e.g. Mid Ulster remains intact). The main different idea I came up with was dividing Newry from Armagh, leaving a Newry and Banbridge seat and a Dungannon and Armagh one. This has a big advantage of putting areas near Newry like Warrenpoint into a constituency with Newry. Downpatrick stays in South Down and Ballymena stays with its hinterland. I also got rid of the unnecessary split of Glengormley. Main downsides of my map are, I'm not entirely satisfied with the dividing of the Limavady area, and also some of Antrim's hinterland is split from Antrim itself. But overall I think a map like this would work.   |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2022 15:37:38 GMT
|
|
nyx
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,046
|
Post by nyx on Nov 17, 2022 14:45:33 GMT
Revised proposals are out. www.boundarycommission.org.uk/2023-review-parliamentary-constituenciesThe changes are using some ward splits to let Downpatrick be returned to South Down and Dungannon to be returned to Fermanagh and South Tyrone, and a few minor knock on effects of doing so. Belfast and Antrim are fully unchanged. I guess it fits in with the Commission's attitude of trying to keep existing constituencies unchanged as much as possible. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 17, 2022 16:53:07 GMT
Very few changes from the initial proposals though Strangford and Quoile is no longer going ahead.
|
|
iain
Lib Dem
Posts: 11,451
Member is Online
|
Post by iain on Jun 28, 2023 15:04:22 GMT
Looks like no changes here
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 39,009
|
Post by The Bishop on Jun 29, 2023 11:02:08 GMT
Not even any silly and annoying name alterations?
|
|
|
|
Post by doktorb🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️ on Jun 29, 2023 11:28:07 GMT
Not even any silly and annoying name alterations? No a Quoile to be found. |
|
