YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,918
|
Post by YL on Mar 31, 2022 10:51:54 GMT
You're about to have Brightlingsea's road connections pointed out, I think.
|
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Mar 31, 2022 10:56:05 GMT
Also that you've split Stanway and that Lexden really needs to go with Prettygate. There are ways to do a 50/50ish division of Colchester that sort of work if you squint a bit, but you need to start out by working out which wards absolutely have to stay together and go from there.
|
|
ilerda
Conservative
Posts: 1,114
|
Post by ilerda on Mar 31, 2022 11:13:10 GMT
You're about to have Brightlingsea's road connections pointed out, I think. I did notice that. There's a foot ferry, but also the existing Harwich and North Essex has no road connection between Pyefleet and Mersea and the rest of the seat, so I don't think it's the end of the world. |
|
ilerda
Conservative
Posts: 1,114
|
Post by ilerda on Mar 31, 2022 11:20:02 GMT
Also that you've split Stanway and that Lexden really needs to go with Prettygate. There are ways to do a 50/50ish division of Colchester that sort of work if you squint a bit, but you need to start out by working out which wards absolutely have to stay together and go from there. I hadn't noticed Stanway, but could easily swap Stanway into Maldon and Pyefleet and Mersea into Colchester South. I agree splitting suburbs like Lexden/Prettygate isn't the most desirable, but I think when you're splitting a town it's sometimes unavoidable to some extent at least. My Harwich and Colchester North has a margin of 56 voters, so it's incredibly tight in order to avoid having to move an additional ward out of the combined Colchester seats. |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Mar 31, 2022 11:33:06 GMT
The foot-ferry from Brightlingsea to Point Clear only runs in the summer, and infrequently then. Mersea is a really bad fit in HNE, but it's a different case for two reasons:
1. It's not a deliberate change, it's just that when they created the Witham seat at the 5th Review the BCE were being dozy and didn't notice they'd isolated Mersea. That's different from making a deliberate decision to add a separated part.
2. Mersea doesn't go with anywhere that well, because it's absurdly insular. Brightlingsea would like to be, but unfortunately for them it joined up to the mainland half a millennium ago and it is a secondary centre for the nearby villages, so putting it in with Clacton breaks those ties.
If you do want a different split of Colchester (and on the ground the BCE proposal actually works pretty well, except round Braiswick which only effects a very small number of electors) then the best option is to swap Lexden, Prettygate and Rural North for Greenstead, St Anne's & St John's and Highwoods. Mile End and Highwoods look like a natural pair, but Highwoods Country Park does provide separation along most of their length and the boundary north of that is still semi-clear for now (though it will probably not be after another decade of housing development.) You're also uniting the university campus with the largest concentrations of student housing in the area.
|
|
|
|
Post by emidsanorak on Mar 31, 2022 14:40:29 GMT
For an 18 seat Essex, it's not necessary to tamper with the Commission's arrangement around Colchester:
Basildon & Billericay as BCE 76993
Basildon South & Thurrock East as Labour 74936
Braintree as existing 74871
Brentwood as BCE less Lambourne; plus Chelmsford Rural West, Writtle 76212
Castle Point as existing plus Lodge 74604
Chelmsford as BCE 76454
Clacton as BCE 70942
Colchester as BCE 74520
Epping Forest as existing plus Lambourne 76172
Harlow as existing plus High Ongar Willingale & The Rodings, Moreton & Fyfield, Hatfield Heath, High Easter & the Rodings 75855
Harwich & Essex North as BCE 74056
Maldon as BCE less Rettendon & Runwell; plus Little Baddow Danbury & Sandon, Wickham Bishops & Woodham 74928
Rayleigh & Wickford as BCE less Lodge; plus Rettendon & Runwell 75996
Rochford & Southend East as existing less Milton; plus Roche North & Rural 70318
Saffron Walden as existing less Chelmsford Rural West, Writtle, Hatfield Heath, High Easter & the Rodings 76278
Southend West as existing plus Milton 76600
Thurrock as Labour and Tory 73347
Witham as BCE less Wickham Bishops & Woodham; plus Hatfield Peverel & Terling 75706
|
|
|
|
Post by islington on Apr 1, 2022 20:00:52 GMT
I gave a 'like' to the plan by emidsanorak because it seemed to me that someone should, if only for ingenuity, but I'm afraid I'm still signed up to Essex/Suffolk with 26 seats and Norfolk with nine.
Speaking of Norfolk, here's a map of my tweak to the BCE plan that I posted the other day. Uncoloured areas are as per the BCE.
 |
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,918
|
Post by YL on Apr 1, 2022 20:40:01 GMT
For an 18 seat Essex, it's not necessary to tamper with the Commission's arrangement around Colchester: Basildon & Billericay as BCE 76993 Basildon South & Thurrock East as Labour 74936 Braintree as existing 74871 Brentwood as BCE less Lambourne; plus Chelmsford Rural West, Writtle 76212 Castle Point as existing plus Lodge 74604 Chelmsford as BCE 76454 Clacton as BCE 70942 Colchester as BCE 74520 Epping Forest as existing plus Lambourne 76172 Harlow as existing plus High Ongar Willingale & The Rodings, Moreton & Fyfield, Hatfield Heath, High Easter & the Rodings 75855 Harwich & Essex North as BCE 74056 Maldon as BCE less Rettendon & Runwell; plus Little Baddow Danbury & Sandon, Wickham Bishops & Woodham 74928 Rayleigh & Wickford as BCE less Lodge; plus Rettendon & Runwell 75996 Rochford & Southend East as existing less Milton; plus Roche North & Rural 70318 Saffron Walden as existing less Chelmsford Rural West, Writtle, Hatfield Heath, High Easter & the Rodings 76278 Southend West as existing plus Milton 76600 Thurrock as Labour and Tory 73347 Witham as BCE less Wickham Bishops & Woodham; plus Hatfield Peverel & Terling 75706 IIRC the plan submitted to the BCE by East Anglian Lefty achieves this too. One question is whether it is possible to have an 18 seat Essex with the BCE's Colchester area arrangements and the Tory version of Castle Point with the ward split. The answer is sort of yes but can it be done without splitting at least one town in Rochford district? |
|
|
|
Post by islington on Apr 3, 2022 20:29:08 GMT
Second stage response now submitted in this region: BCE-94644.
Will the reference numbers get into six figures before the end of tomorrow?
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,845 
Member is Online
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Apr 4, 2022 0:28:06 GMT
Second stage response now submitted in this region: BCE-94644.
Will the reference numbers get into six figures before the end of tomorrow?
BCE-94766 for Yorkshire. |
|
ricmk
Lib Dem
Posts: 2,634
|
Post by ricmk on Apr 4, 2022 9:47:01 GMT
I have handed my first ever submission in. Typically for me, on the date of the deadline. BCE-94769 is the magic number.
I ended up with 2 separate counter-proposals for Suffolk as I could tell that the wider reconfiguration (Felixstowe + Ipswich = 2 urban seats) is a tough sell with a minimum change option available.
I'm quite pleased with it as a paper but I wish I had got it in a round earlier as it would have given others a chance to pick over and see if the ideas got traction - just not possible with family circumstances over the past few months.
Having spent so long playing around with boundary maps, I'm quite satisfied to have turned curiosity into a proper submission.
I might as well enjoy the moment now as I'm sure it'll be ripped to shreds soon enough...
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Nov 7, 2022 21:23:11 GMT
Just looked at Herts and Beds so far (which was the only part of the region I made a submission for). Glad to see they've stuck by the excellent proposals for Hertfordshire with the exception of renaming Three Rivers as SW Herts (as I and many others suggested). Disappointed though that they have stuck with their deeply flawed proposals in Luton and South Bedforshire
|
|
|
|
Post by gerrardwinstanley on Nov 7, 2022 21:31:48 GMT
Just looked at Herts and Beds so far (which was the only part of the region I made a submission for). Glad to see they've stuck by the excellent proposals for Hertfordshire with the exception of renaming Three Rivers as SW Herts (as I and many others suggested). Disappointed though that they have stuck with their deeply flawed proposals in Luton and South Bedforshire How have you got them?! |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Nov 7, 2022 21:37:50 GMT
Colchester a lot better for the Conservatives on these (a lot better than the initial proposals that is - somewhat better than the current boundaries too)
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Nov 7, 2022 21:38:22 GMT
Just looked at Herts and Beds so far (which was the only part of the region I made a submission for). Glad to see they've stuck by the excellent proposals for Hertfordshire with the exception of renaming Three Rivers as SW Herts (as I and many others suggested). Disappointed though that they have stuck with their deeply flawed proposals in Luton and South Bedforshire How have you got them?! PLaying with the url..  |
|
|
|
Post by gerrardwinstanley on Nov 7, 2022 21:40:17 GMT
PLaying with the url.. Now I'm going to have to do the same for the south east! |
|
|
|
Post by jm on Nov 7, 2022 21:43:33 GMT
PLaying with the url.. Give us a hint  I assume all the numbers are the same? |
|
andrea
Non-Aligned
Posts: 7,813
|
Post by andrea on Nov 7, 2022 21:49:43 GMT
PLaying with the url.. Give us a hint I assume all the numbers are the same? Take the London link posted in the general thread and put EASTERN instead of LONDON in the link. Same for other regions. Keep the spaces for regions with more than one word |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 7, 2022 21:55:29 GMT
Give us a hint I assume all the numbers are the same? Take the London link posted in the general thread and put EASTERN instead of LONDON in the link. Same for other regions. Keep the spaces for regions with more than one word I've tried NORTHWEST, NORTH-WEST, and NORTH_WEST and no success for me  |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Nov 7, 2022 21:58:29 GMT
So the big change here from the initial proposals is they've gone for a cross county seat combining parts of Norfolk and Suffolk (a 'Waveney Valley' as suggested by some here) instead of the proposed Essex-Suffolk crossing. This leaves the Essex seats closer to the current arrangements on the whole. The boundaries for Cambridgeshire (as for Hertfordshire and Bedfordshire) are unchanged from the initial proposals.
Not many partisan effects - Colchester made better for the Conservatives as mentioned. I might have worried about the previously proposed Southend Central - Southend Central and Leigh will be a bit safer (while also reducing the threat in Rochford and East compared to the current arrangements)
|
|
I assume all the numbers are the same?
