johng
Labour
Posts: 4,850 
|
Post by johng on Dec 2, 2021 13:34:30 GMT
The Westminster constituencies often split communities for electoral equality reasons. That will be even more the case with the new 5% maximum deviation. If you were going for a 98-member FPTP assembly it would be far better to draw them from scratch. I can't see any value obtained from them being subdivisions of Westminister seats. The initial proposals do split some communities weirdly (and unnecessarily in a number of cases), but they aren't the final boundaries which will, no doubt, be better. Three per Westminster seat plus two for Ynys Mon would be a 95 seat chamber which is reasonably sized. Also, political realities mean there is, and will be, a lot of pressure to retain the link between the two parliaments' constituencies.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Dec 2, 2021 15:19:47 GMT
Then you're just creating new constituencies so there'd be no point looking at local authority boundaries. Wales' local authorities often make little sense so I am not sure how anyone can think it's a reasonable proposition to use them as constituencies. We may as well use Boogie's idea of historic counties. That's often true, but I don't think it's true in this case from Labour's point of view. Moving to a Senedd wholly elected by FPTP would benefit Labour in Wales, but that's not on the agenda. I think that's a shame as the 32 Westminster seats split into three (2 for Ynys Mon) FPTP seats would allow truly local representation.
The Westminster constituencies often split communities for electoral equality reasons. That will be even more the case with the new 5% maximum deviation. If you were going for a 98-member FPTP assembly it would be far better to draw them from scratch. I can't see any value obtained from them being subdivisions of Westminister seats. It's good fun as an exercise though...  |
|
|
|
Post by therealriga on Dec 2, 2021 23:47:27 GMT
The Westminster constituencies often split communities for electoral equality reasons. That will be even more the case with the new 5% maximum deviation. If you were going for a 98-member FPTP assembly it would be far better to draw them from scratch. I can't see any value obtained from them being subdivisions of Westminister seats. It's good fun as an exercise though... Is there ever any fun not to be had from drawing hypothetical boundaries? |
|
|
|
Post by therealriga on Dec 2, 2021 23:53:57 GMT
The Westminster constituencies often split communities for electoral equality reasons. That will be even more the case with the new 5% maximum deviation. If you were going for a 98-member FPTP assembly it would be far better to draw them from scratch. I can't see any value obtained from them being subdivisions of Westminister seats. The initial proposals do split some communities weirdly (and unnecessarily in a number of cases), but they aren't the final boundaries which will, no doubt, be better. Three per Westminster seat plus two for Ynys Mon would be a 95 seat chamber which is reasonably sized. Also, political realities mean there is, and will be, a lot of pressure to retain the link between the two parliaments' constituencies.
There may be, but that pressure would be for using Westminster constituencies or (less likely) combinations of them, to create multi-member PR seats. Sub-dividing the Westminster constituencies to create single member seats is, in order of likelihood, less likely than the Welsh parliament being abolished altogether. Close on zero chance of that electoral system being used, I'd say. |
|
johng
Labour
Posts: 4,850
|
Post by johng on Dec 3, 2021 0:11:34 GMT
The initial proposals do split some communities weirdly (and unnecessarily in a number of cases), but they aren't the final boundaries which will, no doubt, be better. Three per Westminster seat plus two for Ynys Mon would be a 95 seat chamber which is reasonably sized. Also, political realities mean there is, and will be, a lot of pressure to retain the link between the two parliaments' constituencies.
There may be, but that pressure would be for using Westminster constituencies or (less likely) combinations of them, to create multi-member PR seats. Sub-dividing the Westminster constituencies to create single member seats is, in order of likelihood, less likely than the Welsh parliament being abolished altogether. Close on zero chance of that electoral system being used, I'd say. I do believe I have said that it is not going to happen* - sadly IMO. As I have said multiple times, 32 STV seats with three members (2 for YM) is the most likely outcome and that would definitely retain the link between the two parliaments.
*Well, there is actually small possibility we will end up with 64 FPTP (Westminster seats divided into two) and 32 regional seats. The likelihood is low, but certainly higher than close to zero.
|
|
|
|
Post by 🏴☠️ Neath West 🏴☠️ on Dec 3, 2021 9:28:05 GMT
The Westminster constituencies often split communities for electoral equality reasons. That will be even more the case with the new 5% maximum deviation. If you were going for a 98-member FPTP assembly it would be far better to draw them from scratch. I can't see any value obtained from them being subdivisions of Westminister seats. It's good fun as an exercise though... That looks like an interesting split of Montgomeryshire there. |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Dec 3, 2021 9:55:52 GMT
It's good fun as an exercise though... That looks like an interesting split of Montgomeryshire there. I got waylaid...  |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Dec 3, 2021 10:01:39 GMT
I don;t know if that is the most appropriate split there. I hate to say it but I was influenced by not wanting seat 19 to border onto Merioneth because it was the same colour and I couldn't be arsed to change it. I don't suppose you'll find that kind of reasoning in any Boundary Commission reports!
|
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Figgis on Dec 3, 2021 10:20:43 GMT
I don;t know if that is the most appropriate split there. I hate to say it but I was influenced by not wanting seat 19 to border onto Merioneth because it was the same colour and I couldn't be arsed to change it. I don't suppose you'll find that kind of reasoning in any Boundary Commission reports! It’s better reasoning that some of the shite they come out with! |
|
|
|
Post by 🏴☠️ Neath West 🏴☠️ on Dec 3, 2021 10:26:23 GMT
I don;t know if that is the most appropriate split there. I hate to say it but I was influenced by not wanting seat 19 to border onto Merioneth because it was the same colour and I couldn't be arsed to change it. I don't suppose you'll find that kind of reasoning in any Boundary Commission reports! It would be more natural to have a north/south split between the bits of Montgomeryshire that look more to Welshpool and the bits that look more to Newtown, rather than putting both large towns into one constituency and ending up with another that's a bit focusless. |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Dec 3, 2021 10:35:03 GMT
I don;t know if that is the most appropriate split there. I hate to say it but I was influenced by not wanting seat 19 to border onto Merioneth because it was the same colour and I couldn't be arsed to change it. I don't suppose you'll find that kind of reasoning in any Boundary Commission reports! It would be more natural to have a north/south split between the bits of Montgomeryshire that look more to Welshpool and the bits that look more to Newtown, rather than putting both large towns into one constituency and ending up with another that's a bit focusless. I guess Machynlleth fits best with Newtown in this scenario ?  |
|
|
|
Post by 🏴☠️ Neath West 🏴☠️ on Dec 3, 2021 12:29:16 GMT
It would be more natural to have a north/south split between the bits of Montgomeryshire that look more to Welshpool and the bits that look more to Newtown, rather than putting both large towns into one constituency and ending up with another that's a bit focusless. I guess Machynlleth fits best with Newtown in this scenario ? Yep, straight along the A489/A470/A489. |
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Dec 3, 2021 16:46:20 GMT
I don;t know if that is the most appropriate split there. I hate to say it but I was influenced by not wanting seat 19 to border onto Merioneth because it was the same colour and I couldn't be arsed to change it. I don't suppose you'll find that kind of reasoning in any Boundary Commission reports! not printed in the reports, no. But only because they wouldn't admit to it. |
|
|
|
Post by 🏴☠️ Neath West 🏴☠️ on Dec 3, 2021 17:07:27 GMT
That looks like an interesting split of Montgomeryshire there. I got waylaid... I think I can guess what 44 will be called. |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Dec 3, 2021 17:59:09 GMT
I got waylaid... I think I can guess what 44 will be called. Actually no - I've gone with Bryn-Coch, and Neath for the east bank of the river |
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Dec 3, 2021 19:57:57 GMT
Predictable that the Welsh Assembly would rename itself as a parliament, and then want to increase its numbers. The next thing will probably be to re-name the First Minister the "prime minister of Wales". indyref1 is still a long way off though. |
|
|
|
Post by 🏴☠️ Neath West 🏴☠️ on Dec 3, 2021 21:34:09 GMT
Predictable that the Welsh Assembly would rename itself as a parliament, and then want to increase its numbers. The next thing will probably be to re-name the First Minister the "prime minister of Wales". Already works in Welsh. Prif Weinidog means both First and Prime Minister. Should really have gone for Cadeirydd/Chairman like other county-like institutions. |
|
|
|
Post by gwynthegriff on Dec 3, 2021 22:03:54 GMT
Predictable that the Welsh Assembly would rename itself as a parliament, and then want to increase its numbers. The next thing will probably be to re-name the First Minister the "prime minister of Wales". Already works in Welsh. Prif Weinidog means both First and Prime Minister. Should really have gone for Cadeirydd/Chairman like other county-like institutions. Well I suppose First Minister could be rendered as Y Weinidog Cyntaf, but that would just get people sniggering. |
|
johng
Labour
Posts: 4,850
|
Post by johng on Dec 4, 2021 1:36:40 GMT
Predictable that the Welsh Assembly would rename itself as a parliament, and then want to increase its numbers. The next thing will probably be to re-name the First Minister the "prime minister of Wales". Already works in Welsh. Prif Weinidog means both First and Prime Minister. Should really have gone for Cadeirydd/Chairman like other county-like institutions. Which countries refer to their leaders are 'chairman' outside of Maoist China? To really nark the anti-Welsh element, we should have borrowed the use of president from continental Europe.
Mark Drakeford - President of the Welsh Government. Elin Jones - President of the Legislative Chamber. Russell George - President of the Health and Social Care Committee.
Edit: Just realised you wrote county and not country. Perhaps my President idea isn't so bad after all.
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 39,067
|
Post by The Bishop on Dec 4, 2021 10:45:18 GMT
Predictable that the Welsh Assembly would rename itself as a parliament, and then want to increase its numbers. The next thing will probably be to re-name the First Minister the "prime minister of Wales".Though this hasn't yet happened in Scotland. |
|
