Second Review of Scottish Parliament Boundaries

[afleitch]

boundaries.scot/reviews/second-review-scottish-parliament-boundaries

Launched today.

[therealriga]

What are we looking at in terms of changes to constituencies?

I looked on their website but can't find the data for existing constituency or local authority electorates.

[afleitch]

It will be based on the electorate today. So not published yet

Looking at the most recent data, the only council grouping that would numerically gain would be Edinburgh. Combining with West Lothian would help balance out the high electorates there but the net gain would still be one seat.

I can find one solution to decrease representation elsewhere.

Combining North Ayrshire with Argyll and Bute allows Bute to move into Cunninghame North. The rest of Argyll can sit as one seat. West Dunbartonshire can be combined with East Dunbartonshire and North Lanarkshire. South Lanarkshire has an entitlement to 4 and could also be added if say, Bothwell was needed

Overall you end up losing one seat effectively either Dumbarton or Clydebank and Milngavie.

[greenhert]

Sept 1, 2022 15:48:43 GMT afleitch said:

It will be based on the electorate today. So not published yet

Looking at the most recent data, the only council grouping that would numerically gain would be Edinburgh. Combining with West Lothian would help balance out the high electorates there but the net gain would still be one seat.

I can find one solution to decrease representation elsewhere.

Combining North Ayrshire with Argyll and Bute allows Bute to move into Cunninghame North. The rest of Argyll can sit as one seat. West Dunbartonshire can be combined with East Dunbartonshire and North Lanarkshire. South Lanarkshire has an entitlement to 4 and could also be added if say, Bothwell was needed

Overall you end up losing one seat effectively either Dumbarton or Clydebank and Milngavie.

Which amusingly enough reverts to pre-1983 arrangements for Ayrshire and Argyllshire in that respect; from 1918 to 1983 Bute was paired with Ayrshire to form North Ayrshire & Bute, and Argyllshire was a separate seat in its own right.

[afleitch]

North Ayrshire is considered a special case in that it's viewed as an authority with islands, like the Highlands and Argyll and Bute. Which is why it got new wards before the last council elections. So making that jump makes some sense from a political and strategic point of view.

[greyfriar]

Sept 1, 2022 15:48:43 GMT afleitch said:

It will be based on the electorate today. So not published yet

Looking at the most recent data, the only council grouping that would numerically gain would be Edinburgh. Combining with West Lothian would help balance out the high electorates there but the net gain would still be one seat.

I can find one solution to decrease representation elsewhere.

Combining North Ayrshire with Argyll and Bute allows Bute to move into Cunninghame North. The rest of Argyll can sit as one seat. West Dunbartonshire can be combined with East Dunbartonshire and North Lanarkshire. South Lanarkshire has an entitlement to 4 and could also be added if say, Bothwell was needed

Overall you end up losing one seat effectively either Dumbarton or Clydebank and Milngavie.

Abolishing her seat is the only way Jackie Baillie will be dislodged from Dumbarton constituency.

[afleitch]

Being a Labour MSP she wouldn't need the voters of Helensburgh to get elected surely...

:0

[greyfriar]

Sept 1, 2022 17:06:17 GMT afleitch said:

Being a Labour MSP she wouldn't need the voters of Helensburgh to get elected surely...

:0

Has held together a coalition of voters since 1999, including Tories from Helensburgh, socialists from the Vale of Leven and latterly nationalists repulsed by the imposition of an astonishingly ill-judged carpet bagger by head office.

[piperdave]

I had prematurely started a thread on this a while back, so for those that would like a bit more background, read on!

[rockefeller]

Sept 1, 2022 17:06:17 GMT afleitch said:

Being a Labour MSP she wouldn't need the voters of Helensburgh to get elected surely...

:0

On post-2015 results, there must be lots of Helensburgh voters who vote Labour in Scottish Parliament elections and Conservative in General Elections, who previously voted LAB at Holyrood and LD for Westminster.

[afleitch]

Worth nothing that if Boundaries Scotland stick to their timetable (and they have), ward reviews will happen next year, after this review is completed.

[therealriga]

Sept 3, 2022 10:25:49 GMT afleitch said:

Worth nothing that if Boundaries Scotland stick to their timetable (and they have), ward reviews will happen next year, after this review is completed.

Northern Ireland did that once. Completing the parliamentary boundary review in 1981/2 while a local government boundary review was ongoing (it finished in 1984.) As the local review was extensive due to population displacement caused by The Troubles it resulted in lots of split wards and controversy with the result that the government gave a promise that the next review would only take place after the wards had been sorted. That's a sensible approach which should be adopted.

[East Anglian Lefty]

I've taken a look at this based on the figures for the Westminster parliamentary review, making the following assumptions:

• Orkney, Shetland and Na h-Eileanan an Iar remain protected
• The remaining 70 constituencies are all within 10% of the average
• Where possible, local authorities should stand alone
• Where possible, constituencies should be formed of whole wards
• If a constituency can stay unchanged, it should

In practice, starting with local authorities means I've moved away from some existing groupings, which could probably be maintained if you work with eg the current regions instead, but this is more a piece of fun than a serious piece of work, so I'm not inclined to worry about it.

Highlands and Islands



Shetland (protected)
Orkney (protected)
Na h-Eileanan an Iar (protected)
Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross 55458* - gains Black Isles, loses its portions of Wester Ross etc.
Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch 63369* - loses Black Isle, gains Wester Ross and Strathspey
Inverness and Nairn 60676 - loses Strathspey
Moray 55881 - drops Keith
Argyll and Bute 54260 - gains Lomond North

*SL&B has around 141 too many electors. It's difficult to find whole ward solutions here that don't produce nightmarish maps, so the simplest solution is to carve off a few hundred to a few thousand electors, either around Ullapool or to the south of Dingwall.

There's an argument that this region has too few electors relative to the other seven and hence should gain another constituency, but none of the neighbouring ones are an obvious fit and in practice I suspect it's more convenient for the Commission to let sleeping dogs lie.

North East Scotland



Banff & Buchan Coast 52536 - loses Peterhead, gains Turriff
Aberdeenshire East 53502 53502 - gains Peterhead, loses Turriff and Inverurie
Aberdeenshire West 62995 - loses Banchory, gains Inverurie and the rest of Garioch
Aberdeen Donside 61496 - realigns to ward boundaries
Aberdeen East 54337 - successor to Central, gaining Torry and Kincorth
Aberdeen South & North Kincardine 60539 - swaps territory with Central and gains Stonehaven
Angus North and Mearns 52885 - swaps Stonehaven for Banchory
Angus South 57560 - unchanged
Dundee North East 53478 - successor to East, containing The Ferry, East End, North East and Strathmartine
Dundee South West 54472 - successor to West, containing Maryfield, Coldside, Lochee and West End

There's an approach with less change where Banff & Buchan cost keeps Peterhead and doesn't gain Turriff, all the Aberdeenshire wards shuffle a ward along and Stonehaven isn't added to Aberdeen, but that necessitates a ward split in Aberdeen.

Mid Scotland & Fife



Perthshire North 56576 - unchanged
Perthshire South & Kinrossshire 57864 - unchanged
North East Fife 55600 - unchanged
Mid Fife & Glenrothes 52563 - unchanged
Kirkcaldy 57528 - unchanged
Cowdenbeath 55373 - realigns to ward boundaries
Dunfermline 56951 - realigns to ward boundaries
Clackmannanshire and Dunblane 50991* - realigns to ward boundaries
Stirling 58558* - realigns to ward boundaries

In practice, Clackmannanshire is too small, so the easiest solution is not to realign to new ward boundaries and instead use the old boundaries of Dunblane & Bridge of Allan ward, which grabs Stirling Uni and a few nearby areas.

If all that stability is too boring for you, you could instead reunited the city of Perth by moving Perth City North and Perth City South to Perthshire North and moving Highland and Strathtay the other way.

Central Scotland



Falkirk North 61012 - successor to Falkirk West. I'm not keen on the split of Falkirk itself, but I can't see a way to fix that without a ward split
Falkirk South 61951 - successor to Falkirk East
Cumbernauld and Kilsyth 50331* - would be unchanged if it wasn't for the fact it's too small
Coatridge and Chryston 55176 - unchanged
Airdrie and Shotts 53799* - would be unchanged if Cumbernauld wasn't too small
Motherwell East and Wishaw 55524 - Motherwell SE, Motherwell N, Murdostoun and Wishaw wards
Uddingston and Motherwell West 54040 - successor to Uddingston & Bellshill, made up of the remaining North Lanarkshire wards plus Bothwell & Uddingston from South Lanarkshire
Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse 56897^ - unchanged
East Kilbride 60927 - the five East Kilbride wards

*The easiest way to get Cumbernauld and Kilsyth up to size would be to add some of the rural bits from Airdrie North
^The current split of Avondale and Stonehouse ward, with the latter element going with Hamilton, looks like it still works and is required to keep Clydesdale within quota

Lothian



Here's where I make the first significant alteration to regional boundaries - all of Midlothian is now part of the Lothian region, but none of East Lothian.

Livingston 50808* - successor to Almond Valley, but shrinks down due to a sharp rise in the electorate
Bathgate 56796* - technically the successor to Linlithgow, but in practice a new seat made up of the four western wards of West Lothian
Linlithgow and Queensferry 53375 - Linlithgow and Broxburn etc from the current Linlithgow seat, plus Almond ward from Edinburgh
Edinburgh Western 60340 - Drum Brae/Gyle, Corstorphine/Murrayfield and Inverleith wards
Edinburgh Northern and Leith 60847 - Leith, Leith Walk and Forth wards
Edinburgh Central 61767^ - City Centre, Fountain/Craiglockhart and Morningside wards
Edinburgh Pentlands 61661 - Colinton/Fairmilehead, Pentland Hills and Sighthill/Gorgie wards
Edinburgh Southern 47987^ - Liberton/Gilmerton and Southside/Newington wards
Edinburgh Eastern and Dalkeith 54370 - Craigentinny/Duddingston, Portobello/Craigmillar and Dalkeith
Midlothian 60678 - all of Midlothian bar Dalkeith

*Livingston is still a little on the small side on these numbers (although it might not be by now) but this can easily be fixed with a minor tweak to the boundary, probably round Polbeth.

^Edinburgh Southern needs to gain about 4000 electors. My knowledge of Edinburgh geography is a bit ropey, but from a map it looks like adding the southern bit of Morningside might be the simplest solution. Alternatively, you could rotate areas between Central, Southern and Pentlands to remove the awkward salient of the latter to Gorgie

South Scotland



East Lothian 56134 - the four eastern wards of the authority
Dunbar, Berwickshire and East Roxburghshire 58678 - two wards from East Lothian, both the Berwickshire wards, Kelso and Jedburgh
Tweeddale, Lauderdale and Teviotdale 58334 - yes, it's an awful name. You could put Lauderdale in with Berwickshire and reunite Roxburghshire, but you'd need to split a ward
Clydesdale 63419* - unchanged
Dumfriesshire 61006 - I can't see a way to unsplit Dumfries
Galloway and West Dumfries 56754 - unchanged
Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley 59760^ - almost unchanged
Ayr 60690 - unchanged
Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley 63539^ - almost unchanged

*As mentioned above, Stonehouse goes with Hamilton, maintaining the present ward split
^To get Kilmarnock in quota, the Irvine Valley ward needs a very slight haircut

West Scotland



Cunninghame South 53457 - realigns to ward boundaries
Cunninghame North 52779 - I'm not keen on the split of Saltcoasts and Stevenson here. If you want to fix this, the easiest solution is to give both to Cunninghame North and then have south grab part of Annick ward from Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley, which needs a ward split anyway
Eastwood 60869 - gains Barrhead, but loses Giffnock to a Glasgow seat
Paisley 52512 - the five Paisley wards
Renfrewshire West 62446 - mashes up the western ends of Renfrewshire South and Renfrewshire North and West
Invercylde 61096 - becomes co-extensive with the authority
Dumbarton 49046* - loses Lomond North, gains Old Kilpatrick from Clydebank Waterfront ward
Clydebank and Milngavie 65115* - loses Old Kilpatrick, gains Bearsden South
Strathkelvin 51978 - successor to Strathkelvin and Bearsden

*Both of these seats are out of quota, but shifting Old Kilpatrick should fix both

Glasgow



You could draw 8 seats entirely within Glasgow, but you'd need to split a lot of wards and it still doesn't deal with the fact that it's electorate is shrinking relative to the rest of Scotland. Instead I've decided to bite the bullet and take chunks out of both East Renfrewshire (Giffnock) and Renfrewshire (Renfrew.) Ready your pitchforks!

Glasgow Anniesland 59623 - more or less draws itself
Glasgow Kelvin 59896 - City Centre, Hillhead and Partick East/Kelvindale wards
Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn 52889* - Maryhill, Canal and Springburn/Robroyston wards
Glasgow Provan 67312* - Dennistoun, East Centre, North East and Baillieston wards
Glasgow Bridgeton 55805 - you need to cross the Clyde somewhere, and the options are either to do it in the City Centre or the east. I've picked the latter. Southside Central, Calton and Shettleston wards
Rutherglen 60982 - gains the bits of Blantyre ward it doesn't currently have
Glasgow Cathcart 63806^ - Linn, Langside and Newlands/Auldburn wards
Pollok and Giffnock 59074^ - Cardonald, Greater Pollok and Giffnock wards
Renfrew and Govan 62762 - the two Renfrew wards from Renfrewshire, plus Govan and Pollokshields from Glasgow

*Dennistoun ward needs to be split more or less in half to make the numbers work. Along the M8 is probably the best option
^Cathcart is slightly too large, but this can easily be fixed by transferring the Carnwadric area to Pollok and Giffnock, which also makes it look less stupid on a map

I'm less than entirely satisfied with Renfrew and Govan. It might be worth splitting Renfrew South and Gallowhill ward (putting the latter element in with Paisley) and combining Renfrew proper with Pollok rather than Govan, then rotating the seats south of the Clyde accordingly. But I don't imagine any potential arrangement combining Renfrew with part of Glasgow would be especially popular.

[xenon]

I don't really see the reasoning behind the stipulation in the Scotland Act for seven list seats per region. Much nicer regions could be drawn if they could have a larger variance in electorate, with the 56 list seats apportioned between them in the same way that European seats were.

That way you could have a less geographically-sprawling Highlands and Islands, and Glasgow can follow the city boundary rather than have to take in random bits of Clydebank or Giffnock. You could even fix the regions to correspond with the health board areas, or another similarly-sized set of subdivisions.

[No Offence Alan]

Apr 21, 2023 21:29:46 GMT xenon said:

I don't really see the reasoning behind the stipulation in the Scotland Act for seven list seats per region. Much nicer regions could be drawn if they could have a larger variance in electorate, with the 56 list seats apportioned between them in the same way that European seats were.

That way you could have a less geographically-sprawling Highlands and Islands, and Glasgow can follow the city boundary rather than have to take in random bits of Clydebank or Giffnock. You could even fix the regions to correspond with the health board areas, or another similarly-sized set of subdivisions.

Agree. You could even make the Holyrood seats always co-terminous with the Westminster ones and adjust the numbers on the list accordingly.

[Foggy]

Apr 21, 2023 21:46:21 GMT No Offence Alan said:

Apr 21, 2023 21:29:46 GMT xenon said:

I don't really see the reasoning behind the stipulation in the Scotland Act for seven list seats per region. Much nicer regions could be drawn if they could have a larger variance in electorate, with the 56 list seats apportioned between them in the same way that European seats were.

That way you could have a less geographically-sprawling Highlands and Islands, and Glasgow can follow the city boundary rather than have to take in random bits of Clydebank or Giffnock. You could even fix the regions to correspond with the health board areas, or another similarly-sized set of subdivisions.

Agree. You could even make the Holyrood seats always co-terminous with the Westminster ones and adjust the numbers on the list accordingly.

Disagree with the second suggestion. As neat as it sounds, there's a reason it was done away with under the 2004 Act.

At the moment, it would result in 59 FPTP seats to 70 proportional members. On the proposed boundaries for the next UK election, the balance would be tipped even further in favour of the additional members to make the ratio the exact reverse of what is now (i.e. 56:73 instead of 73:56), resulting in a bizarre sort of 'hyperproportionality' within each region (not to mention the awkwardness of having more "second-class" members than constituency members in the actual chamber itself – normal practice in some parts of Germany, but alien to Commonwealth jurisidictions). 

[The Bishop]

Have to say I have never understood those who insist the national parliaments in Scotland or Wales or NI *have* to have the same constituency boundaries as Westminster, isn't the whole point that they are different bodies doing different things?

[YL]

Apr 22, 2023 10:02:55 GMT The Bishop said:

Have to say I have never understood those who insist the national parliaments in Scotland or Wales or NI *have* to have the same constituency boundaries as Westminster, isn't the whole point that they are different bodies doing different things?

It is less work for Commissions and presumably easier to understand for the electorate, but neither of those are overwhelming arguments in favour.

[xenon]

It would make even less sense now that the franchise has been extended to 16- and 17-year olds and EU nationals, as constituencies with higher than average numbers of these groups would end up significantly above the quota for Holyrood elections.

[haroldthepolitician]

Apr 22, 2023 10:34:37 GMT YL said:

Apr 22, 2023 10:02:55 GMT The Bishop said:

Have to say I have never understood those who insist the national parliaments in Scotland or Wales or NI *have* to have the same constituency boundaries as Westminster, isn't the whole point that they are different bodies doing different things?

It is less work for Commissions and presumably easier to understand for the electorate, but neither of those are overwhelming arguments in favour.

Organisational benefits for political parties and organisations that divide themselves into accounting units. For example, rn, a Labour member might be in the Inverclyde seat in Westminster by Highlands in Holyrood despite most of the Holyrood seat residing in the Westminster one.