YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,915
|
Post by YL on Aug 5, 2024 18:49:43 GMT
Before 2010 the city of York constituency was coterminous with the local authority (although the boundaries were expanded in 1995, the 'new' 1997 constituencies were based on the old districts). I'm surprised if there was discussion as far back as 1976 about splitting the city and diluting both halves with what would have been parts of other districts. And while the Conservatives would certainly have benefited from that kind of arrangement, clearly they were able to win the City of York as was, as they 'should' have done in 1979 and did in 1983 and 1987. The original proposal for pre-83 was to lop Foxwood and Micklegate from the City and add them to Selby. This was not well received. The Tories proposed a York East/West. The constituency was left unchanged and Selby had an undersized electorate. York 87 sans those two wards would have voted Labour. What else would have been in York East/West? Was Selby meant to go into one of them or was it going to gain territory from somewhere else? It was the awkwardness of the Commission's plans for Selby in the Fifth Review (implemented as Selby & Ainsty) which was Labour's main argument for keeping City of York wards with Selby in spite of the city boundary by then being protected as a county boundary. Because York's entitlement was almost exactly two seats, keeping that boundary crossing meant another one as well, and they proposed a constituency called Forest of Galtres (hi doktorb🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️) which I think must have contained the "Ainsty" wards and also parts of what became Thirsk & Malton as well as the York Outer wards they didn't put in Selby. |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Aug 5, 2024 18:52:34 GMT
they proposed a constituency called Forest of Galtres What in fucks name..  |
|
|
|
Post by hullenedge on Aug 5, 2024 19:01:28 GMT
The original proposal for pre-83 was to lop Foxwood and Micklegate from the City and add them to Selby. This was not well received. The Tories proposed a York East/West. The constituency was left unchanged and Selby had an undersized electorate. York 87 sans those two wards would have voted Labour. What else would have been in York East/West? Was Selby meant to go into one of them or was it going to gain territory from somewhere else? It was the awkwardness of the Commission's plans for Selby in the Fifth Review (implemented as Selby & Ainsty) which was Labour's main argument for keeping City of York wards with Selby in spite of the city boundary by then being protected as a county boundary. Because York's entitlement was almost exactly two seats, keeping that boundary crossing meant another one as well, and they proposed a constituency called Forest of Galtres (hi doktorb🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️) which I think must have contained the "Ainsty" wards and also parts of what became Thirsk & Malton as well as the York Outer wards they didn't put in Selby. Sorry can't elaborate re the East/West arrangement because I don't have the clippings but it was mentioned over a decent lunch. (The then agent wasn't a fan of students and wasn't amenable to me or others perusing the archive). Fair chance that East would have absorbed the Flaxton area. |
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Aug 5, 2024 19:05:43 GMT
they proposed a constituency called Forest of Galtres What in fucks name.. Daft, but not quite as daft as it sounds.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Aug 5, 2024 19:07:51 GMT
It sounds like the site of an obscure WWI battle
|
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Aug 5, 2024 19:16:44 GMT
It sounds like the site of an obscure WWI battle Or something from Game of Thrones. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Aug 6, 2024 10:56:21 GMT
What in fucks name.. Daft, but not quite as daft as it sounds.
Thank you. That is fascinating and previously unknown to me. I am well acquainted with the wonderful Crayke village and castle and even better acquainted with the delightful Duncombe Park with the ridge above the abbey with follies and some of the best swathes of common cowslip that I know. But terrible name for a constituency despite all that. |
|
|
|
Post by doktorb🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️ on Aug 6, 2024 22:47:37 GMT
For some reason I'm reminded of the NW LibDems cobbling together a proposal called "Ribble Estuary".
|
|
john07
Labour & Co-operative
Posts: 15,818 
|
Post by john07 on Aug 6, 2024 22:50:24 GMT
For some reason I'm reminded of the NW LibDems cobbling together a proposal called "Ribble Estuary". Not as good as Mersey Banks! |
|
|
|
Post by iainbhx on Aug 6, 2024 23:02:36 GMT
As someone who lived in City of York from late 1989 through to the summer of 1995, I was perhaps naively surprised at how lacklustre the Tory campaign was in 1992, there again I lived in the old Bootham ward (and now would be in Guildhall) which was somewhat of a Labour fortress. so I suppose they didn't bother much there.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2024 3:53:01 GMT
As someone who lived in City of York from late 1989 through to the summer of 1995, I was perhaps naively surprised at how lacklustre the Tory campaign was in 1992, there again I lived in the old Bootham ward (and now would be in Guildhall) which was somewhat of a Labour fortress. so I suppose they didn't bother much there. My grandad did more than anyone else to help the SDP candidate in the 1987 election and might have single-handedly kept the City of York in the Tory column that year (a meagre majority of around 100 votes). |
|
|
|
Post by swanarcadian on Aug 7, 2024 5:56:53 GMT
As someone who lived in City of York from late 1989 through to the summer of 1995, I was perhaps naively surprised at how lacklustre the Tory campaign was in 1992, there again I lived in the old Bootham ward (and now would be in Guildhall) which was somewhat of a Labour fortress. so I suppose they didn't bother much there. I guess a Labour gain was seen as inevitable back then. It was their number one target. |
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,915
|
Post by YL on Aug 7, 2024 14:45:09 GMT
Here are the City of York votes since the Outer/Central split was instituted. The shift towards Labour in 2017, largely maintained since, is striking, and might explain changing attitudes to doughnuts vs. sandwiches.
| 2005 notional (a) | 2010 | 2015 | 2017 | 2019 | 2024 | | Lab | 32588 (37.3%) | 27681 (27.7%) | 33560 (33.0%) | 55661 (50.4%) | 44651 (42.6%) | 47968 (50.5%) | | Con | 25222 (28.5%) | 35034 (35.1%) | 39973 (39.4%) | 45375 (41.1%) | 41091 (39.2%) | 19155 (20.3%) | | Lib Dem | 26011 (29.8%) | 30918 (31.0%) | 10073 (9.9%) | 8385 (7.6%) | 14141 (13.5%) | 8547 (9.1%) | | UKIP/Brexit/Reform | (a)
| 2200 (2.2%) (b) | 10046 (9.9%) | - | 1479 (1.4%) | 10633 (11.3%) | | Green | (a)
| 1669 (1.7%) | 7349 (7.2%) | 1094 (1.0%) | 2107 (2.0%) | 7397 (7.8%) | | Yorks | - | - | 291 (0.3%) | - | 557 (0.5%) | 260 (0.3%) | | BNP | - | 2127 (2.1%) | - | - | - | - | | SDP | - | - | - | - | 134 (0.1%) | - | | TUSC | - | - | 288 (0.3%) | - | - | - | | OMRLP | - | 154 (0.2%) | - | - | - | - | | Ind | (a)
| - | - | - | 692 (0.7%) | 741 (0.8%) | | "Other" (a) | 3528 (4.0%) | - | - | - | - | - |
(a) These figures are from Electoral Calculus, and I think they are their own notionals, not the "official" Rallings/Thrasher ones. "Other" here includes all candidates other than Lab, Con and Lib Dem, because this is how Electoral Calculus presents the figures. This includes two Independents, the Greens, UKIP, the 1989 Liberals and the Death, Dungeons and Taxes Party. (b) Curiously UKIP got the same numeric vote, 1100, in each constituency. |
|
