Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2013 15:22:34 GMT
I've been niggled by South East England region for a long time, as a councillor, county councillor, campaigner; and I think I'm not alone.
Most of the government regions are artificial, of course, but SEE is artificiality taken to an extreme: it's just a (near) doughnut defined by its hole - the hole being London
Everything about SEE is irresistible, magnetically, drawn to London: our issues are about transport into London, migration from London, being economically dominated and driven by London; that's all we have in common. The region is so huge that huge problems in one part of the region are completely ignored and ignorable elsewhere: HS2 a huge debate in Oxon and Bucks? Not so much in Sussex; south coast transport a nightmare for Hampshire, Sussex and Kent? In Berkshire, no one cares.
And practically, SEE is a nightmare - precisely because our links are so dependent on London; SEE meetings mysteriously gravitate into the city as the most convenient location. Just as elsewhere in this forum people have pointed out that the most convenient way from North to South Wales is through England, so - albeit on a lesser scale - goes SEE.
So, what's to do?
From my south coast perspective, there are two obvious subregions in SEE:
1. Oxfordshire, Buckinghamshire and Berkshire
2. The rest (all right, for those of you for whom SEE is a far off country of which we know little, that means Hampshire, Isle of Wight, Surrey, West and East Sussex, Kent).
But if the region was simply broken into two, while the southern part would be a viable size, the northern part would be very small - much smaller even than North East, currently the smallest of the English regions. So is there a viable alternative? If we added Hertfordshire and Bedfordshire to the northern block, then the new region would have just over 3 million electors, significantly larger than North East England, and almost as big as (the rump of) East of England, and East Midlands. South East England would have 4.8 million electors. Note that my electorate figures are from the ONS stats for 2012.
What would this mean for the European elections?
South East would have 7 MEPs, down from 10.
East of England would have 5, down from 7.
The new region would have 5 MEPS. This would be just inside 10% (9.9%) away from quota (but bear in mind that West Midlands and London are each 9.3% away with current numbers.
Here are some maps for the current and revised region:
Current
Revised
Although it's a vague term that's been used in very elastic ways, I would suggest calling this region Home Counties.
What do you think? Pete W's views on this would be very welcome.
Most of the government regions are artificial, of course, but SEE is artificiality taken to an extreme: it's just a (near) doughnut defined by its hole - the hole being London
Everything about SEE is irresistible, magnetically, drawn to London: our issues are about transport into London, migration from London, being economically dominated and driven by London; that's all we have in common. The region is so huge that huge problems in one part of the region are completely ignored and ignorable elsewhere: HS2 a huge debate in Oxon and Bucks? Not so much in Sussex; south coast transport a nightmare for Hampshire, Sussex and Kent? In Berkshire, no one cares.
And practically, SEE is a nightmare - precisely because our links are so dependent on London; SEE meetings mysteriously gravitate into the city as the most convenient location. Just as elsewhere in this forum people have pointed out that the most convenient way from North to South Wales is through England, so - albeit on a lesser scale - goes SEE.
So, what's to do?
From my south coast perspective, there are two obvious subregions in SEE:
1. Oxfordshire, Buckinghamshire and Berkshire
2. The rest (all right, for those of you for whom SEE is a far off country of which we know little, that means Hampshire, Isle of Wight, Surrey, West and East Sussex, Kent).
But if the region was simply broken into two, while the southern part would be a viable size, the northern part would be very small - much smaller even than North East, currently the smallest of the English regions. So is there a viable alternative? If we added Hertfordshire and Bedfordshire to the northern block, then the new region would have just over 3 million electors, significantly larger than North East England, and almost as big as (the rump of) East of England, and East Midlands. South East England would have 4.8 million electors. Note that my electorate figures are from the ONS stats for 2012.
What would this mean for the European elections?
South East would have 7 MEPs, down from 10.
East of England would have 5, down from 7.
The new region would have 5 MEPS. This would be just inside 10% (9.9%) away from quota (but bear in mind that West Midlands and London are each 9.3% away with current numbers.
Here are some maps for the current and revised region:
Current
Revised
Although it's a vague term that's been used in very elastic ways, I would suggest calling this region Home Counties.
What do you think? Pete W's views on this would be very welcome.
I should have taken the time to reread, but it's been a harrowing evening again