|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Jan 2, 2016 16:57:04 GMT
Interesting story in the Telegraph (bottom right): They said something similar last time, and had the proposals gone through it wouldn't have been true. I doubt they'll have any more influence over the Boundary Commission than last time. I suspect the more likely outcome is peerages for anybody who can't be found a winnable seat or is willing to vacate one.
|
|
|
Post by greatkingrat on Jan 2, 2016 17:02:53 GMT
I think what they are saying is that MPs left without a seat, will be able to stand somewhere else where the MP is retiring, even if that is in a different part of the country.
|
|
Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 11,515
|
Post by Khunanup on Jan 2, 2016 17:26:43 GMT
Here's the link to the Telegraph story: www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/12077770/No-Tory-left-behind-pledge-amid-boundary-change-fear.htmlTypical bollocks from journos who don't know what they're talking about. Seeing as Hastings and Rye is likely to be little changed, if at all (at the zombie review it was completely unchanged) I'm not sure how Amber Rudd was ever going to be at risk. It's the likes of George Hollingbery and Michael Tomlinson who will be slightly screwed... greatkingrat Are you working from the old seat averages for Bristol etc? We don't yet have the national electorate so we can't really speculate as to the quota for individual counties/regions otherwise. If Bristol is anything like Pompey I imagine there'll be a big drop in wards with large student/transient population compared with the 2010 numbers which will effect the make-up of the city seats.
|
|
|
Post by greatkingrat on Jan 2, 2016 17:51:27 GMT
4.01 is the entitlement based on Dec 2014 electorates.
|
|
Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 11,515
|
Post by Khunanup on Jan 2, 2016 19:47:43 GMT
4.01 is the entitlement based on Dec 2014 electorates. I think all bets are off until we get the nationwide electorate that they're going from for quota. I really get the impression that there will be big disparities between inner city/town centre wards and suburban/rural wards which will take the overall quota down from last time but we don't know by how much.
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Jan 3, 2016 10:42:44 GMT
I think they put on lists whoever submitted before and/or persistent types like Harry and me.... They've emailed me and asked if I'd be prepared to be interviewed about past and future consultation procedures. ! Me too
|
|
Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 11,515
|
Post by Khunanup on Jan 4, 2016 20:57:32 GMT
Davıd Boothroyd which ward boundaries will be used for the places that are rewarding for 2016 for the purposes of this review? Is it the same for all of them or different depending on when the legislation passed through parliament?
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Jan 4, 2016 21:05:03 GMT
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 13,600
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Jan 4, 2016 22:32:10 GMT
They are required to use the electorate as published on 1st December 2015, but, as David says, there's no requirement to use the wards. It's only a habit that the English BC has to not split wards between constituencies. As the wards in the 1st December 2015 register will be extinguished more or less before the review even starts there are strong arguments to make in a submission to "split" wards in a manner that "just happens" to coincide with the new ward boundaries.
|
|
|
Post by La Fontaine on Jan 4, 2016 23:03:50 GMT
They are required to use the electorate as published on 1st December 2015, but, as David says, there's no requirement to use the wards. It's only a habit that the English BC has to not split wards between constituencies. As the wards in the 1st December 2015 register will be extinguished more or less before the review even starts there are strong arguments to make in a submission to "split" wards in a manner that "just happens" to coincide with the new ward boundaries. During the last review, I think I recall the Commission using old wards in some areas in the north east even though the new ones were determined and ready to go. This was widely regarded as being daft. It was hoped that this would in practice be sorted out at some stage. I believe Parliament can change things even after the Commission's report is submitted and might do so in such circumstances.
|
|
Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 11,515
|
Post by Khunanup on Jan 4, 2016 23:18:14 GMT
Be that as it may, do you think they will regard the wards in place as of 1st December as the ones that they will consider as essential building blocks? I certainly do going by their previous record but at least have the clear option now of splitting wards to stop ludicrous seats (as they're mapping polling districts).
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Jan 4, 2016 23:28:30 GMT
I would think they will use wards where they are small enough, but not in cities and unitary areas where wards are larger. But that's just a guess.
Could use parishes in rural areas, of course. That would be a return to the situation before 1983.
|
|
piperdave
SNP
Dalkeith; Midlothian/North & Musselburgh
Posts: 909
|
Post by piperdave on Jan 5, 2016 3:15:44 GMT
I think the English Commission will follow the example of the Scottish one during the zombie review. Wards will be the starting point but splitting will take place when necessary to achieve a reasonable constituency design. If they can also incorporate pending ward boundary changes (ie. confirmed in secondary legislation but not in practical effect), then that would be a very forward thinking approach. So forward thinking for the British approach to boundary reviews that I may need a sit down and a cuppa to recover from the shock!
|
|
|
Post by La Fontaine on Jan 5, 2016 10:09:53 GMT
I think the English Commission will follow the example of the Scottish one during the zombie review. Wards will be the starting point but splitting will take place when necessary to achieve a reasonable constituency design. If they can also incorporate pending ward boundary changes (ie. confirmed in secondary legislation but not in practical effect), then that would be a very forward thinking approach. So forward thinking for the British approach to boundary reviews that I may need a sit down and a cuppa to recover from the shock! I believe the English Commission did avoid crossing any ward boundaries during the zombie review. From memory, they also avoided crossing any "new but unimplemented" ward boundaries in Northumberland, but not in Durham. This time the position in Birmingham will be particularly bizarre if the proposed new boundaries are not used, as the proposed (but far from agreed as yet) new wards are much smaller.
|
|
Harry Hayfield
Green
Cavalier Gentleman (as in 17th century Cavalier)
Posts: 2,756
|
Post by Harry Hayfield on Jan 5, 2016 15:04:00 GMT
I had a thought this morning. Whilst everyone is offering comments on the shadow cabinet reshuffle here we are talking about constituencies. Are we a little bit sad?
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Jan 5, 2016 15:05:32 GMT
They've emailed me and asked if I'd be prepared to be interviewed about past and future consultation procedures. ! Me too I've just had a 1-hour long rambling conversation with somebody (independent of the BCE itself) who was talking about "systems" and a lot of gibberish. It was quite a long-winded discussion of my life and interests and how I did the last boundary review, but the essence of it seemed to be that it was a long-winded way of me telling the BCE to split wards, and him asking me if it would worthwhile for them to make a new computerised map-making thingy which probably only a few hundred people will use.
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Figgis on Jan 5, 2016 15:05:53 GMT
I had a thought this morning. Whilst everyone is offering comments on the shadow cabinet reshuffle here we are talking about constituencies. Are we a little bit sad? The vast majority of people are talking about neither.
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Jan 5, 2016 15:07:08 GMT
I had a thought this morning. Whilst everyone is offering comments on the shadow cabinet reshuffle here we are talking about constituencies. Are we a little bit sad? No. Those who incorrectly suffer from the hallucinations of thinking that shadow cabinet reshuffles are more important than boundary reviews, are inherently insane and are actively begging to be released from their torment.
|
|
|
Post by greatkingrat on Jan 5, 2016 16:09:14 GMT
I've just had a 1-hour long rambling conversation with somebody (independent of the BCE itself) who was talking about "systems" and a lot of gibberish. It was quite a long-winded discussion of my life and interests and how I did the last boundary review, but the essence of it seemed to be that it was a long-winded way of me telling the BCE to split wards, and him asking me if it would worthwhile for them to make a new computerised map-making thingy which probably only a few hundred people will use. I do hope you told them that computerised map-making thingys are always welcome!
|
|
|
Post by greatkingrat on Jan 5, 2016 16:10:47 GMT
I had a thought this morning. Whilst everyone is offering comments on the shadow cabinet reshuffle here we are talking about constituencies. Are we a little bit sad? No, the Boundary Commission will probably have completed their review before Corbyn completes the reshuffle.
|
|