jamie
Top Poster
Posts: 6,893
Member is Online
|
Post by jamie on Sept 12, 2016 12:34:08 GMT
Copeland not looking good... Wasn't that turned into "West Cumbria" last time? Just looking at my North-West plan, he shouldn't be surprised. Cumbria is good for 5 seats and the most logical seat for Copeland would be Copeland LA and Windermere area. It's hard to justify any other seat as that would require every LA being split up and probably some large towns as well.
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Sept 12, 2016 12:37:14 GMT
Hardly. Quite apart from the fact that he would win a contest with Abbott (IMHO) and Thornberry (if it came to it) , a seat would be found elsewhere. Whether he would want to move geographically is another matter.
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 36,804
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Sept 12, 2016 12:49:18 GMT
Wasn't that turned into "West Cumbria" last time? Just looking at my North-West plan, he shouldn't be surprised. Cumbria is good for 5 seats and the most logical seat for Copeland would be Copeland LA and Windermere area. It's hard to justify any other seat as that would require every LA being split up and probably some large towns as well. I can assure you - and the reaction last time proved this - that it is a geographically illogical monstrosity that literally nobody in either part wants. Other arrangements might not look as nice on a map but make much more sense in all other respects.
|
|
|
Post by greatkingrat on Sept 12, 2016 12:55:25 GMT
It's a cunning plan to ensure Labour MPs don't block the boundary review!
|
|
Crimson King
Lib Dem
Be nice to each other and sing in tune
Posts: 9,440
|
Post by Crimson King on Sept 12, 2016 12:59:20 GMT
Anyone want to guess how soon after 12 we get the first leaks? the answer appears to have been 58 minutes
|
|
jamie
Top Poster
Posts: 6,893
Member is Online
|
Post by jamie on Sept 12, 2016 13:03:43 GMT
Just looking at my North-West plan, he shouldn't be surprised. Cumbria is good for 5 seats and the most logical seat for Copeland would be Copeland LA and Windermere area. It's hard to justify any other seat as that would require every LA being split up and probably some large towns as well. I can assure you - and the reaction last time proved this - that it is a geographically illogical monstrosity that literally nobody in either part wants. Other arrangements might not look as nice on a map but make much more sense in all other respects. I'll rephrase that "the most likely seat under the commissions rules..."
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Sept 12, 2016 14:02:31 GMT
I have nothing but contempt for those MPs who are leaking details of the boundary review when they must have been told it's not supposed to be made publicly available until tomorrow. They can't expect other people to respect other embargos in the future if they've so blatantly broken one themselves.
|
|
|
Post by kevinlarkin on Sept 12, 2016 14:10:51 GMT
If the Standard report is accurate (big if, obviously) then 'Finsbury Park and Stoke Newington' is either a tri-borough constituency or one that does not contain Finsbury Park.
|
|
Crimson King
Lib Dem
Be nice to each other and sing in tune
Posts: 9,440
|
Post by Crimson King on Sept 12, 2016 14:11:12 GMT
I have nothing but contempt for those MPs who are leaking details of the boundary review when they must have been told it's not supposed to be made publicly available until tomorrow. They can't expect other people to respect other embargos in the future if they've so blatantly broken one themselves. agree If I were the boundary comission I would announce that MPs would not be given advance warning in future and would have to get it at the same time as the public and press if anyone else breaches the embargo. If they are going to behave like children they may have to be treated like them
|
|
|
Post by Right Leaning on Sept 12, 2016 14:13:09 GMT
I have nothing but contempt for those MPs who are leaking details of the boundary review when they must have been told it's not supposed to be made publicly available until tomorrow. They can't expect other people to respect other embargos in the future if they've so blatantly broken one themselves. Surely that is politicians for you - "Do as I say not as I do".
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Sept 12, 2016 14:16:27 GMT
I have nothing but contempt for those MPs who are leaking details of the boundary review when they must have been told it's not supposed to be made publicly available until tomorrow. They can't expect other people to respect other embargos in the future if they've so blatantly broken one themselves. Why? What possible harm can it do? They get to see first so as to have time to respond to questions but once seen why not make known your feelings. These are not set in stone, not market sensitive, nor state secrets!
|
|
Crimson King
Lib Dem
Be nice to each other and sing in tune
Posts: 9,440
|
Post by Crimson King on Sept 12, 2016 14:54:08 GMT
I have nothing but contempt for those MPs who are leaking details of the boundary review when they must have been told it's not supposed to be made publicly available until tomorrow. They can't expect other people to respect other embargos in the future if they've so blatantly broken one themselves. Why? What possible harm can it do? They get to see first so as to have time to respond to questions but once seen why not make known your feelings. These are not set in stone, not market sensitive, nor state secrets! because, whether you think it is reasonable or not, that was the condition placed on getting advance notice.
|
|
|
Post by islington on Sept 12, 2016 15:00:52 GMT
If the Standard report is accurate (big if, obviously) then 'Finsbury Park and Stoke Newington' is either a tri-borough constituency or one that does not contain Finsbury Park. Kevin
I'm shocked that anyone should doubt the accuracy of such an august and universally respected journal of record as the 'Evening Standard'.
Nevertheless, assuming that the 'Standard' has, for once, carried a reliable report, I imagine that the reference in the proposed constituency name is not to the actual park (which is in Haringey) but to the district of Finsbury Park. The latter is centred on the station and is mainly in Islington (which has a ward of this name), and spills slightly into Hackney.
(All very much my part of the world.)
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Sept 12, 2016 15:09:56 GMT
Why? What possible harm can it do? They get to see first so as to have time to respond to questions but once seen why not make known your feelings. These are not set in stone, not market sensitive, nor state secrets! because, whether you think it is reasonable or not, that was the condition placed on getting advance notice. I just don't think it matters. As soon as they know and start talking it will get out and about.........And why not? They knew first and thus job done. If they want to spill then fie by me. The information is not secret and it is only a form of proposals and it is not the copyright and ownership of the issuers. It is public knowledge.
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Sept 12, 2016 15:48:46 GMT
There is a fair amount of non-partisan support for this, it appears. But how much more delayed can this review get? Delay it now to make the figures "up to date" and you run in danger of not being complete in time for 2020, meaning existing seats will be more unfairly uneven than ever. There has to be a cutoff point. a) The Review is supposed to be completed in 2018, so you could have quite a lot of delay and still use the new lines; b) More recent electorate figures are already available, and are in fact prepared by local authorities every month. It needn't create any significant delay; c) Yes, there has to be a cut-off point. That does not mean you need to use this particular cut-off point.
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Sept 12, 2016 16:00:50 GMT
All sorts of sensitive documents are released on embargo to interested parties. I have had stuff from all over the place in the referendum. It allows you to prepare for press questions etc once the stuff is released. NOBODY breaks the embargo. If someone thinks he has until midnight then he may not be ready. Its unfair to just do what suits you....and of course if you get caught you will not get a heads up next time Except Paul Staines?
|
|
Chris
Independent
Posts: 573
|
Post by Chris on Sept 12, 2016 16:05:14 GMT
But how much more delayed can this review get? Delay it now to make the figures "up to date" and you run in danger of not being complete in time for 2020, meaning existing seats will be more unfairly uneven than ever. There has to be a cutoff point. a) The Review is supposed to be completed in 2018, so you could have quite a lot of delay and still use the new lines; b) More recent electorate figures are already available, and are in fact prepared by local authorities every month. It needn't create any significant delay; c) Yes, there has to be a cut-off point. That does not mean you need to use this particular cut-off point. The cut-off date was specified in the legislation, that was the time to debate when you should cut it off. What happens if there are another 2 million on the register (unlikely, but possible you must concede) when the next draft is published? Do we also throw that one in the bin and start again? This was my same concern with the extension of the voting registration deadline for the referendum. It created a new precedent which could be prone to abuse in the future.
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Sept 12, 2016 16:08:53 GMT
Why? What possible harm can it do? They get to see first so as to have time to respond to questions but once seen why not make known your feelings. These are not set in stone, not market sensitive, nor state secrets! All sorts of sensitive documents are released on embargo to interested parties. I have had stuff from all over the place in the referendum. It allows you to prepare for press questions etc once the stuff is released. NOBODY breaks the embargo. If someone thinks he has until midnight then he may not be ready. Its unfair to just do what suits you....and of course if you get caught you will not get a heads up next time Yes they do all the time on all manner of things. Sometimes it matters and sometimes it doesn't. this doesn't matter AT ALL.
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Sept 12, 2016 16:12:04 GMT
Oh, I don't think there's any absolute need for the government to change the freeze date. The legal language is clear.
However, the distribution of the 2 million new registrations means that some seats will be well out of quota before they are even finalised, let alone first used in an election. It does significantly undermine the argument that it's about equalising constituency sizes.
In an ideal world, I think we'd use a situation combining elements of the Australian and British local systems, where there are redistributions whenever a county gains a theoretical entitlement to another seat (and another county loses one), and where boundaries are altered within counties if the disparity gets too large.
|
|
Chris
Independent
Posts: 573
|
Post by Chris on Sept 12, 2016 16:16:27 GMT
Oh, I don't think there's any absolute need for the government to change the freeze date. The legal language is clear. However, the distribution of the 2 million new registrations means that some seats will be well out of quota before they are even finalised, let alone first used in an election. It does significantly undermine the argument that it's about equalising constituency sizes. In an ideal world, I think we'd use a situation combining elements of the Australian and British local systems, where there are redistributions whenever a county gains a theoretical entitlement to another seat (and another county loses one), and where boundaries are altered within counties if the disparity gets too large. This true, and would still be the case even if the boundary was changed. It would be a good idea to move over to forecasted electorates like those used for local reviews, though given the direction of travel it would probably lead to even more unfounded accusations of "evil tory gerrymandering" as Labour's current seats would take an even bigger hit. This review is going to be disruptive of that I have no doubt, the only thing that could make it worse would be to delay until 2025 general election at which point the changes would be even greater. At some point you have to stop kicking the can down then road...
|
|