|
|
Post by islington on Aug 30, 2016 13:48:19 GMT
Or, how about this - - ?  Sheffield Hallam and Penistone - 77862: This is as per Minion's plan above. It contains the Hallamshire Hospital and Hallamshire Golf Course, so can I get away with 'Hallam' as a name? 'Sheffield West' would be a defensible alternative. Sheffield Central - 71452: Also as per Minion. Sheffield Hillsborough - 77695: The name has the merit of familiarity, although Hillsborough is very much at one end of the seat. The Penistone East ward (which does not contain Penistone itself) is not a very natural addition to this seat, but at least this scheme is better than linking Rotherham's Keppel ward with a Sheffield seat, plus it avoids the three-borough arrangement in Minion's plan. This seat could be 'Sheffield North'. Sheffield Attercliffe - 76841: Or 'Sheffield East'. This looks a very solid seat to me, with Brinsworth a relatively logical ward to borrow from Rotherham. Sheffield Heeley - 78448: As in many other plans. If we're using compass-points, this completes the set as 'Sheffield South'. Barnsley North - 71128: As in most other plans. Barnsley South - 71775: Also seen many times before. If preferred, the Barnsley seats could exchange Central and Dodworth wards. Wentworth - 71972 Rotherham - 72571: I've managed to get most of Rotherham town into this seat. Moreover, unlike the other non-split plans above, I've (a) avoided putting any Sheffield wards in a Rotherham-based seat, and (b) managed to be somewhat more respectful of the existing pattern in the Rotherham area. Rother Valley - 71519: Also as seen before. The west Sheffield arrangement is crazy, and the treatment of Penistone East unfortunate, but otherwise this is not too bad. You might want to look at whether you can avoid splitting the parishes of Maltby and Aston cum Aughton, though. YL -
Thanks for the feedback.
Regarding west Sheffield, the way I see it is that the Central and Hallam & Penistone seats, taken together, form a reasonably coherent unit with 149314 electors, so it's ideal for two seats. The snag is that the only way to divide this area into two, legally and without ward splits, is a boundary line that meanders weirdly through west Sheffield. I agree it's distressing to those of us that spend too much of our lives poring over maps; but I doubt whether ordinary voters are that bothered about, or even aware of, issues such as an eccentric boundary line.
So I'd say this boundary is bad, but not so intolerably awful as to invalidate the whole plan. And in support of this view, I'd cite existing constituencies: (a) Lancaster & Fleetwood (big chunk of Lancaster bitten off; Fleetwood separated from the rest of the seat by a river estuary with no bridge in the seat or remotely near it); and (b) Shipley (an entire ward (Wharfedale) completely inaccessible by road from the rest of the seat without a substantial excursion outside the boundary (much longer than the brief transit needed to get from Dore ward to the rent of the proposed Hallam & Penistone seat)). And if those constituencies can currently exist, without much adverse comment so far as I know (except in fora like this), then I feel the proposed Sheffield map will also pass muster.
And once you get past the single, admittedly very awkward, boundary between the two seats in the west/central Sheffield area, then I maintain that the rest of the plan has a lot going for it compared with the other non-split schemes: as much respect for the Sheffield boundary as you can reasonably expect with a non-split plan; seats elsewhere in Sheffield that definitely work better than in the other plans (I'm especially pleased with Attercliffe); and Rotherham seats that are (although significantly altered) recognizably the successors of the current seats.
Finally, you mentioned keeping parishes together. I'd respond that the plan offers plenty of scope for tweaking the Rotherham area - for instance, Rotherham and RV could exchange Rother Vale and Maltby wards, which I'm guessing might address your parish point; or you could go further and exchange Sitwell and Dinnington wards as well. All these variants are legal, but I haven't recommended them because, although they arguably improve the RV seat, they would leave an awkwardly shaped Rotherham. But if you want to put a case for these or other changes, please be my guest.
|
|
|
|
Post by AustralianSwingVoter on Sept 9, 2016 5:25:31 GMT
Electoral Calculus Initial Proposals Vote Projections | Row 1 column 1 | Row 1 column 2 | Row 1 column 3 | Row 1 column 4 | Row 1 column 5 | Row 1 column 6 | Row 1 column 7 | | Row 2 column 1 | Row 2 column 2 | Row 2 column 3 | Row 2 column 4 | Row 2 column 5 | Row 2 column 6 | Row 2 column 7 | | Row 3 column 1 | Row 3 column 2 | Row 3 column 3 | Row 3 column 4 | Row 3 column 5 | Row 3 column 6 | Row 3 column 7 | | Row 4 column 1 | Row 4 column 2 | Row 4 column 3 | Row 4 column 4 | Row 4 column 5 | Row 4 column 6 | Row 4 column 7 | | Row 5 column 1 | Row 5 column 2 | Row 5 column 3 | Row 5 column 4 | Row 5 column 5 | Row 5 column 6 | Row 5 column 7 | | Row 6 column 1 | Row 6 column 2 | Row 6 column 3 | Row 6 column 4 | Row 6 column 5 | Row 6 column 6 | Row 6 column 7 | | Row 7 column 1 | Row 7 column 2 | Row 7 column 3 | Row 7 column 4 | Row 7 column 5 | Row 7 column 6 | Row 7 column 7 |
|
|
|
|
Post by uhurasmazda on Sept 12, 2016 22:15:22 GMT
One hour to go, so... Asterisks are wards from outside West Yorks.  |
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,917
|
Post by YL on Sept 12, 2016 23:17:17 GMT
The proposed "Sheffield Hallam & Stocksbridge" is even worse than in the non-splitting proposals on here.
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,843 
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Sept 12, 2016 23:41:39 GMT
The proposed "Sheffield Hallam & Stocksbridge" is even worse than in the non-splitting proposals on here. Sheffield Beauchief, Bradfield, & Barnsley. |
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,843
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Sept 12, 2016 23:43:13 GMT
North Yorkshire looks reasonable, almost unchanged (Scarborough & Whitby is unchanged). They've avoids the previous abomination of slicing bits up with West Yorkshire, have kept to the county boundary other than two nibbles around Selby.
|
|
|
|
Post by greatkingrat on Sept 12, 2016 23:46:43 GMT
How could they have left Scarborough and Whitby unchanged considering it was below quota to start with??
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,843
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Sept 12, 2016 23:49:56 GMT
How could they have left Scarborough and Whitby unchanged considering it was below quota to start with?? Only by 800 electors. |
|
Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 16,059
Member is Online
|
Post by Sibboleth on Sept 12, 2016 23:52:11 GMT
Some... odd... boundaries in the Wakefield area.
|
|
|
|
Post by greatkingrat on Sept 12, 2016 23:52:24 GMT
Doesn't matter, it is still not unchanged.
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,843
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Sept 12, 2016 23:57:58 GMT
I don't know whether to laugh or dispair at Sheffield:  |
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,843
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Sept 13, 2016 0:02:44 GMT
Some... odd... boundaries in the Wakefield area. There's some sort of lobster swimming through Castleford. |
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Sept 13, 2016 0:07:50 GMT
Some... odd... boundaries in the Wakefield area. There's some sort of lobster swimming through Castleford. You are Captain Beefheart and I claim my £5. |
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,742
|
Post by Adrian on Sept 13, 2016 2:22:10 GMT
|
|
iain
Lib Dem
Posts: 11,455
Member is Online
|
Post by iain on Sept 13, 2016 4:56:55 GMT
I don't know whether to laugh or dispair at Sheffield: That is hideous ... I really do not understand the fetishism of not splitting wards at any cost. |
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,917
|
Post by YL on Sept 13, 2016 7:15:02 GMT
Halifax is another split town, but they've pretended not to have split it by keeping the existing names.
I suspect they haven't even noticed that they've split Maltby.
|
|
|
|
Post by Richard Gadsden on Sept 13, 2016 8:58:20 GMT
To be fair, the Halifax seats aren't that bad. Rename them Calder Valley and Halifax West and Brighouse and Halifax East and they'd be OK.
|
|
|
|
Post by lennon on Sept 13, 2016 10:03:45 GMT
I note that we still have a doughnut in York - is this just 'minimum change' or have they put any more anywhere else?
|
|
Yorkie
Yorkshire Party
Posts: 180
|
Post by Yorkie on Sept 13, 2016 10:11:50 GMT
The inclusion of Byram and Brotherton with a West Yorkshire constituency isn't the worst idea in the world, but it 'feels' much more like part of Knottingley/Pontefract than it does that Normanton, Castleford and Outwood mess.
Much less convinced about the Whitley ward being attached to Pontefract. Geographically close, but not really 'connected' in a way you'd want for a constituency.
Hemsworth going with Barnsley isn't a bad call, either.
Still stuck with a Yorkshire - North Lincs seat though!
|
|
|
|
Post by uhurasmazda on Sept 13, 2016 10:38:26 GMT
I note that we still have a doughnut in York - is this just 'minimum change' or have they put any more anywhere else? Colchester is also a doughnut, taking over from Bath in this regard. Telford is also very close to doughnuthood. |
|
