YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,918
|
Post by YL on Sept 28, 2016 22:04:37 GMT
Proposals for Sheffield with detailed ward splits (since this is one of only a few areas that should have any split wards at all regarding the 2018 review). 1. Sheffield South East (77,719) Arburthorne, Beighton, Manor Castle, Mosborough and Woodhouse wards. Alternative name: Sheffield Attercliffe. 2. Sheffield Central (76,588) Loses Manor Castle ward, gains Crookes ward and polling districts NB, NC, NF and NG from Fulwood ward. Alternative name: Sheffield Park. 3. Sheffield South West (75,194) Beauchief & Greenhill, Dore & Totley, Ecclesall Gleadless Valley, Graves Park and polling districts NA, NC and ND from Fulwood ward. Closest successor to Sheffield Heeley . Alternative name: Sheffield Ecclesall. 4. Sheffield East (74,734) Burngreave, Darnall, Firth Park, Manor Castle, Shiregreen & Brightside wards, plus polling districts WC, WF and WG of Southey ward (the part east of Halifax Road). Succeeds Sheffield Brightside & Hillsborough (despite losing Hillsborough itself). Alternative name: Sheffield Brightside. 5. Sheffield North (76,689). Stocksbridge & Upper Don, Ecclesfield East, Ecclesfield West, Hillsborough and Stannington wards, and polling districts WA, WB, WD and WE of Southey ward (the districts west of Halifax Road). Closest successor to Penistone & Stocksbridge. Alternative name: Sheffield Stocksbridge & Ecclesfield. Sheffield Hallam disappears. This looks like the basis of a reasonable plan, but: - You've listed Manor Castle twice (I'm assuming it should be in Brightside as that seat needs the numbers) and missed both Birley and Richmond (in South East). - In your Southey split, only WB and WD (Birley Carr and Fox Hill) are actually west of Halifax Road. It looks to me like they'd be enough, and that would be a much neater split than adding WA and WE as well. - You can't use "Attercliffe" for seat 1 or "Park" for seat 2 if you look at where those places actually are. - The seat stretching round from Gleadless Valley to Lodge Moor is much better than the worst seat in some other plans (and much, much better than the worst seat in the initial proposals) but it's still a bit of a stretch. |
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Sept 28, 2016 22:06:11 GMT
Proposals for Leeds-Bradford-Calderdale with detailed ward splits:
1. Leeds East (76,213) As per BCE proposal (i.e. gains Burmantofts & Richmond Hill ward)
2. Elmet & Rothwell (77,287) Unchanged and therefore as per BCE proposal.
3. Leeds North (72,129) Chapel Allerton, Headingley, Moortown, Roundhay and Weetwood wards. Succeeds Leeds North East in practice.
4. Leeds South West (78,440) Armley, Beeston with Holbeck, City & Hunslet, Farnley & Wortley, and Hyde Park & Woodhouse wards, plus polling districts KIF and KIG from Kirkstall ward. Succeeds Leeds Central for the most part.
5. Pudsey (76,522) Bramley & Stanningley, Calverley & Forsley, Horsforth, and Pudsey wards, plus polling districts KIA, KIB, KIC, KID and KIE from Kirkstall ward.
6. Morley (77,642). The Leeds wards of Morley North, Morley South, Ardsley & Robin Hood and Middleton Park, and the Bradford ward of Tong.
7. Otley (76,461) The Leeds wards of Adel & Wharfedale, Alwoodley, Guiseley & Rawdon, and Otley & Yeadon, plus the Bradford ward of Wharfedale. A new seat.
8. Shipley (72,709) Baildon, Bingley, Heaton, Idle & Thackley, Shipley, and Windhill & Wrose wards, plus polling districts 3C and 3D of Bingley Rural ward (containing Airevalley Road which is a major link here).
9. Keighley (77,039) Gains polling districts 3A, 3B, 3E, 3F, 3G and 3H from Bingley Rural ward.
10. Bradford East (72,529) Loses Idle & Thackley ward, gains City & Manningham wards.
11. Bradford West (73,382) Clayton & Fairweather Green, Great Horton, Royds, Thornton & Allerton, Toller, Wibsey, and Wyke wards. An amalgamation of what remains of Bradford South and the current Bradford West.
12. Halifax & Queensbury (77,121) Gains the Bradford ward of Queensbury and loses polling district RD (comprising the small village of Southowram in practice) of Town ward.
13. Brighouse & Sowerby (77,424) As Calder Valley but plus polling district RD (comprising the village of Southowram) from Town ward.
|
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Sept 28, 2016 22:20:47 GMT
Proposals for Sheffield with detailed ward splits (since this is one of only a few areas that should have any split wards at all regarding the 2018 review). 1. Sheffield South East (77,719) Arburthorne, Beighton, Manor Castle, Mosborough and Woodhouse wards. Alternative name: Sheffield Attercliffe. 2. Sheffield Central (76,588) Loses Manor Castle ward, gains Crookes ward and polling districts NB, NC, NF and NG from Fulwood ward. Alternative name: Sheffield Park. 3. Sheffield South West (75,194) Beauchief & Greenhill, Dore & Totley, Ecclesall Gleadless Valley, Graves Park and polling districts NA, NC and ND from Fulwood ward. Closest successor to Sheffield Heeley . Alternative name: Sheffield Ecclesall. 4. Sheffield East (74,734) Burngreave, Darnall, Firth Park, Manor Castle, Shiregreen & Brightside wards, plus polling districts WC, WF and WG of Southey ward (the part east of Halifax Road). Succeeds Sheffield Brightside & Hillsborough (despite losing Hillsborough itself). Alternative name: Sheffield Brightside. 5. Sheffield North (76,689). Stocksbridge & Upper Don, Ecclesfield East, Ecclesfield West, Hillsborough and Stannington wards, and polling districts WA, WB, WD and WE of Southey ward (the districts west of Halifax Road). Closest successor to Penistone & Stocksbridge. Alternative name: Sheffield Stocksbridge & Ecclesfield. Sheffield Hallam disappears. This looks like the basis of a reasonable plan, but: - You've listed Manor Castle twice (I'm assuming it should be in Brightside as that seat needs the numbers) and missed both Birley and Richmond (in South East). - In your Southey split, only WB and WD (Birley Carr and Fox Hill) are actually west of Halifax Road. It looks to me like they'd be enough, and that would be a much neater split than adding WA and WE as well. - You can't use "Attercliffe" for seat 1 or "Park" for seat 2 if you look at where those places actually are. - The seat stretching round from Gleadless Valley to Lodge Moor is much better than the worst seat in some other plans (and much, much better than the worst seat in the initial proposals) but it's still a bit of a stretch. I have corrected my post in response and your calculations about the polling districts in Southey proved correct-both Sheffield North and Sheffield East are still in quota.
Unfortunately, due to the tight statutory limits and the way the Sheffield wards are made, it is not possible to avoid creating a Sheffield seat that is not 'a bit of a stretch'.
|
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,918
|
Post by YL on Sept 29, 2016 7:04:38 GMT
Unfortunately, due to the tight statutory limits and the way the Sheffield wards are made, it is not possible to avoid creating a Sheffield seat that is not 'a bit of a stretch'. Try putting the whole of Fulwood into the successor to Central (which can then take the Hallam name) and splitting Nether Edge instead. It's not easy to get a nice split of Nether Edge (polling district TA not being enough, unfortunately) but if one can be found that can be lived with it would give more compact and better connected seats overall. Not that it should really affect policy, but there are probably more pitchforks in Fulwood than Nether Edge... |
|
|
|
Post by islington on Sept 29, 2016 12:59:41 GMT
Just a quick random thought, but I was looking at the BCE proposals in Leeds. Overall, they're not that bad but I thought it might work better if Leeds C and Pudsey exchanged Farnley and Armley wards.
It's fine on the numbers (Leeds C 75621, Pudsey 76569) and I feel it looks better on the map than the BCE proposal, but I don't claim to know the area so I thought I'd mention it here and seek views.
|
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Sept 30, 2016 16:13:30 GMT
I believe there is a very good case for compelling the BCE to slightly violate regional boundaries by moving just one North East Lincolnshire ward (Humberston) back into Lincolnshire to make sure North Lincolnshire and North East Lincolnshire can be reviewed as separate from East Yorkshire. Humberston is better connected with (south) Lincolnshire.
This is based on the historical fact that before 1983, the old constituency of Louth included the town of Cleethorpes (and therefore the village of Humberston), which is now intertwined with Grimsby in the same way Hove is intertwined with Brighton.
This means that Scunthorpe only has to add Axholme Central, Axholme South, and Burringham & Gunness wards; Axholme North is better connected to the Barton-on-Humber hinterland. The constituencies in North Lincolnshire then become more evenly balanced: Grimsby & Cleethorpes (75,028), Brigg (74,071), and Scunthorpe (74,405). As for Lincolnshire, Boston & Skegness can absorb a few more villages near Horncastle to increase its electorate to 76,060, and Louth & Horncastle adds Humberston to be in quota (giving its electorate in this example as 75,691).
|
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,918
|
Post by YL on Sept 30, 2016 17:08:16 GMT
Just a quick random thought, but I was looking at the BCE proposals in Leeds. Overall, they're not that bad but I thought it might work better if Leeds C and Pudsey exchanged Farnley and Armley wards.
It's fine on the numbers (Leeds C 75621, Pudsey 76569) and I feel it looks better on the map than the BCE proposal, but I don't claim to know the area so I thought I'd mention it here and seek views.
I thought of that too, but I'm coming to the conclusion that Armley is better connected to the rest of the Leeds component of the BCE's "Pudsey" than Farnley & Wortley is: note the routes of the A647 and A657, and the permeability of Armley's border with Bramley & Stanningley. It does seem odd to have Armley in a seat without "Leeds" in the name, but that's easy to fix by changing the name. The main problem with the BCE's Pudsey is the inclusion of Tong, and Tong village is indeed close to Farnley & Wortley, but the main populated parts of Tong ward (which are really parts of Bradford) don't strike me as well connected to Farnley & Wortley. |
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,918
|
Post by YL on Sept 30, 2016 17:14:43 GMT
I believe there is a very good case for compelling the BCE to slightly violate regional boundaries by moving just one North East Lincolnshire ward (Humberston) back into Lincolnshire to make sure North Lincolnshire and North East Lincolnshire can be reviewed as separate from East Yorkshire. Humberston is better connected with (south) Lincolnshire. This is based on the historical fact that before 1983, the old constituency of Louth included the town of Cleethorpes (and therefore the village of Humberston), which is now intertwined with Grimsby in the same way Hove is intertwined with Brighton. This means that Scunthorpe only has to add Axholme Central, Axholme South, and Burringham & Gunness wards; Axholme North is better connected to the Barton-on-Humber hinterland. The constituencies in North Lincolnshire then become more evenly balanced: Grimsby & Cleethorpes (75,028), Brigg (74,071), and Scunthorpe (74,405). As for Lincolnshire, Boston & Skegness can absorb a few more villages near Horncastle to increase its electorate to 76,060, and Louth & Horncastle adds Humberston to be in quota (giving its electorate in this example as 75,691). You don't need to cross the regional boundary to treat Lincolnshire on its own: see erimus58's plan in this post (which also doesn't split the Isle of Axholme) and following discussion. |
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,843 
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Oct 4, 2016 0:40:14 GMT
I give you... AN IMPROVED SHEFFIELD NO WARD SPLIT Eternal Gratitude to YL of without whom I could of never figured out this plan Sheffield, Rotherham & Barnsley ... South YorkshireOk, where did you get that time machine? That's near as dammit the BCE's proposals for Sheffield. |
|
|
|
Post by John Chanin on Oct 4, 2016 4:36:45 GMT
I give you... AN IMPROVED SHEFFIELD NO WARD SPLIT Eternal Gratitude to YL of without whom I could of never figured out this plan Sheffield, Rotherham & Barnsley ... South YorkshireOk, where did you get that time machine? That's near as dammit the BCE's proposals for Sheffield. I'm amused at the idea that the BCE is full of deranged enthusiasts like ASV. It would explain a lot.... |
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Yn Ennill Yma
Posts: 6,144
|
Post by Foggy on Oct 4, 2016 21:04:04 GMT
I'm not amused by the thought that the BCE outsourced their work to schoolchildren who live 17,000km away from the constituencies they are proposing. You're right that it would explain a heck of a lot, mind.
|
|
|
|
Post by hullenedge on Oct 4, 2016 21:17:09 GMT
One of my former colleagues let slip that he had one worked for the Boundary Commission. He said that it was the most boring job that he'd ever done and that most of his then colleagues thought the same. (This view was confirmed, some years later, by another ex-employee of the BCE). My heart sank. I suppose boundaries are not for everyone.
|
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Yn Ennill Yma
Posts: 6,144
|
Post by Foggy on Oct 4, 2016 21:36:43 GMT
One of my former colleagues let slip that he had one worked for the Boundary Commission. He said that it was the most boring job that he'd ever done and that most of his then colleagues thought the same. (This view was confirmed, some years later, by another ex-employee of the BCE). My heart sank. I suppose boundaries are not for everyone. My heart would sink upon hearing this too. If that was many decades ago, then fair enough, but it strikes me that nowadays it wouldn't be difficult, if one were in charge of recruitment for the BCE, to headhunt people who both know their stuff and find the task fascinating. |
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,742
|
Post by Adrian on Oct 5, 2016 12:01:55 GMT
Leaving the commissioners and assistant commissioners to one side, I don't think the BCE headhunts staff. I think a couple of the managers are interested in boundaries, which is why they applied for the role, but most of the staff are general ONS staff who "get" data but don't "get" most of the other stuff related to the Review. A lot of the procedural work is dull anyway, but don't forget that almost no-one finds this stuff interesting, let alone fascinating.
|
|
|
|
Post by greatkingrat on Oct 5, 2016 12:22:34 GMT
Plus there is a danger that many of the sort of people with a particular interest in boundaries will also have partisan affiliations which bring up the risk of gerrymandering.
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,843
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Oct 5, 2016 15:07:55 GMT
Leaving the commissioners and assistant commissioners to one side, I don't think the BCE headhunts staff. I think a couple of the managers are interested in boundaries, which is why they applied for the role, but most of the staff are general ONS staff who "get" data but don't "get" most of the other stuff related to the Review. A lot of the procedural work is dull anyway, but don't forget that almost no-one finds this stuff interesting, let alone fascinating. And most annoyingly, most of us on here with the relevant skills and likely to be able to draw up much better plans are banned from working for them. |
|
|
|
Post by AustralianSwingVoter on Oct 8, 2016 0:15:06 GMT
Yorkshire Ridings Beverley & Holderness 76641 Hull East 78078 Hull North 71747 Hull West 76169 Howden 75002 Bridlington & Malton 77796 Scarborough 71741 Thirsk 72633 Richmond 73966 York 73247 Wetherby & Tadcaster 76603 Selby 72517 Harrogate 72004 Otley 75324 Skipton & Ripon 72897 Leeds East 76213 Leeds North 74883 Leeds West 75802 Leeds South 75426 Birstall & Morley 74799 Bradford East 72011 Bradford Central 72393 Bradford West 74250 Shipley 72891 Keighley 77714 Valleys of Calder, Colne & Holme 73998 Halifax 76475 Brighouse 73190 Huddersfield 76628 Batley & Dewsbury 75378 Denby Dale 72211 Wakefield 76795 Normanton, Pontefract & Castleford 78097 Hemsworth 74779 Dearne 73857 Barnsley South 72305 Barnsley North 76258 Hallam & Penistone 73202 Sheffield West 71212 Sheffield North 77744 Sheffield Central 77699 Sheffield South 78448 Sheffield East 76367 Rotherham 71610 Maltby 72205 Doncaster 71298 Goole 74509 Scunthorpe 71820 Grimsby North & Barton 71470 Grimsby South & Cleethorpes 71733   |
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Yn Ennill Yma
Posts: 6,144
|
Post by Foggy on Oct 8, 2016 0:46:39 GMT
Welcome back, ASV. Have you been on a Canadian discussion forum during your downtime? The admin here is always on the lookout for international sister sites! Anyway, I think you'll find there are only three historic Ridings of Yorkshire. The 50 seats you outline here are called constituencies (and the last three are not in Yorkshire, but I'm sure you know that already). |
|
|
|
Post by AustralianSwingVoter on Oct 8, 2016 1:27:04 GMT
Welcome back, ASV. Have you been on a Canadian discussion forum during your downtime? The admin here is always on the lookout for international sister sites! Anyway, I think you'll find there are only three historic Ridings of Yorkshire. The 50 seats you outline here are called constituencies (and the last three are not in Yorkshire, but I'm sure you know that already). Yorkshire Ridings means Yorkshire seats based on old Ridings |
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Yn Ennill Yma
Posts: 6,144
|
Post by Foggy on Oct 8, 2016 1:32:45 GMT
Oh, I see. My apologies. How many times are historic Riding borders are crossed by most people's proposals (and those of the Commission), though?
|
|
