YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,915
|
Post by YL on Feb 28, 2017 19:22:36 GMT
A brief mention of the Lib Dems' proposals for Sheffield. They're much closer to the Commission's: they simply rotate Beauchief & Greenhill from Hallam & Stocksbridge to South (successor to Heeley), Nether Edge from South back into Central and Ecclesall from Central back to Hallam. To make the numbers work they split Fulwood, moving the studenty bit from Hallam to Central.
My view on this is that, while it does make Hallam & Stocksbridge mildly less disgusting, it gets too little out of the split ward. If you're prepared to split a ward, there's really no need to keep Penistone East with west Sheffield, and they've also ignored the controversial proposals in the Mosborough area.
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,841 
Member is Online
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Feb 28, 2017 19:38:33 GMT
Sheffield's Labour MPs have submitted a proposal for the city (ref 26358). It's compatible with the Tory proposal outside Sheffield, and also splits three wards, but different ones: ... I think this is better than the Tory map in north Sheffield: that North & Ecclesfield is significantly better than the Tories' Hillsborough. But the Tory map is better in the south and west (I don't like the Beauchief to Stannington seat) and their names are better too. Yes, my initial thoughts are to recommend stitching the Labour map in the north to the Conservative map in the south. |
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,915
|
Post by YL on Mar 1, 2017 8:17:33 GMT
Here's a fuller summary of the Conservative counterproposal:
Sheffield: as described above
Rotherham: compared with existing, Rother Valley unchanged, Rotherham simply gains Wickersley, Wentworth & Dearne loses Wickersley and has its Barnsley component replaced by the Hoyland wards and Wombwell. (As with the Commission's proposals, "Wentworth & Dearne" is misnamed.)
Doncaster: as per Commission, including the inclusion of Dearne North from Barnsley.
Barnsley: a Barnsley West & Stocksbridge containing Penistone East, the Darton wards, Dodworth, and the west of the town proper (Kingstone, Old Town, Central, Wosbrough), and a Barnsley East & Hemsworth containing the rest of the borough except for the bits that have been nibbled off. (I think Barnsley is one area they haven't handled very well: they've kept the double crossing of the West Yorks boundary, and they've still split Dearne North off. No seat is entirely in the borough, and five seats contain part of it, two of which contain just one ward.)
Wakefield: With Hemsworth itself gone to Barnsley, the seat of that name gains Wakefield Rural and is renamed "Featherstone". Normanton, Pontefract & Castleford is unchanged, and Wakefield gains the Outwood wards in compensation for Wakefield Rural (and, unlike the Commission's proposals, does not gain Wakefield South).
Kirklees: only one boundary crossing. Compared with existing seats, Batley & Spen and Dewsbury (essentially) unchanged, Colne Valley gains Penistone West, Huddersfield takes Crosland Moor & Netherton from Colne Valley rather than the Commission's suggestion of Lindley. (I think this is the first place where I think "I see what they're playing at" ...)
Calderdale: as mentioned above, one seat covering the core of Halifax plus the three Upper Valley wards, one covering the rest plus Queensbury. On the map these are named "Calder North" and "Calder South"; in the other documents they're "Upper Calder" and "Lower Calder". (IMO both pairs of names are rubbish. The first one should mention Halifax, and the second one should probably be "Brighouse & Queensbury" or some such. I think the boundaries are workable, though.)
Bradford: Keighley as per Commission, but renamed "Keighley & Ilkley", Shipley existing less Wharfedale and plus Thornton & Allerton, Bradford South and Bradford North seats covering most of the core of Bradford, but Idle & Thackley and poor old Tong nibbled off into Leeds seats.
Leeds:
- Elmet & Rothwell unchanged as per Commission
- Leeds East as per Commission
- "Pudsey & Morley" consisting of the two Morley wards in the south, Pudsey and Calverley & Farsley in the north, glued together with Tong. (I think this is the worst seat in the proposal.)
- Leeds Central loses Burmantofts & Richmond Hill, gains Ardsley & Robin Hood. ("Central"?)
- Leeds West existing plus Horsforth.
- Leeds North East loses Alwoodley, gains Headingley and Weetwood and one PD at the southern end of Adel & Wharfedale.
- A seat which appears on the map as "Otley", but elsewhere as "Leeds North & Idle", containing Alwoodley, the bulk of Adel & Wharfedale, Otley, Guiseley & Rawdon and the Bradford ward of Idle & Thackley.
North Yorkshire: re-align to ward boundaries and move Thornton Dale to Scarborough & Whitby, otherwise all seats unchanged.
N & NE Lincs: support the boundaries, but have come up with some creative names: Brigg & Grimsby North; Goole, Howdenshire & the Isle of Axholme; Scunthorpe & Trent Valley. (On the last one: you what? "Trent Valley" could refer to oodles of places between here and Stoke, some of which even have railway stations with it in their names.)
East Riding: Beverley & Holderness and East Yorkshire unchanged as per Commission, see above for Goole etc., Hull East as per Commission, swap wards in Hull with Pickering & St Andrew's in Central and Bricknell and Newington in West & Haltemprice.
|
|
|
|
Post by hullenedge on Mar 1, 2017 9:31:14 GMT
My head is still spinning from the LD proposal of 'Airedale & Queensbury'...crikey!
Tories and Labour in Calderdale appear to be in agreement with Upper/Lower...North/South Calder bar the inclusion of which Bradford ward.
|
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,915
|
Post by YL on Mar 1, 2017 19:14:07 GMT
And now a summary of that Lib Dem counterproposal: Sheffield: as described above. Barnsley, Rotherham, Doncaster: all exactly as per Commission. Wakefield: all as per Commission, including the two crossings into Selby. Kirklees: as per Commission, including both the crossings into neighbouring authorities. Calderdale: they have Halifax West & Calder Valley containing Skircoat, Sowerby Bridge and Warley from the existing Halifax, the three Upper Valley wards, Elland, Greetland & Stainland and Ryburn, and Halifax East & Brighouse containing the rest of the borough plus Royds ward of Bradford. Bradford: is it called Bradford Rural & Guiseley or Airedale & Queensbury? Whatever the name, it's mostly a sort of Bradford Outer West (Queensbury, Thornton & Allerton, Clayton & Fairweather Green, the two Bingley wards) but then randomly tacks on Guiseley & Rawdon ward from Leeds. In the rest of the borough, Keighley is as per Commission, then they have a Bradford Central containing the rest of the current Bradford West plus the two Hortons and Bowling & Barkerend, Bradford North & Shipley containing the rest of the current East plus Shipley, Windhill & Wrose and Baildon. Tong is in a Leeds seat as per Commission, and Wyke and Wibsey in Spen as per Commission. Leeds: all as per Commission, except for the details of Guiseley's fate in Bradford. North Yorkshire: all as per Commission. N & NE Lincs: boundaries as per Commission, names too, except they want to call the Goole seat Hunsley, Howdenshire & Axholme. (Hi doktorb🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️ .) East Riding: all as per Commission, except for that Goole name. |
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,915
|
Post by YL on Mar 6, 2017 19:05:15 GMT
Quite a few submissions (including from Shipley and Keighley CLPs) suggest separating Keighley from Ilkley and forming a Keighley & Shipley constituency with the three Keighley wards, Worth Valley, Bingley Rural, Shipley and Windhill & Wrose. While the general point that Keighley is much better connected along the Aire towards Shipley than it is across Ilkley Moor seems entirely reasonable, the problem as I see it is that it's mostly Bingley (as opposed to Bingley Rural) between Keighley and Shipley and they've ended up with Bingley in with Ilkley. krollo : comments? |
|
iain
Lib Dem
Posts: 11,453
|
Post by iain on Mar 6, 2017 20:00:49 GMT
Quite a few submissions (including from Shipley and Keighley CLPs) suggest separating Keighley from Ilkley and forming a Keighley & Shipley constituency with the three Keighley wards, Worth Valley, Bingley Rural, Shipley and Windhill & Wrose. While the general point that Keighley is much better connected along the Aire towards Shipley than it is across Ilkley Moor seems entirely reasonable, the problem as I see it is that it's mostly Bingley (as opposed to Bingley Rural) between Keighley and Shipley and they've ended up with Bingley in with Ilkley. krollo : comments? It's also fairly silly to exclude Craven from such a seat. Looks like a fairly clear partisan gerrymander to me. |
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Mar 6, 2017 20:26:51 GMT
No part of the Craven district has ever been included in such a seat. When the constituency of Skipton (the town at the centre of the current Craven district) was abolished in 1983, only a small rural piece of territory was lost to Keighley.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Mar 6, 2017 20:44:23 GMT
Nobody mentioned Craven district
|
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on Mar 16, 2017 11:43:44 GMT
Here's a fuller summary of the Conservative counterproposal: Sheffield: as described above Rotherham: compared with existing, Rother Valley unchanged, Rotherham simply gains Wickersley, Wentworth & Dearne loses Wickersley and has its Barnsley component replaced by the Hoyland wards and Wombwell. (As with the Commission's proposals, "Wentworth & Dearne" is misnamed.) Doncaster: as per Commission, including the inclusion of Dearne North from Barnsley. Barnsley: a Barnsley West & Stocksbridge containing Penistone East, the Darton wards, Dodworth, and the west of the town proper (Kingstone, Old Town, Central, Wosbrough), and a Barnsley East & Hemsworth containing the rest of the borough except for the bits that have been nibbled off. (I think Barnsley is one area they haven't handled very well: they've kept the double crossing of the West Yorks boundary, and they've still split Dearne North off. No seat is entirely in the borough, and five seats contain part of it, two of which contain just one ward.) Wakefield: With Hemsworth itself gone to Barnsley, the seat of that name gains Wakefield Rural and is renamed "Featherstone". Normanton, Pontefract & Castleford is unchanged, and Wakefield gains the Outwood wards in compensation for Wakefield Rural (and, unlike the Commission's proposals, does not gain Wakefield South). Kirklees: only one boundary crossing. Compared with existing seats, Batley & Spen and Dewsbury (essentially) unchanged, Colne Valley gains Penistone West, Huddersfield takes Crosland Moor & Netherton from Colne Valley rather than the Commission's suggestion of Lindley. (I think this is the first place where I think "I see what they're playing at" ...) Calderdale: as mentioned above, one seat covering the core of Halifax plus the three Upper Valley wards, one covering the rest plus Queensbury. On the map these are named "Calder North" and "Calder South"; in the other documents they're "Upper Calder" and "Lower Calder". (IMO both pairs of names are rubbish. The first one should mention Halifax, and the second one should probably be "Brighouse & Queensbury" or some such. I think the boundaries are workable, though.) Bradford: Keighley as per Commission, but renamed "Keighley & Ilkley", Shipley existing less Wharfedale and plus Thornton & Allerton, Bradford South and Bradford North seats covering most of the core of Bradford, but Idle & Thackley and poor old Tong nibbled off into Leeds seats. Leeds: - Elmet & Rothwell unchanged as per Commission - Leeds East as per Commission - "Pudsey & Morley" consisting of the two Morley wards in the south, Pudsey and Calverley & Farsley in the north, glued together with Tong. (I think this is the worst seat in the proposal.) - Leeds Central loses Burmantofts & Richmond Hill, gains Ardsley & Robin Hood. ("Central"?) - Leeds West existing plus Horsforth. - Leeds North East loses Alwoodley, gains Headingley and Weetwood and one PD at the southern end of Adel & Wharfedale. - A seat which appears on the map as "Otley", but elsewhere as "Leeds North & Idle", containing Alwoodley, the bulk of Adel & Wharfedale, Otley, Guiseley & Rawdon and the Bradford ward of Idle & Thackley. North Yorkshire: re-align to ward boundaries and move Thornton Dale to Scarborough & Whitby, otherwise all seats unchanged. N & NE Lincs: support the boundaries, but have come up with some creative names: Brigg & Grimsby North; Goole, Howdenshire & the Isle of Axholme; Scunthorpe & Trent Valley. (On the last one: you what? "Trent Valley" could refer to oodles of places between here and Stoke, some of which even have railway stations with it in their names.) East Riding: Beverley & Holderness and East Yorkshire unchanged as per Commission, see above for Goole etc., Hull East as per Commission, swap wards in Hull with Pickering & St Andrew's in Central and Bricknell and Newington in West & Haltemprice. Yes, taking Crosland Moor out of Colne Valley would help the Tories vs Labour. It might increase the chances of the Lib Dems moving back into contention in some speculative future world where they are at 20% in the polls. Meanwhile however, adding Lindley to Huddersfield might give the Tories a chance there if Sheerman retires |
|
|
|
Post by hullenedge on Mar 21, 2017 19:07:55 GMT
|
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,915
|
Post by YL on Mar 22, 2017 21:40:20 GMT
Perhaps, though they might need to give a plan for Bradford which doesn't involve crossing the boundary too... It's hard to second-guess what the Commission is going to end up doing in South and West Yorkshire. They could: - stick to no ward splits (ugh); - accept one or two and solve some of the worst problems but still leave some awkward features; - split a few more than that (six or so) and end up with a comparable amount of flexibility to areas with smaller wards. That Halifax Labour proposal would fit into the third approach; the Tory counterproposal is somewhere between the second and third approaches. I think the Commission's statements on the matter are closest to the second approach, but we'll see... |
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,915
|
Post by YL on Oct 16, 2017 23:17:33 GMT
Well, at a first glance this looks much better than the initial proposals. I wouldn't have expected them to split three Sheffield wards based on their statements at the beginning of the review but after both Labour and the Tories did it I'm not really surprised that they have, and all three splits are reasonable lines which could easily have been ward boundaries; in fact I think the split of (old) Central now is one.
There are some rubbish names which will probably be the focus of any submission I make. I don't really like Hallam including both Beauchief and Stannington, but it's so much better than the monstrosity in the initial proposals that it's probably not worth complaining too much about it.
|
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,915
|
Post by YL on Oct 16, 2017 23:29:43 GMT
It seems that Bradford Moor ward is to be the random bit of Bradford tacked onto a Leeds seat. At least there's only one, though.
Someone really should explain to the Commission where the River Dearne is.
"Halifax" as a name disappears entirely.
|
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,915
|
Post by YL on Oct 17, 2017 7:13:27 GMT
Here's my attempt at describing what's going on in SY and WY.
In Sheffield, the dreadful initial proposals have gone and something rather closer to the current map has been adopted, splitting three wards to do so. The specifics are those proposed by the city's Labour MPs. Sheffield Hallam loses Crookes proper (but keeps Crosspool/Sandygate; one merit of this proposal is that this is a very clean ward split) to Central, and gains Beauchief & Greenhill from Heeley. Sheffield Central gains Crookes from Hallam as above and also gains Hillsborough, but loses Nether Edge and the parts of the old Central ward now in Nether Edge & Sharrow, both to Heeley, which is unnecessarily renamed Sheffield South. Sheffield South East simply gains part of Burngreave ward (Burngreave proper); the rest stays in the successor to Brightside & Hillsborough, which gains the two Ecclesfield wards and is renamed Sheffield North & Ecclesfield.
In Rotherham, without the knock-on effects from the initial proposals' mess in Sheffield, Rother Valley is now unchanged, and Rotherham simply gains Wickersley from Wentworth & Dearne. Wentworth & Dearne itself also loses both Dearne wards, but is inexplicably not renamed, and instead its Barnsley component now consists of the two Hoyland wards and Wombwell.
The Doncaster seats have returned to something like the current configuration of Don Valley and Doncaster North from the east/west split in the initial proposals, but the latter still contains Dearne South ward from Barnsley, an unfortunate feature. Doncaster Central is as in the initial proposals.
The bulk of Barnsley borough (excluding Hoyland, Wombwell, Dearne South and Penistone West) is split east/west into Barnsley West & Stocksbridge and Barnsley East & Hemsworth, each containing the obvious ward outside the borough. Penistone West ward goes into Colne Valley as per the initial proposals: the SY/WY border is still crossed twice.
Kirklees is as in the initial proposals: Huddersfield gains Lindley from Colne Valley which is compensated with Penistone West, Dewsbury is essentially unchanged, the two Batley wards go into Batley & Morley with the Leeds component of the existing Morley & Outwood, and the remaining wards go into what is now called Bradford South East & Spen.
In Calderdale, the counterproposal proposed by the Tories has been adopted, with Upper Calder containing the core of Halifax plus the three Upper Calder Valley wards, and Lower Calder containing the rest of the borough plus Queensbury ward from Bradford. I still don't like these names...
Wakefield also follows the Tory counterproposal. Wakefield loses Wakefield Rural and gains the Outwood wards, the existing Hemsworth loses Hemsworth itself, gains Wakefield Rural and is renamed Featherstone, and Normanton, Pontefract & Castleford is unchanged. The crossings of the North Yorkshire boundary in the initial proposals have both gone.
Leeds is as in the initial proposals, including Batley & Morley as mentioned above. So Leeds North West gains Horsforth and Kirkstall but loses Headingley to Leeds North East, Leeds Central gains Farnley & Wortley and loses Burmantofts & Richmond Hill to Leeds East, Elmet & Rothwell is unchanged, and the remnants of Leeds West are merged with those of Pudsey, under the latter name, and also containing a Bradford ward...
... but that Bradford ward is now Bradford Moor rather than Tong. Tong and Wyke go into the above mentioned Bradford South East & Spen. Bradford South survives in name, unlike the initial proposals, but is heavily rearranged, losing Tong, Wyke and Queensbury but gaining Bowling & Barkerend and Little Horton from Bradford East (which is totally carved up) and City and Clayton & Fairweather Green from Bradford West. To the extent that Bradford West has a successor, it's Bradford North, which contains Toller, Manningham, Heaton and Thornton & Allerton, together with Eccleshill, Bolton & Undercliffe and (PITCHFORK TIME) Bingley Rural. Idle & Thackley goes into Shipley, which also gains Guiseley & Rawdon ward of Leeds as in the initial proposals, but loses Bingley Rural as above and also Wharfedale, which is simply added to Keighley, again as in the initial proposals, which surprisingly hasn't had "& Ilkley" added to its name.
|
|
|
|
Post by hullenedge on Oct 17, 2017 16:29:01 GMT
In Calderdale, the counterproposal gerrymander proposed by the Tories has been adopted FTFY And Labour never gerrymander? I don't care for these proposals but it's so deliciously Machiavellian that I take my hat off for the cheeky, clever, crafty Conservatives of Calderdale. The Boundary Commission fell for this hook, line and stinker! Perhaps it was the bus timetables (Hebden Bridge to Halifax) that clinched it? Upper Calder, Lower Calder...what a hoot. |
|
|
|
Post by hullenedge on Oct 17, 2017 16:39:40 GMT
And Labour never gerrymander? I don't care for these proposals but it's so deliciously Machiavellian that I take my hat off for the cheeky, clever, crafty Conservatives of Calderdale. The Boundary Commission fell for this hook, line and stinker! Perhaps it was the bus timetables (Hebden Bridge to Halifax) that clinched it? Upper Calder, Lower Calder...what a hoot. We attempt to all the time, but the fact that this actually got through to the second consultation reflects very poorly on the commission! The clear sensible solution in Calderdale is to add Queensbury to Halifax bar a few polling districts on the east of the ward that aren't part of Queensbury proper anyway. But I'm preaching to the converted here I'm sure. Something like that or split Luddenden Foot (the Halifax Labour proposal). Of course we're more likely to see devolution in Yorkshire than boundary changes. |
|
|
|
Post by hullenedge on Oct 17, 2017 17:50:06 GMT
|
|
jamie
Top Poster
Posts: 7,069
|
Post by jamie on Oct 17, 2017 18:19:57 GMT
@benjl Is it a gerrymander as the Tory get a safe(ish) seat or because both are winnable for them (at least by 2016 standards)?
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Oct 17, 2017 18:23:53 GMT
@benjl Is it a gerrymander as the Tory get a safe(ish) seat or because both are winnable for them (at least by 2016 standards)? It's the former. It basically takes the most Labour parts of Calder Valley (Todmorden, Hebden Bridge) out of that seat and replaces them with the most Tory ward from Halifax (plus Queensbury which is a fairly good Conservative ward from Bradford South). Shows a bit of a paucity of ambition though if that is the aim as they really ought to be going for two winnable seats in Calderdale |
|
