|
Post by AustralianSwingVoter on Jun 24, 2016 10:15:58 GMT
Berkshire West Berkshire 72026 West Reading 72080 East Reading 73899 Wokingham 72975 Bracknell Forest 72576 Maidenhead 73319 Windsor 72871 Slough 74526
|
|
|
Post by AustralianSwingVoter on Jun 24, 2016 23:46:27 GMT
Everyone rejoice, for with David Cameron's resignation we can do whatever we want with Witney!!! There are Jubilations of rejoice ringing out through the streets of Oxfordshire
|
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Inactivist
Posts: 5,551
|
Post by Foggy on Jun 25, 2016 0:02:39 GMT
Before Brexit, he had indicated that he wanted to stay on as a backbench MP beyond 2020.
|
|
Chris
Independent
Posts: 573
|
Post by Chris on Jul 4, 2016 22:52:26 GMT
Oxfordshire (DONT CROSS THE THAMES) Cherwell 78250 West Oxfordshire 78455 South Oxfordshire 77667 Oxford 74748 Abingdon 78088 Vale of White Horse 74126 (Sandford and the Wittenhams SPLIT south of thames only) OxfordshireAnnoyingly these seats will be drawn using the old ward for Cherwell, which means that the biggest housing development in Bicester (Kingsmere) is in Ambrosden and Chesterton Ward, rather than Bicester South and Ambrosden as it is under the boundaries that were introduced this year. Consequently it means that you need to include Ambrosden and Chesterton with the main Bicester wards, or you will split 500+ houses (with another 2,000 on the way) from the town. Other than that I like your plans
|
|
Dalek
Conservative
Aldershot and Glasgow Kelvingrove
Posts: 110
|
Post by Dalek on Jul 27, 2016 20:11:21 GMT
Berkshire West Berkshire 72026 West Reading 72080 East Reading 73899 Wokingham 72975 Bracknell Forest 72576 Maidenhead 73319 Windsor 72871 Slough 74526 BerkshireI looked at the possibility of returning to a compact all Reading Reading North constituency and a semi suburban cross border Reading South but the ward structure and location of Wokingham town makes that almost impossible.
|
|
Dalek
Conservative
Aldershot and Glasgow Kelvingrove
Posts: 110
|
Post by Dalek on Jul 27, 2016 20:18:35 GMT
Kent & East Sussex Dartford 76772 Gravesham 77756 Sevenoaks 71747 Tonbridge & Tunbridge 74513 (these two should be paired as they are right next to each other) Strood & Malling 76756 Chatham & Rochester 74880 Gillingham 73293 Maidstone 73443 Tenterden 72565 Swale 71235 Ashford 73372 Canterbury 75660 Herne Bay 75023 Thanet 78130 Dover 74928 Shepway 77333 Rother 76503 Hastings & Bexhill 75179 (these two should be paired as they are right next to each other) Wealden 73869 Eastbourne 74670 Lewes & Uckfield 74553 Brighton Kemptown, Peacehaven, Newhaven & Seahaven 74929 Brighton Pavillion 71527 Hove 74716 Yes KentEast SussexHastings & Bexhill would be too large without excluding wards from one or both towns. The Rye constituency could have been retained in 1983 if Bexhill-on-Sea was split but the BC seem to have wanted to keep both towns whole.
|
|
Dalek
Conservative
Aldershot and Glasgow Kelvingrove
Posts: 110
|
Post by Dalek on Jul 27, 2016 20:24:15 GMT
Hampshire Rushmoor 76054 Hart 75612 Basingstoke 73129 Deane 76704 Test Valley 76795 Winchester 75626 East Hampshire 76750 Havant 77739 Portsmouth South 75389 Portsmouth North 75207 Gosport 72357 Fareham 77933 Eastleigh 75414 Southampton Itchen 72597 Southampton Test 72391 New Forest East 72520 New Forest West 71289 HampshireI can't see the residents of Aldershot being happy with their town no longer forming the name of their constituency. The may be logic in incorporating Farnborough so it became Aldershot & Farnborough. The problem with Rushmoor is that is could easily be confused with Rushcliffe just as Wyre did with Wyre Forest and Broxbourne with Broxtowe.
|
|
Dalek
Conservative
Aldershot and Glasgow Kelvingrove
Posts: 110
|
Post by Dalek on Jul 27, 2016 20:32:52 GMT
Kent & East Sussex Dartford 76772 Gravesham 77756 Sevenoaks 71747 Tonbridge & Tunbridge 74513 (these two should be paired as they are right next to each other) Strood & Malling 76756 Chatham & Rochester 74880 Gillingham 73293 Maidstone 73443 Tenterden 72565 Swale 71235 Ashford 73372 Canterbury 75660 Herne Bay 75023 Thanet 78130 Dover 74928 Shepway 77333 Rother 76503 Hastings & Bexhill 75179 (these two should be paired as they are right next to each other) Wealden 73869 Eastbourne 74670 Lewes & Uckfield 74553 Brighton Kemptown, Peacehaven, Newhaven & Seahaven 74929 Brighton Pavillion 71527 Hove 74716 Yes KentEast SussexOne of the problems with a Margate & Ramsgate constituency is that a coastal constituency stretching from each town would be too large. Margate & Ramsgate would if Broadstairs was excluded. The boundary commission no longer accept constituencies in two parts except those separated by water. The last ever such constituency was Glasgow Pollok from 1983 to 1997 where Polloksheilds/ Shawlands was separated from the Greater Pollok estate by an intersection between Glasgow Govan and Glasgow Cathcart.
|
|
|
Post by AustralianSwingVoter on Jul 28, 2016 8:05:06 GMT
Traditional Surrey Spelthorne 77426 Runnymede 72801 Woking 75188 Surrey Heath 73291 Guildford 73226 Waverley 71265 Elmbridge 77504 Mole Valley 74858 Epsom & Ewell 77417 Reigate 73529 Tandridge 77146
|
|
|
Post by AustralianSwingVoter on Jul 28, 2016 8:44:17 GMT
Traditional Oxfordshire Banbury 74381 Witney 72580 Bicester & Thame 73814 Oxford 71294 Reading North & Henley 71102
|
|
|
Post by AustralianSwingVoter on Jul 28, 2016 22:58:48 GMT
Traditional Buckinghamshire Milton Keynes North 72494 Milton Keynes South 78095 Buckingham 77245 Aylesbury 77533 High Wycombe 78305 Chesham & Amersham 78487 Beaconsfield 74375 Slough 76668
|
|
|
Post by AustralianSwingVoter on Jul 28, 2016 23:18:22 GMT
Traditional Berkshire Abingdon 71956 Didcot & Wantage 76396 Newbury 76262 Reading West 72833 Reading East 74750 Wokingham 78149 Bracknell 74373 Windsor & Maidenhead 77325
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Jul 29, 2016 0:34:18 GMT
Traditional Berkshire Abingdon 71956 Didcot & Wantage 76396 Newbury 76262 Reading West 72833 Reading East 74750 Wokingham 78149 Bracknell 74373 Windsor & Maidenhead 77325 BerkshireSorry to go off topic but I've sent you a message. If you don't want to reply that's fine, but I just thought you might not have noticed.
|
|
Dalek
Conservative
Aldershot and Glasgow Kelvingrove
Posts: 110
|
Post by Dalek on Jul 31, 2016 9:39:44 GMT
I was looking at the impact of Brighton & Hove being twinned with West Sussex rather than East Sussex.
Combining Adur (Shoreham) with Brighton & Hove meets the quota for three constituencies.
In turn, this also means that there would be no need to split Worthing, that is exactly the quota for 1 MP.
We would obviously have Shoreham & Portslade and a Brighton Kempton. It's quote hard to keep St Peter's & North Lane Ward (with the Pavilion) out of an extended Kempton but not impossible if you include Hollingdean & Stanmer. The problem is that its so interlinked with Patcham via transport links
|
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,726
|
Post by Adrian on Jul 31, 2016 11:31:46 GMT
Worthing doesn't need to be split anyway.
|
|
Dalek
Conservative
Aldershot and Glasgow Kelvingrove
Posts: 110
|
Post by Dalek on Aug 2, 2016 12:27:55 GMT
Worthing doesn't need to be split anyway. Worthing did not need to be split in 1997. Arun (Bognar and Littlehampton) was too large and Adur (Shoreham) was too small. Previously the Shoreham constituency combined Adur (Shoreham) with East Preston/ Ferring in Arun by surrounding Worthing like a kidney shape. No real need to re-align Worthing and Shoreham as Worthing West and Worthing East & Shoreham. Why split Worthing when Shoreham and East Preston/ Ferring relate quite well?
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Aug 8, 2016 22:12:52 GMT
My proposals for Berkshire (which unites Reading as much as possible):
1. Slough. Unchanged from current boundaries. Electorate: 76,668. 2. Reading. All Reading wards except for Tilehurst, Kentwood, and Norcot. Electorate: 75,946. 3. Windsor. As the current Windsor constituency plus Cox Green ward. Electorate: 73,691. 4. Bracknell. As the current Bracknell constituency (adjusted) minus Wokingham Without ward. Electorate: 72,197. 5. Maidenhead. As the current Maidenhead constituency minus Cox Green, Twyford, and Hurst, but plus the wards of Bulmershe & Whitegates, South Lake, and Loddon (all three of which are part of the current Reading East). Electorate: 71,833. 6. Wokingham. The Wokingham wards of Wokingham Without, Finchampstead North, Evendons, Westcott, Norreys, Emmbrook, Barkham, Hillside, Hawkedon, Winnersh, Maiden Erlegh and Arborfield, plus the Maidenhead wards of Hurst and Twyford. Electorate: 72,784. 7. Theale. The Reading wards of Tilehurst, Kentwood, and Norcot, the Wokingham wards of Shinfield North/South, and Swallowfield, and the West Berkshire wards of Mortimer, Burghfield, Calcot, Theale, Sulhamstead, Bucklebury, Basildon, Pangbourne, Purley on Thames, Birch Copse, and Westwood. Electorate: 72,820. 8. Newbury. As the current Newbury constituency minus Bucklebury and Basildon wards. Electorate: 71,737.
Berkshire proposals map
Revised and finalised proposals of mine for Berkshire (the consultation opens next month)
1. Slough (76,668). Unchanged. 2. Reading North (73,027). The West Berkshire ward of Westwood (part of the Reading conurbation in reality), and all Reading wards except for Southcote, Minster, Whitley and Church. Similar to the Reading North seat of 1974-83. 3. Reading South (74,486). The West Berkshire wards of Birch Copse and Calcot, the Reading wards of Southcote, Minster, Whitley, and Church, and the Wokingham wards of Hillside, Hawkedon, Maiden Erlegh, Bulmershe & Whitegates, South Lake, and Loddon (also part of the Reading conurbation). Similar to the Reading South seat of 1974-83. 4. Newbury (72,026). Loses Aldermaston and Bucklebury wards. 5. Maidenhead (71,834). Unchanged. 6. Windsor (72,776). Adds the Bracknell Forest ward of Crowthorne. 7. Bracknell (72,985). Loses Crowthorne ward. 8. Wokingham (73,884). All West Berkshire wards not in Reading North, Reading South, or Newbury, and all Wokingham wards not included in Reading South or Bracknell. Still similar enough to the current Wokingham constituency.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2016 22:39:52 GMT
Worthing doesn't need to be split anyway. Worthing did not need to be split in 1997. Arun (Bognar and Littlehampton) was too large and Adur (Shoreham) was too small. Previously the Shoreham constituency combined Adur (Shoreham) with East Preston/ Ferring in Arun by surrounding Worthing like a kidney shape. No real need to re-align Worthing and Shoreham as Worthing West and Worthing East & Shoreham. Why split Worthing when Shoreham and East Preston/ Ferring relate quite well? Hmm, there really isn't much community of interest between Shoreham (constituency - which also included Lancing and Southwick) and East Preston/Ferring. In some ways the latter fit well with Goring and coastal West Worthing, while Lancing has a lot in common with the eastern Worthing wards of Broadwater and Selden. But splitting Worthing just to address number problems in adjacent areas was not a good idea. Shoreham (constituency) should have taken in some southern wards of Horsham district, such as Steyning and Bramber.
|
|
|
Post by John Chanin on Aug 9, 2016 10:47:33 GMT
Worthing did not need to be split in 1997. Arun (Bognar and Littlehampton) was too large and Adur (Shoreham) was too small. Previously the Shoreham constituency combined Adur (Shoreham) with East Preston/ Ferring in Arun by surrounding Worthing like a kidney shape. No real need to re-align Worthing and Shoreham as Worthing West and Worthing East & Shoreham. Why split Worthing when Shoreham and East Preston/ Ferring relate quite well? Hmm, there really isn't much community of interest between Shoreham (constituency - which also included Lancing and Southwick) and East Preston/Ferring. In some ways the latter fit well with Goring and coastal West Worthing, while Lancing has a lot in common with the eastern Worthing wards of Broadwater and Selden. But splitting Worthing just to address number problems in adjacent areas was not a good idea. Shoreham (constituency) should have taken in some southern wards of Horsham district, such as Steyning and Bramber. Agreed, and this is what I have done with my draft proposals for West Sussex. However the "minimal change" clause has been uppermost in the Boundary Commission's mind in recent reviews, and I don't expect this to change., since you only need to shuffle 3 wards from the existing seats to get all the seats within quota.
|
|
|
Post by AustralianSwingVoter on Aug 14, 2016 12:47:20 GMT
Surrey without areas (Banstead, Caterham & Warlingham, Epsom & Ewell, Esher, Staines, Sunbury and Walton & Weybridge) recommended to go into Greater London by the Report of the Royal Commission on Local Government in Greater London 6.97 Kent without areas (Dartford) considered but declined for inclusion in Greater London 15.81 East Sussex (Unchanged) 7.56 NEW KENT + EAST SUSSEX 23.37 (76119)
|
|