Chris
Independent
Posts: 573
|
Post by Chris on Sept 18, 2016 15:07:57 GMT
... or possibly if you just look at an out of date map. But, yes, the Commission's proposed Henley & Thame and its border with Banbury & Bicester are not good. Maybe now Cameron has resigned the BC will be more amenable to splitting up Witney... (Which as others posted above, gives you a number of much better options by extending Banbury South) These were my two efforts: I favour option one (though it still excludes one of the Bicester growth sites) as it keeps West Oxfordshire together as an authority, I always prefer to keep authorities within a single constituency if possible, and West Oxfordshire fits within quota all on its own. However given one of the latest unitary proposals for Oxfordshire would pair it with Cherwell, I don't see that as much of an issue as it once was.
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Sept 18, 2016 18:05:23 GMT
These new Winchester and Test Valley seats are hideous, especially the latter. Andover, Anna Valley, Amport, Twyford, Compton, Chandler's Ford and Hiltingbury all in one seat is ridiculous.
|
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,726
|
Post by Adrian on Sept 18, 2016 21:09:52 GMT
Maybe now Cameron has resigned the BC will be more amenable to splitting up Witney... (Which as others posted above, gives you a number of much better options by extending Banbury South) These were my two efforts: I favour option one (though it still excludes one of the Bicester growth sites) as it keeps West Oxfordshire together as an authority, I always prefer to keep authorities within a single constituency if possible, and West Oxfordshire fits within quota all on its own. However given one of the latest unitary proposals for Oxfordshire would pair it with Cherwell, I don't see that as much of an issue as it once was. I had Banbury-Kidlington in one of my plans, but I don't think the BCE will favour it over Banbury-Bicester unless there's a huge campaign against the latter. Both your plans split the Vale of White Horse, which I've been told is an unpopular suggestion in those parts. I think the BCE's plan for Oxon is relatively uncontroversial, except perhaps for having a 4-borough seat.
|
|
Chris
Independent
Posts: 573
|
Post by Chris on Sept 18, 2016 21:18:12 GMT
These were my two efforts: I favour option one (though it still excludes one of the Bicester growth sites) as it keeps West Oxfordshire together as an authority, I always prefer to keep authorities within a single constituency if possible, and West Oxfordshire fits within quota all on its own. However given one of the latest unitary proposals for Oxfordshire would pair it with Cherwell, I don't see that as much of an issue as it once was. I had Banbury-Kidlington in one of my plans, but I don't think the BCE will favour it over Banbury-Bicester unless there's a huge campaign against the latter. Both your plans split the Vale of White Horse, which I've been told is an unpopular suggestion in those parts. I think the BCE's plan for Oxon is relatively uncontroversial, except perhaps for having a 4-borough seat. This is my big gripe with the Bicester boundary - they've sliced 1500 houses off the town! I know splitting the vale is controversial, but I'd prioritise keeping whole towns together!
|
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,726
|
Post by Adrian on Sept 18, 2016 22:39:27 GMT
I had Banbury-Kidlington in one of my plans, but I don't think the BCE will favour it over Banbury-Bicester unless there's a huge campaign against the latter. Both your plans split the Vale of White Horse, which I've been told is an unpopular suggestion in those parts. I think the BCE's plan for Oxon is relatively uncontroversial, except perhaps for having a 4-borough seat. This is my big gripe with the Bicester boundary - they've sliced 1500 houses off the town! I know splitting the vale is controversial, but I'd prioritise keeping whole towns together! dgmw, I think the best solution for Bicester would be a Bicester, Kidlington & Thame seat. It's just that the Commission would prefer to change things as little as possible, even if it means some Bicester folk are in the wrong seat. What would you think of a Witney & North Oxford seat? (see my third plan here ukelect.wordpress.com/2016/06/09/2018-review-oxfordshire/ )
|
|
Chris
Independent
Posts: 573
|
Post by Chris on Sept 18, 2016 22:46:58 GMT
This is my big gripe with the Bicester boundary - they've sliced 1500 houses off the town! I know splitting the vale is controversial, but I'd prioritise keeping whole towns together! dgmw, I think the best solution for Bicester would be a Bicester, Kidlington & Thame seat. It's just that the Commission would prefer to change things as little as possible, even if it means some Bicester folk are in the wrong seat. What would you think of a Henley & North Oxford seat? (see my third plan here ukelect.wordpress.com/2016/06/09/2018-review-oxfordshire/ ) I guess you meant Witney and Oxford North? I quite like that. The orphaned wards from Oxford don't really fit well with anything aside from Kidlington, and I've yet to find a way of making that work. The BCEs insistence on least disturbance cumulatively creates crappy seats and one day they're going to have to recognise that. It's silly that seats like Meon Valley and Central Devon get any form of protection when they are just the joining together of scraps left over from drawing logical seats!
|
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Long may it rain
Posts: 5,507
|
Post by Foggy on Sept 19, 2016 1:18:29 GMT
These new Winchester and Test Valley seats are hideous, especially the latter. Andover, Anna Valley, Amport, Twyford, Compton, Chandler's Ford and Hiltingbury all in one seat is ridiculous. Andover and Romsey in the same local authority is utter madness, and this should've been obvious even in the early 1970s.
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Sept 19, 2016 10:13:16 GMT
These new Winchester and Test Valley seats are hideous, especially the latter. Andover, Anna Valley, Amport, Twyford, Compton, Chandler's Ford and Hiltingbury all in one seat is ridiculous. Andover and Romsey in the same local authority is utter madness, and this should've been obvious even in the early 1970s. Then there's the madness in and around Chandlers Ford.
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Sept 19, 2016 11:11:50 GMT
Andover and Romsey in the same local authority is utter madness, and this should've been obvious even in the early 1970s. Then there's the madness in and around Chandlers Ford. A phrase you don't hear often enough.
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Sept 19, 2016 11:42:28 GMT
Then there's the madness in and around Chandlers Ford. A phrase you don't hear often enough. Madness at Chandlers Ford is my favourite John Wayne film.
|
|
|
Post by lennon on Sept 20, 2016 11:53:28 GMT
OK - So I was looking at Berkshire - and whilst I can't really see anything particularly objectionable there - I do dislike the way that they have treated Slough by putting a random mid-Slough ward in Windsor, and so tried to find a solution. It's not brilliant (it treats the Surrey-Berkshire border as porous) - but does have some advantages to my mind.
Slough - takes back Chalvey ward and is thus unchanged from the current constituency. Spelthorne - Put the Colnbrook and Poyle ward of Slough in with Spelthorne, in exchange for the Chertsey ward and thus avoid crossing the Thames / splitting Chertsey. Runneymede and Weybridge - as the BCE, but add back the Chertsey ward.
So far so good / uncontroversial but Windsor is now some way short of quota. Instead of breaking into Maidenhead or splitting Bracknell you go into Surrey...
Windsor, Ascot and Surrey Heath - As the BCE's Windsor, less the 2 Slough wards described above, less the 2 Warfield wards of Bracknell, but plus the 5 Surrey Heath wards North-East of the Heath itself (which provides a very natural boundary with few crossings across it) Blackwater Valley (With reference to the previous Surrey Heath) - Having lost the 5 Surrey Heath wards, this seat extends along the Blackwater into Berkshire to take the 4 Sandhurst wards. Bracknell Having lost the 4 Sandhurst wards - this seat takes the 2 Warfield wards in the BCE's Windsor, but which are clearly Bracknell focused if not actually suburbs thereof.
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Sept 20, 2016 12:25:43 GMT
Not another Blackwater horror please
|
|
|
Post by Antiochian on Sept 20, 2016 12:48:12 GMT
These new Winchester and Test Valley seats are hideous, especially the latter. Andover, Anna Valley, Amport, Twyford, Compton, Chandler's Ford and Hiltingbury all in one seat is ridiculous. Andover and Romsey in the same local authority is utter madness, and this should've been obvious even in the early 1970s. Test Valley was essentially the odds and sods borough. Most of us here in Andover have more affinity for (ugh) Basingstoke because of the rail/road vectors that run between us. The new configuration of NW Hants consolidates this trend, though Andover has lost its "villages" to its immediate south that likewise are not Romsey-oriented. I was looking at the new borders and while LibDems are happier to be losing Chandlers Ford from Winchester and picking up LibDem areas of strength in the far south of the borough the new arrangements are far from ideal, logistically speaking. The hinterland of Winchester (including its largest "village Twyford/Colden Common) are lost to the new Test Valley seat. Stockbridge looks to Winchester (or Salisbury) not south to Romsey. Chandlers Ford (and Valley Park) are suburbs of Eastleigh and yet the farflung seaside part of Eastleigh remains in the unchanged seat when really some consolidation could have been merited.
|
|
|
Post by lennon on Sept 20, 2016 12:48:14 GMT
Not another Blackwater horror please OK, although genuine question - what's the issue with it (other than crossing the Surrey-Berkshire border)? I've not crossed the river itself into Hampshire, there is clear separation between Sandhurst/Owlsmoor and Crowthorne, it has a GU Postcode rather than a RG Postcode and I would be surprised if you told me that it looks to Bracknell rather than Camberley with which it is virtually linked?
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Sept 20, 2016 13:03:41 GMT
My issue is merely crossing the Berkshire/Surrey boundary (which is not a trivial matter to me at all) - you are right that Sandhurst's links to Camberley are excellent and stronger than they are to Bracknell (I used to spend quite a lot of time in this area). I was making a slightly tongue in cheek reference to the Blackwater situation in the NI plans
|
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Long may it rain
Posts: 5,507
|
Post by Foggy on Sept 20, 2016 17:09:30 GMT
Andover and Romsey in the same local authority is utter madness, and this should've been obvious even in the early 1970s. Test Valley was essentially the odds and sods borough. Most of us here in Andover have more affinity for (ugh) Basingstoke because of the rail/road vectors that run between us. The new configuration of NW Hants consolidates this trend, though Andover has lost its "villages" to its immediate south that likewise are not Romsey-oriented. I can see why counties sometimes end up with 'odds and sods' constituencies (nasty as they are), even under the old rules. However, there is absolutely no excuse for any district or borough to be made up just of the bits that didn't seem to fit anywhere else.
|
|
|
Post by Antiochian on Sept 20, 2016 19:01:41 GMT
Test Valley was essentially the odds and sods borough. Most of us here in Andover have more affinity for (ugh) Basingstoke because of the rail/road vectors that run between us. The new configuration of NW Hants consolidates this trend, though Andover has lost its "villages" to its immediate south that likewise are not Romsey-oriented. I can see why counties sometimes end up with 'odds and sods' constituencies (nasty as they are), even under the old rules. However, there is absolutely no excuse for any district or borough to be made up just of the bits that didn't seem to fit anywhere else. It was the 70s.... not a good period for anything in reality... Stockbridge should have been bolted onto Winchester and some of the southern parts are suburbs of Eastleigh and Southampton.
|
|
Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 11,516
|
Post by Khunanup on Sept 20, 2016 20:01:06 GMT
Test Valley was essentially the odds and sods borough. Most of us here in Andover have more affinity for (ugh) Basingstoke because of the rail/road vectors that run between us. The new configuration of NW Hants consolidates this trend, though Andover has lost its "villages" to its immediate south that likewise are not Romsey-oriented. I can see why counties sometimes end up with 'odds and sods' constituencies (nasty as they are), even under the old rules. However, there is absolutely no excuse for any district or borough to be made up just of the bits that didn't seem to fit anywhere else. Winchester is the same too. Bolting Droxford Rural District onto Winchester and so bringing its boundary down to Portsdown Hill was just crazy (why they didn't split that rural district between Fareham, Portsmouth and East Hants I'll never know). The links between Winchester and the south of its district are negligible to say the least. That's the reason the district boundary should be completely ignored when creating coherent seats in east central/south Hants.
|
|
|
Post by lennon on Sept 21, 2016 6:46:10 GMT
I can see why counties sometimes end up with 'odds and sods' constituencies (nasty as they are), even under the old rules. However, there is absolutely no excuse for any district or borough to be made up just of the bits that didn't seem to fit anywhere else. Winchester is the same too. Bolting Droxford Rural District onto Winchester and so bringing its boundary down to Portsdown Hill was just crazy (why they didn't split that rural district between Fareham, Portsmouth and East Hants I'll never know). The links between Winchester and the south of its district are negligible to say the least. That's the reason the district boundary should be completely ignored when creating coherent seats in east central/south Hants. Well if we're playing "fantasy local govt reorganisation" can we move Portchester from Fareham to Portsmouth please? Also tempted to move East Hants south of Butser (Cowplain, Horndean etc) to Havant - it all flows into Waterlooville anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Sept 21, 2016 14:55:10 GMT
Coastal Eastleigh, Gosport, bottom of Winchester's Lebensraum and Fareham could make a good, coherent authority. Solent, maybe, as the name?
|
|