2018 Review - South East England

[iain]

Oxford East will have to snaffle North ward, which leaves Oxford West just under quota. The most obvious ward to add appears to be Marcham from VoWH, or else a South Oxfordshire ward.

[lennon]

Feb 27, 2016 10:19:29 GMT iain said:

Oxford East will have to snaffle North ward, which leaves Oxford West just under quota. The most obvious ward to add appears to be Marcham from VoWH, or else a South Oxfordshire ward.

The difficulty in Oxfordshire as I see it is Banbury. Assuming that you don't want to touch Witney (currently *just* in quota and coterminous with West Oxfordshire) then I don't see any alternative to splitting one of the Bicester wards off (or taking the rural surrounding wards and having Bicester as a somewhat daft looking peninsula). Clearly "Banbury and Bicester North" and "Henley and Bicester South" are both pretty rubbish.

[islington]

Khunanup earlier suggested pairing Kent with Surrey.

But if I were going to pair Surrey with anywhere, it would be Berkshire – not because there’s any need, in quota terms, but because it would allow me to add Slough’s rather isolated Colnbrook and Poyle ward to Spelthorne, thus bringing the latter up to quota without a horrible Thames crossing in the Walton or Egham area. This would also allow the existing Slough constituency to be retained as is.

[Pete Whitehead]

Buckinghamshire

The main issue here is that Milton Keynes is too big for two seats and needs to lose a couple of wards with ripple effects elsewhere. The size of the new wards makes it difficult to draw two seats within quota - I only found one workable option.




Starting from the South where the changes are least

Wycombe: gains Stokenchurch ward from Aylesbury - 75,849
Beaconsfield: gains Penn & Coleshill from Chesham & Amersham - 77,434
Chesham & Amersham: gains Greater Hughenden and Wendover from Aylesbury - 77,884 (not ideal in that it contains two orphan wards one each from Wycombe and Aylesbury Vale district but I played around for ages with various options around here and kept getting just over quota, the difficulty being that once Milton Keynes is assigned two seats we are dealing with an average electorate for the other five seats quite close to the upper limit)
Aylesbury: less those wards mentioned above plus HAddenham & Stone, Icknield, Lacey Green and the Risboroughs form Buckingham - 77,533
Buckingham (& Bletchley ? ): Loses everything from Haddenham & Stone southwards. Gains the Bletchley East and Bletchley Park wards from Milton Keynes SOuth - 77,245
Milton Keynes NE: Milton Keynes wards of: Broughton; Campbell Park & Old Woughton; Central Milton Keynes; Danesborough & Walton; Monkston; Newport Pagnell North & Hanslope; Newport Pagnell South; Olney; Woughton & Fishermead. 78,294
MIlton Keynes SW: Milton Keynes wards of: Bletchley West; Bradwell; Loughton & Shenley; Shenley Brook End; Stantonbury; Stony Stratford; Tattenhoe; Wolverton. 72,295

[Pete Whitehead]

Berkshire



Slough is unchanged at 76,668
Windsor gains Bray from Maidenhead for 74,133
Bracknell loses Finchampstead South for 72,576
Maidenhead loses Bray and Hurst, gains Loddon - 71,134
Wokingham loses Hawkedon, Hillside and Maiden Earliegh (Early in other words) gains FInchampstead South, Hurst, Theale, Aldermaston and Bucklebury (Its becoming debatable whetehr Wokingham is the best name for this seat anymore) - 73,025
Newbury loses Aldermaston adn Bucklebury for 72,026
Reading East gains the three Early wards, loses Katesgrove - 75,315
Reading West gains Katesgrove loses Theale - 72,799

Guess that would kill Labour chances in Reading East but help them a bit in West

[Pete Whitehead]

Thinking about the Wokingham situation, an alternative configuration would return the five Wokingham borough wards I have in Reading East to form a compact seat entirely to the East of Reading. Then the rest of the seat I have from Shinfield/Swallowfield and westwards to merge with the West Berkshire section of Reading West plus three wards from the edge of Reading itself (say Kentwood, Tilehurst and Whitley) leaving most of Reading in a single seat

[Pete Whitehead]

Talking of which you could go for a single Oxford seat if you stripped out the areas added fairly recently (Old Marston, Littlemore, Risinghurst etc). God knows what you'd do with the surrounding areas though. I'd forgotten how much this shit sends you insane

[lennon]

Oxfordshire is messy on the assumption that you don't go outside it, and that you keep Witney / West Oxfordshire unchanged.

I think that I've got a plausible (although not minimum change) version along the following lines,
although this is rough.

Banbury Essentially unchanged, just loses the rural wards around Bicester, but keeps Bicester itself (not much choice about this that I can see.

Witney Unchanged

Henley and Didcot Basically the Southern half of the Henley seat, with the addition of all the South Oxfordshire wards currently in Wantage (Didcot and Wallingford basically)

Wantage and Abingdon In return for losing Didcot, Wantage takes Abingdon off Oxford West and Ab. I think that the numbers are a bit tight, so it might need to give a rural Vale of White Horse ward back again in return, but I've not done detailed numbers.

Oxford Oxford East plus a couple of wards from Ox West and Ab (I initially had it taking North and St Margarets, but you could play around with this as required)

Thame and Oxford Surrounds What's leftover. Basically it consists of Thame and the north half of the current Henley seat, the rural wards around Bicester, Kidlington, the rest of Vale of the White Horse that's not in Wantage and whichever of the Oxford wards you decide not to put in Oxford. It's a bit of a mess of a seat, completely surrounds Oxford and contains bits from 4 different Districts - but it actually has good internal communications (A44 / M40), is at least vaguely coherent, and makes all the other seats work.

The only alternatives that I've come up with involve either splitting Bicester and/or Abingdon and/or destroying Witney - none of which are particularly appealing.

[Pete Whitehead]

Yeah I was initially quite pleased to see that Witney was a good size as it is and close to the upper limit which gives us more leaway in other seats but then as soon as I looked at Banbury I relaised that this was actually a hindrance. It might be better to remove Bicester altogether and compensate with bits of West Oxon which in turn can be compensated with (say) Kidlington. I gave up trying to work anything out for now when I relaised Vale of White Horse had had ward boundary changes and I can't bear waiting for that uselss election maps site

[Arthur Figgis]

Feb 29, 2016 16:01:36 GMT lennon said:

Oxfordshire is messy on the assumption that you don't go outside it, and that you keep Witney / West Oxfordshire unchanged.

I think that I've got a plausible (although not minimum change) version along the following lines,
although this is rough.

Banbury Essentially unchanged, just loses the rural wards around Bicester, but keeps Bicester itself (not much choice about this that I can see.

Witney Unchanged

Henley and Didcot Basically the Southern half of the Henley seat, with the addition of all the South Oxfordshire wards currently in Wantage (Didcot and Wallingford basically)

Wantage and Abingdon In return for losing Didcot, Wantage takes Abingdon off Oxford West and Ab. I think that the numbers are a bit tight, so it might need to give a rural Vale of White Horse ward back again in return, but I've not done detailed numbers.

Oxford Oxford East plus a couple of wards from Ox West and Ab (I initially had it taking North and St Margarets, but you could play around with this as required)

Thame and Oxford Surrounds What's leftover. Basically it consists of Thame and the north half of the current Henley seat, the rural wards around Bicester, Kidlington, the rest of Vale of the White Horse that's not in Wantage and whichever of the Oxford wards you decide not to put in Oxford. It's a bit of a mess of a seat, completely surrounds Oxford and contains bits from 4 different Districts - but it actually has good internal communications (A44 / M40), is at least vaguely coherent, and makes all the other seats work.

The only alternatives that I've come up with involve either splitting Bicester and/or Abingdon and/or destroying Witney - none of which are particularly appealing.

Give it a few years and Bicester will be big enough to have three constituencies to itself anyway.

[iain]

Feb 29, 2016 16:20:03 GMT Pete Whitehead said:

Yeah I was initially quite pleased to see that Witney was a good size as it is and close to the upper limit which gives us more leaway in other seats but then as soon as I looked at Banbury I relaised that this was actually a hindrance. It might be better to remove Bicester altogether and compensate with bits of West Oxon which in turn can be compensated with (say) Kidlington. I gave up trying to work anything out for now when I relaised Vale of White Horse had had ward boundary changes and I can't bear waiting for that uselss election maps site

Just use the maps from the LGBCE boundary review pages.

[greenhert]

Here are some of my proposed constituencies for Kent, much of which will be heavily affected by the boundary changes in terms of the South East:

Rochester & Strood: Unchanged from existing boundaries. Electorate: 75,317.

Gillingham & Chatham: The Chatham wards of Chatham & Aylesford plus all of Gillingham except the wards of Rainham North/Central/South and Twydall. Electorate: 71,724.

Rainham & Maidstone Outer: The four Rainham wards mentioned above plus the Maidstone wards of Detling & Thurnham, Staplehurst, North Downs, Harrietsham and Lenham, Headcorn, Leeds, Bearsted, Marden & Yatling, and Boxley. Electorate: 71,831.

Maidstone Central: The rest of the borough of Maidstone, centred on the eponymous town itself. Electorate: 71,890.

Sittingbourne and Sheppey: Unchanged from present boundaries. Electorate: 75,638.

Thanet: All of Thanet except Birchington North/South, Thanet Villages, and Westgate-on-sea. Electorate: 78,130.

Folkestone & Hythe: Now entirely coterminous with the Shepway district. Electorate: 77,333.

Dover and Deal: Unchanged from current boundaries. Electorate: 72,940.

North Kent: The wards comprising the towns of Whitstable and Herne Bay, plus the remaining wards of Dover not in the Dover & Deal constituency and Birchington North/South, Thanet Villages & Westgate-on-sea from the Thanet District. Electorate: Approx. 73,000 (boundary changes in Canterbury have occurred since 2010).

Canterbury & Faversham: I wanted to avoid this pairing but Canterbury's heavy electorate drop (students failing to register under IER, presumably) plus electoral situations of nearby seats make it unavoidable in most situations. The rest of the Canterbury District (including the city itself) plus the Swale wards comprising Faversham and the surrounding villages. Electorate: Approx 73.000.

Tunbridge Wells: Now entirely coterminous with the Royal Borough of Tunbridge Wells. Electorate: 76,380.

Dartford: Unchanged from current boundaries (since Sevenoaks is too large for one seat). Electorate: 76,911.

Gravesend: Since this now includes wards outside Gravesham, it should revert to its pre-1983 name and take in Downs and Mereworth ward from Tonbridge. Electorate: 73,782.

One set of Western Sevenoaks wards will need to form a Kent-Surrey cross-county constituency in practice. Cross-county constituencies which are not necessary or practicable are a key reason why the government should have listened to those recommendations and allowed a 10% deviation from the UK electoral quota instead of just 5%.

[Foggy]

Your plans for Kent would rather leave Sussex in the lurch, what with it being entitled to about 15 and a half seats. From initial fiddling with wards, I'm afraid I can't see beyond some kind of 'Winchelsea and Dungeness' solution.

[Chris]

One issue in Oxfordshire is that the Cherwell data set is using the current boundaries and not those coming into effect in May. The December register was supposed to be using the new boundaries, but that was evidently not the case.

Biggest issue is that Kingsmere (a massive expansion of Bicester) is currently part of Ambrosden and Chesterton ward, and could now face being hived off into another constituency, separate from the rest of the town.

[Arthur Figgis]

Mar 1, 2016 9:52:20 GMT Chris said:

One issue in Oxfordshire is that the Cherwell data set is using the current boundaries and not those coming into effect in May. The December register was supposed to be using the new boundaries, but that was evidently not the case.

Biggest issue is that Kingsmere (a massive expansion of Bicester) is currently part of Ambrosden and Chesterton ward, and could now face being hived off into another constituency, separate from the rest of the town.

I was wondering about that. Doesn't the existing boundary go straight down the middle of Kingsmere, with about a third in Bicester Town and the rest in Ambrosden and Chesterton?

Slight declaration of interest here, as a Kingsmere resident currently in Ambrosden and Chesterton. Shockingly, after 7 months living here I still haven't memorised every ward boundary in the area.

[Chris]

Mar 1, 2016 10:00:16 GMT Arthur Figgis said:

Mar 1, 2016 9:52:20 GMT Chris said:

One issue in Oxfordshire is that the Cherwell data set is using the current boundaries and not those coming into effect in May. The December register was supposed to be using the new boundaries, but that was evidently not the case.

Biggest issue is that Kingsmere (a massive expansion of Bicester) is currently part of Ambrosden and Chesterton ward, and could now face being hived off into another constituency, separate from the rest of the town.

I was wondering about that. Doesn't the existing boundary go straight down the middle of Kingsmere, with about a third in Bicester Town and the rest in Ambrosden and Chesterton?

Slight declaration of interest here, as a Kingsmere resident currently in Ambrosden and Chesterton. Shockingly, after 7 months living here I still haven't memorised every ward boundary in the area.

The boundary is an almighty mess at present - Current Boundary

You're correct that the estate is also partially in Bicester Town - quite a small proportion if I recall it correctly. We could face a scenario where it's not just odds and evens in different constituencies, but as mishmash of both. The boundary line was of course drawn when the land was being farmed!

If you look at the constituency in isolation, assuming that West Oxfordshire won't be amended, then yoou have a couple of permutations that allow you to lose the 6,891 - 14,367 electors necessary to fit in the limits. I'm increasingly thinking that the Bicester and Thame approach may be the most sensible - the Cherwell boundary changes would have made it impossible without invading a huge chunk of West Oxfordshire.

I've quickly sketched out 6 constituencies; Bicester and Thame, Cherwell, Oxford, Oxford North and Abingdon, Henley and Wantage, and West Oxfordshire

Unfortunately plan builder is of no help as most districts have amended their boundaries, so I'd have to fire up QGIS to make a map. My geographical knowledge of the south of the county isn't fantastic, so would appreciate anyone pointing out any obvious clangers. I've managed to make it so only two LAs are used for each constituency, and three constituencies come from only a single LA. My primary driver was to come up with a solution that didn't rip the increasingly large town of Bicester in half. Oxford North and Abingdon is the ugly constituency that I'd like to find a way to amend.


BICESTER AND THAME - 78,172
Cherwell Wards
Ambrosden and Chesterton - 3,005
Bicester East - 4,307
Bicester North - 4,601
Bicester South - 3,630
Bicester Town - 3,784
Bicester West - 5,467
Launton - 2,256
Otmoor - 1,967

South Oxfordshire Wards
Benson & Crowmarsh - 5,716
Berinsfield - 2,846
Chalgrove - 2,643
Chinnor - 6,118
Forest Hill & Holton - 2,688
Garsington & Horspath - 2,752
Haseley Brook - 3,062
Sandford & the Wittenhams - 2,880
Thame - 8,847
Wallingford - 5,625
Watlington - 2,955
Wheatley - 3,023

CHERWELL - 74,826
Cherwell Wards
Adderbury - 2,317
Banbury Calthorpe - 3,974
Banbury Easington - 6,076
Banbury Grimsbury and Castle - 6,821
Banbury Hardwick - 5,911
Banbury Neithrop - 3,869
Banbury Ruscote - 5,606
Bloxham and Bodicote - 5,250
Caversfield - 2,087
Cropredy - 2,268
Deddington - 2,163
Fringford - 1,887
Hook Norton - 2,063
Kidlington North - 3,973
Kidlington South - 6,112
Kirtlington - 2,346
Sibford - 2,161
The Astons and Heyfords - 3,756
Wroxton - 2,139
Yarnton, Gosford and Water Eaton - 4,047

HENLEY AND WANTAGE - 75,800
South Oxfordshhire Wards
Cholsey - 6,597
Didcot North East - 6,805
Didcot South - 7,104
Didcot West - 4,663
Goring - 2,991
Henley-on-Thames - 8,318
Kidmore End & Whitchurch - 2,789
Sonning Common - 5,214
Woodcote & Rotherfield - 6,244

Vale of White Horse Wards
Blewbury & Harwell - 4,583
Grove North - 3,998
Hendreds - 2,151
Ridgeway - 2,355
Sutton Courtenay - 2,086
Wantage & Grove Brook - 5,138
Wantage Charlton - 4,764

OXFORD - 77,269
Oxford Wards
Barton and Sandhills - 4,614
Blackbird Leys - 3,790
Carfax - 1,926
Churchill - 3,715
Cowley - 3,937
Cowley Marsh - 3,982
Headington - 3,843
Headington Hill and Northway - 3,109
Hinksey Park - 3,717
Holywell - 1,573
Iffley Fields - 3,645
Jericho and Osney - 4,040
Littlemore - 4,305
Lye Valley - 4,327
Marston - 4,232
North - 2,936
Northfield Brook - 4,081
Quarry and Risinghurst - 4,418
Rose Hill and Iffley - 4,235
St Clement's - 3,767
St Mary's - 3,077

OXFORD NORTH AND ABINGDON - 76,812
Oxford Wards
St Margaret's - 2,965
Summertown - 4,197
Wolvercote - 4,281

Vale of the White Horse Wards
Abingdon Abbey Northcourt - 4,333
Abingdon Caldecott - 5,083
Abingdon Dunmore - 4,545
Abingdon Fitzharris - 4,616
Abingdon Peachcroft - 5,178
Botley & Sunningwell - 4,240
Cumnor - 4,645
Drayton - 2,274
Faringdon - 5,362
Kennington & Radley - 5,081
Kingston Bagpuize - 2,555
Marcham - 2,158
Stanford - 2,654
Steventon & the Hanneys - 2,444
Thames - 2,534
Watchfield & Shrivenham - 5,087
Wootton - 2,580

WEST OXFORDSHIRE - 78,455
West Oxfordshire Wards
Alvescot and Filkins - 1,367
Ascott and Shipton - 1,713
Bampton and Clanfield - 2,877
Brize Norton and Shilton - 1,549
Burford - 1,467
Carterton North East - 3,806
Carterton North West - 3,260
Carterton South - 3,295
Chadlington and Churchill - 1,533
Charlbury and Finstock - 2,955
Chipping Norton - 4,640
Ducklington - 1,667
Eynsham and Cassington - 4,706
Freeland and Hanborough - 3,378
Hailey, Minster Lovell and Leafield - 3,107
Kingham, Rollright and Enstone - 3,115
Milton-under-Wychwood - 1,645
North Leigh - 1,506
Standlake, Aston and Stanton Harcourt - 3,280
Stonesfield and Tackley - 3,111
The Bartons - 1,556
Witney Central - 3,654
Witney East - 5,541
Witney North - 3,114
Witney South - 4,522
Witney West - 2,994
Woodstock and Bladon - 3,097

[East Anglian Lefty]

It strikes me that it'd be substantially simpler just to split West Oxfordshire. There's no reason why Chipping Norton and Witney have to end up in the same seat, the northern boundary of the district doesn't follow any readily apparent natural feature and in the south the Thames is hardly large enough to form a major barrier to communication. Also, Cameron is retiring in 2020, so you don't have to worry about whether the boundaries will upset him.

So I'd suggest that Banbury loses Bicester and environs, but gains West Oxfordshire as far south as Woodstock and Wychwood; Bicester & Thame then gains Kidlington but stops just to the south of the M40;, Henley gains Didcot, with the Vale/South Oxfordshire boundary as its western extent; West Oxfordshire can gains the west of the Vale; Wantage goes with Abingdon and then you just have to decide which Oxford wards to leave out of the Oxford seat.

As far as I can see, there are two main options on that. Either you put Wolvercote, Summertown and St. Margarets with it, poor connections be damned, or you put Hinksey Park and Jericho with it, and place Wolvercote in the Bicester & Thame seat, because plenty of it is north of the A40 anyway.

[greenchristian]

Mar 1, 2016 17:04:11 GMT East Anglian Lefty said:

It strikes me that it'd be substantially simpler just to split West Oxfordshire. There's no reason why Chipping Norton and Witney have to end up in the same seat, the northern boundary of the district doesn't follow any readily apparent natural feature and in the south the Thames is hardly large enough to form a major barrier to communication. Also, Cameron is retiring in 2020, so you don't have to worry about whether the boundaries will upset him.

Though having his seat dismembered during this review would have a certain amusement value.

[YL]

Feb 29, 2016 16:01:36 GMT lennon said:

Oxfordshire is messy on the assumption that you don't go outside it, and that you keep Witney / West Oxfordshire unchanged.

I think that I've got a plausible (although not minimum change) version along the following lines,
although this is rough.

Banbury Essentially unchanged, just loses the rural wards around Bicester, but keeps Bicester itself (not much choice about this that I can see.

Witney Unchanged

Henley and Didcot Basically the Southern half of the Henley seat, with the addition of all the South Oxfordshire wards currently in Wantage (Didcot and Wallingford basically)

Wantage and Abingdon In return for losing Didcot, Wantage takes Abingdon off Oxford West and Ab. I think that the numbers are a bit tight, so it might need to give a rural Vale of White Horse ward back again in return, but I've not done detailed numbers.

Oxford Oxford East plus a couple of wards from Ox West and Ab (I initially had it taking North and St Margarets, but you could play around with this as required)

Thame and Oxford Surrounds What's leftover. Basically it consists of Thame and the north half of the current Henley seat, the rural wards around Bicester, Kidlington, the rest of Vale of the White Horse that's not in Wantage and whichever of the Oxford wards you decide not to put in Oxford. It's a bit of a mess of a seat, completely surrounds Oxford and contains bits from 4 different Districts - but it actually has good internal communications (A44 / M40), is at least vaguely coherent, and makes all the other seats work.

Something like this? I couldn't quite get the Thame seat as an Oxford doughnut as suggested, basically because the shape of Haseley Brook ward forces the Thame seat to take it and Chinnor as well as Thame itself, and having lost Chinnor Henley & Didcot needed to come north to the southern edge of Oxford to make up.



It's a tight fit electorally. The numbers I got were
Banbury 78,250
Witney 78,395
Abingdon & Wantage 73,898
Henley & Didcot 76,142
Oxford 76,194
Thame & Port Meadow 78,395

[Chris]

If we decide that the Boundary Commission is happy to destroy the PM's seat then we can look at this option, which I like more than I initially thought I would.

West Oxfordshire - 75637
Banbury - 77739
Henley and Didcot - 77973
Oxford West, Abingdon and Wantage - 77352
Bicester and Thame - 75959
Oxford East - 76674
High Resolution Map - much clearer than the one below!

You may need to refresh your cache to see the correct map as the original had one ward out of place


BANBURY
Cherwell Wards
Adderbury - 2,317
Banbury Calthorpe - 3,974
Banbury Easington - 6,076
Banbury Grimsbury and Castle - 6,821
Banbury Hardwick - 5,911
Banbury Neithrop - 3,869
Banbury Ruscote - 5,606
Bloxham and Bodicote - 5,250
Cropredy - 2,268
Deddington - 2,163
Hook Norton - 2,063
Sibford - 2,161
The Astons and Heyfords - 3,756
Wroxton - 2,139

West Oxfordshire Wards
Ascott and Shipton - 1,713
Chadlington and Churchill - 1,533
Charlbury and Finstock - 2,955
Chipping Norton - 4,640
Kingham, Rollright and Enstone - 3,115
Milton-under-Wychwood - 1,645
Stonesfield and Tackley - 3,111
The Bartons - 1,556
Woodstock and Bladon - 3,097

BICESTER AND THAME
Cherwell Wards
Ambrosden and Chesterton - 3,005
Bicester East - 4,307
Bicester North - 4,601
Bicester South - 3,630
Bicester Town - 3,784
Bicester West - 5,467
Caversfield - 2,087
Fringford - 1,887
Kidlington North - 3,973
Kidlington South - 6,112
Kirtlington - 2,346
Launton - 2,256
Otmoor - 1,967
Yarnton, Gosford and Water Eaton - 4,047

South Oxfordshire Wards
Chinnor - 6,118
Forest Hill & Holton - 2,688
Garsington & Horspath - 2,752
Haseley Brook - 3,062
Thame - 8,847
Wheatley - 3,023

HENLEY AND DIDCOT
South Oxfordshire Wards
Benson & Crowmarsh - 5,716
Berinsfield - 2,846
Chalgrove - 2,643
Cholsey - 6,597
Didcot North East - 6,805
Didcot South - 7,104
Didcot West - 4,663
Goring - 2,991
Henley-on-Thames - 8,318
Kidmore End & Whitchurch - 2,789
Sandford & the Wittenhams - 2,880
Sonning Common - 5,214
Wallingford - 5,625
Watlington - 2,955
Woodcote & Rotherfield - 6,244

Vale of the White Horse Wards
Blewbury & Harwell - 4,583

OXFORD EAST
Oxford Wards
Barton and Sandhills - 4,614
Blackbird Leys - 3,790
Carfax - 1,926
Churchill - 3,715
Cowley - 3,937
Cowley Marsh - 3,982
Headington - 3,843
Headington Hill and Northway - 3,109
Holywell - 1,573
Iffley Fields - 3,645
Littlemore - 4,305
Lye Valley - 4,327
Marston - 4,232
North - 2,936
Northfield Brook - 4,081
Quarry and Risinghurst - 4,418
Rose Hill and Iffley - 4,235
St Clement's - 3,767
St Margaret's - 2,965
St Mary's - 3,077
Summertown - 4,197

OXFORD WEST, ABINGDON AND WANTAGE
Oxford Wards
Hinksey Park - 3,717
Jericho and Osney - 4,040
Wolvercote - 4,281

Vale of the White Horse Wards
Abingdon Abbey Northcourt - 4,333
Abingdon Caldecott - 5,083
Abingdon Dunmore - 4,545
Abingdon Fitzharris - 4,616
Abingdon Peachcroft - 5,178
Botley & Sunningwell - 4,240
Cumnor - 4,645
Drayton - 2,274
Grove North - 3,998
Hendreds - 2,151
Kennington & Radley - 5,081
Marcham - 2,158
Steventon & the Hanneys - 2,444
Sutton Courtenay - 2,086
Wantage & Grove Brook - 5,138
Wantage Charlton - 4,764
Wootton - 2,580

WEST OXFORDSHIRE
Vale of the White Horse Wards
Faringdon - 5,362
Kingston Bagpuize - 2,555
Ridgeway - 2,355
Stanford - 2,654
Thames - 2,534
Watchfield & Shrivenham - 5,087

West Oxfordshire Wards
Alvescot and Filkins - 1,367
Bampton and Clanfield - 2,877
Brize Norton and Shilton - 1,549
Burford - 1,467
Carterton North East - 3,806
Carterton North West - 3,260
Carterton South - 3,295
Ducklington - 1,667
Eynsham and Cassington - 4,706
Freeland and Hanborough - 3,378
Hailey, Minster Lovell and Leafield - 3,107
North Leigh - 1,506
Standlake, Aston and Stanton Harcourt - 3,280
Witney Central - 3,654
Witney East - 5,541
Witney North - 3,114
Witney South - 4,522
Witney West - 2,994

For those looking at the Cherwell area, you ideally want to have Ambrosden & Chesterton, and Caversfield in the same constituency as Bicester. Each of these wards contain significant developments that are part of Bicester, and are now part of the town following a CGR last year.