YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,915
|
Post by YL on Mar 1, 2016 18:36:28 GMT
Here's my attempt at removing Bicester from the Banbury seat and compensating Banbury with the northern part of West Oxfordshire. Possibly I ought to rotate the seats a bit more to get Bicester further from the border.  Banbury & Chipping Norton 77,604 Witney 78,091 Abingdon & Wantage 73,898 Henley & Didcot 76,142 Oxford 77,269 Bicester, Thame & Summertown 78,330 |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Mar 1, 2016 18:49:09 GMT
Here's my attempt at removing Bicester from the Banbury seat and compensating Banbury with the northern part of West Oxfordshire. Possibly I ought to rotate the seats a bit more to get Bicester further from the border. Banbury & Chipping Norton 77,604 Witney 78,091 Abingdon & Wantage 73,898 Henley & Didcot 76,142 Oxford 77,269 Bicester, Thame & Summertown 78,330 Yes, you want to put the two wards immediately north of Bicester in the same seat as it, to take account of incoming ward boundaries and urban overspill. Sadly I think that puts your Bicester, Thame & Summertown, which is a shame because it's a neat solution for doing Oxford with only two seats. |
|
|
|
Post by andrewteale on Mar 1, 2016 18:57:18 GMT
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 Yes, I'm afraid it will be a while before I get around to Vale of White Horse.  |
|
Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 12,055
|
Post by Khunanup on Mar 1, 2016 19:20:19 GMT
![]()  I have had a go at Hampshire ![]() New Forest W (75,752) - gains Bramshaw+Lyndhurst+Brockenhurst from New Forest E New Forest E and Romsey (77286) - loses Bramshaw+Lyndhurst+Brockenhurst to New Forest W and gains Abbey,Cupernham,Tadburn, Romsey Extra from Romsey Southampton, Test (73,663) - gains Bassett from Romsey Southampton, Itchen BC (74,516) - gains Swaythling from Romsey Eastleigh (77,814) - no change Fareham (75,724) - no change Gosport (72,357) - no change Portsmouth South (74,253) - gains Nelson Portsmouth North (75,213) - loses Nelson, gains Purbrook+Stakes from Havant Havant (77,739) - loses Purbrook+Stakes, gains the 3 Waterlooville wards from Meon Valley Meon Valley (71,976) - loses the 3 Waterlooville wards; gains Alresfords, Wonston, Itchen Valley from Winchester and East Meon and Petersfield (6 wards) from East Hants East Hampshire (71,363) - loses East Meon and Petersfield (6 wards); gains Oakley from NW Hants, Upton Grey and Odiham from NE Hants Aldershot (74,538) - gains the rest of the split Yateley E ward NE Hampshire (73,523) - loses the rest of the split Yateley E ward; loses Upton Grey and Odiham; gains Tadleyx3 + Kingsclere from NW Hants Basingstoke (78,026) - no change NW Hampshire (71,249) - loses Oakley; loses Tadleyx3 + Kingsclere; gains Harewood, Broughton, Over Wallop, Blackwater, Dun Valley, Kings Somborne from Romsey Winchester (77,145) - loses Alresfords, Wonston, Itchen Valley; gains Chilworth, North Baddesley, Ampfield, Valley Park from Romsey Overall I'm quite pleased except for the East Hants seat. I've tried shuffling it around but it is difficult to do so without splitting Winchester or Fleet or Bordon/Whitehill. I initially tried a Test Valley seat (minus Romsey) but ended up with the West Basingstoke Borough wards having to go with Alton! Just a note that I moved Kingsclere from NW to NE Hants after the photo was taken Ok, I can see what you've tried to do here and protect all the seats that come within quota as sacrosanct and work round it. My advice is, don't. The signal you're getting things wrong is if you have a reduction in one seat and still keep the essence of Meon Valley. Meon Valley is an awful mess of a cobbled together seat and under your scheme it's actually made even worse by going right up to Wonston and Micheldever and still keeping the fact that all of its centres of population are around the edge with next to no relationship with each other (three postcodes by the way...). Cutting Chilworth, Nursling and Rownhams off from Romsey is nuts (unless you're putting it in with Southampton) and the Andover seat, though it looks nice and neat, connects areas that have absolute nothing in common with Andover, let alone each other. The north of the county is always the part that is hardest to do from experience but freeing up changes to Fareham (though it's in quota) in particular tends to make things work better overall. |
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,915
|
Post by YL on Mar 1, 2016 19:57:31 GMT
Here's my attempt at removing Bicester from the Banbury seat and compensating Banbury with the northern part of West Oxfordshire. Possibly I ought to rotate the seats a bit more to get Bicester further from the border. Banbury & Chipping Norton 77,604 Witney 78,091 Abingdon & Wantage 73,898 Henley & Didcot 76,142 Oxford 77,269 Bicester, Thame & Summertown 78,330 Yes, you want to put the two wards immediately north of Bicester in the same seat as it, to take account of incoming ward boundaries and urban overspill. Sadly I think that puts your Bicester, Thame & Summertown, which is a shame because it's a neat solution for doing Oxford with only two seats. Well, the only way I can save it and add more of Cherwell is for it to lose Thame, which has to go back into Henley, which then isn't going to take Didcot, but does still have to take Cholsey and Wallingford. Compared with the previous map, Abingdon & Wantage then gains Didcot and loses quite a lot of the rural Vale of White Horse to Witney. The problem is then that the only way I can get the numbers to work in West Oxfordshire is with a really straggly Banbury along the NW boundary.  Banbury & Chipping Norton 78,039 Witney & Kingston Bagpuize 78,369 (just for doktorb🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️ ) Abingdon & Wantage 77,201 Henley 75,597 Oxford 77,269 Bicester & Summertown 74,859 It might work better if you add Woodstock to B&S, which at least means you don't end up doing the only split between Banbury and Witney which leaves both within quota. But I'm going to stop wrestling with Oxfordshire now; Chris 's map seems like a reasonable attempt. |
|
|
|
Post by greatkingrat on Mar 1, 2016 20:50:46 GMT
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 They obviously were listening to you as the election maps site seems to have had an upgrade today and is now working much better. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2016 21:25:29 GMT
I want Kingston Bagpuize in every constituency name tbf
|
|
|
|
Post by greatkingrat on Mar 1, 2016 21:49:20 GMT
Bagpuize, dear Bagpuize
Old Fat Furry Catpuize
|
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Mar 1, 2016 21:56:40 GMT
Bagpuize, dear Bagpuize Old Fat Furry Catpuize but Emily loved him....  |
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Figgis on Mar 1, 2016 23:52:16 GMT
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 BANBURYCherwell WardsAdderbury - 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 WardsAscott 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 THAMECherwell WardsAmbrosden 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 WardsChinnor - 6,118 Forest Hill & Holton - 2,688 Garsington & Horspath - 2,752 Haseley Brook - 3,062 Thame - 8,847 Wheatley - 3,023 HENLEY AND DIDCOTSouth Oxfordshire WardsBenson & 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 WardsBlewbury & Harwell - 4,583 OXFORD EASTOxford WardsBarton 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 WANTAGEOxford WardsHinksey Park - 3,717 Jericho and Osney - 4,040 Wolvercote - 4,281 Vale of the White Horse WardsAbingdon 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 OXFORDSHIREVale of the White Horse WardsFaringdon - 5,362 Kingston Bagpuize - 2,555 Ridgeway - 2,355 Stanford - 2,654 Thames - 2,534 Watchfield & Shrivenham - 5,087 West Oxfordshire WardsAlvescot 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. I like that. A lot. |
|
|
|
Post by lennon on Mar 2, 2016 1:41:49 GMT
OK - So here is my version of Hampshire. I have managed to eliminate the horrific Meon Valley seat, but in doing so suspect that I have been too radical for the Boundary Commission if they want 'Minimum Change'. Would be interested in others comments however...
The Northern 3rd of the County seems reasonable so little change here:
Aldershot (74,538): The current seat with the remainder of the split Yateley East ward from North-East Hants.
North-East Hants (74,162): Loses half of the split Yateley East ward to Aldershot, and takes Basing from Basingstoke. Minor change with North-West Hants (Sherborne St John) to align to ward boundaries.
North-West Hants (77,892): Minor ward alignments with North-East Hants, but otherwise unchanged. Personally I'd call this seat 'Andover', but...
Basingstoke (71,402): Loses it's most 'rural' ward of Basing to become an even more tightly drawn seat around the town as a whole. In an ideal world, the Basing ward might be split for a cleaner 'Town' Constituency.
Moving then to the South of the County:
Portsmouth South (75,389): The current seat with the addition of Baffins from Portsmouth North
Portsmouth North (73,736): Loses Baffins to South, gains the 2 Portchester wards from Fareham. Whilst there is the theoretical possibility to take from Havant (or go over the hill to Meon Valley) Portchester is a natural extension of Cosham and has a natural separation from the rest of Fareham as well making this a very natural join.
Havant (77,639): Takes Waterloo ward to bring it back up to quota so it is now only 2 wards short of being co-terminous with the Borough.
Gosport (72,357): Unchanged, this seat is compact, logical as is, and in quota.
Fareham and the Hamble Estuary (75,528): This takes the previous Fareham seat, less the 2 Portchester wards donated to Portsmouth North, and extends across the Hamble River to include Hamble, Netley and Bursledon from Eastleigh. Whilst there isn't a great connection East and West of the Hamble at this point it still seems a reasonable seat and better than a number of alternatives.
Moving up Southampton Water we then get the 2 Southampton seats:
Southampton Test (73,344): The current Southampton Test seat with the addition of Bargate from Itchen
Southampton Itchen (74,835): The current Itchen seat which loses Bargate to Test so that it stays East of the Itchen at the Southern end. Then adds Bassett and Swaythling from Romsey so that the City is cleanly split to 2 seats. (Alternative splits available to taste)
I am now going to move to the New Forest. Here I appear to differ from others in that by my reckoning you can't move all of Lyndhurst, Brockenhurst and Bramshaw from East to West as you also need to move Boldre and Sway which then takes you over quota. As such I keep these as low to minimum quota as possible:
New Forest West (71,289): Current seat plus the Lymington surrounds of the Boldre and Sway ward.
Test Valley and Forest Waterside (72,520): The current New Forest East seat less the Boldre and Sway ward. Takes Blackwater and Dun Valley from Romsey CC. This isn't a great seat, but I struggle to see any realistic alternative without splitting Romsey in half.
Romsey and Chandlers Ford (78,434): This is a considerably changed seat which is based on the outer Southampton 'conurbation' of Romsey, Chandlers Ford and Eastleigh town. It combines the remainder of the old Romsey seat (basically Romsey plus the Test Valley wards not in Andover or New Forest) with the 4 Chandlers Ford wards of Eastleigh previously in Winchester CC, and the 3 Eastleigh town wards West of the Itchen (which is a pretty strong natural boundary despite not being respected by existing boundaries). It means that Eastleigh, Chandlers Ford, Romsey and Chilworth are all in the same seat which makes far more sense than respecting the local Borough boundaries in the area.
We now move onto the splits of the remainder which enables the elimination of the horrific Meon Valley seat. Moving back East we have:
Butser and Bramshott (74,089): aka Petersfield this is a considerably changed seat from the previous East Hampshire being the bottom 2/3rds of the East Hants District, rather than the Northern 2/3rds (Hence the suitability of a name change). It takes the remaining 2 Havant wards of Cowplain, plus all of East Hants that was previously in Meon Valley before crossing the South Downs over Butser Hill and following the A3 / Portsmouth Main Line north to take in Petersfield, Liss, Liphook, Grayshott and Bordon/Whitehill. It leaves Alton and surrounds out of East Hants and whilst long and thin it follows the North-South lines of communication well.
Winchester and the Watercress (78,251): Takes the remaining wards of Winchester CC (basically the city and immediate surrounds) and heads up the A31 / Watercress Line to take in the Alresfords and Alton (the remainder of East Hants)
Solent View (78,101) (aka Hedge End and Hambledon or Bishop's Waltham) this is, if anything, a successor to the old Meon Valley, but takes the South Downs as it's Northern boundary instead of trying to cross them, and incorporates the swathe of farmland and pretty Portsmouth/Southampton commuter villages that lie south of the South Downs and north of the M27.
|
|
Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 12,055
|
Post by Khunanup on Mar 2, 2016 3:20:07 GMT
OK - So here is my version of Hampshire. I have managed to eliminate the horrific Meon Valley seat, but in doing so suspect that I have been too radical for the Boundary Commission if they want 'Minimum Change'. Would be interested in others comments however... The Northern 3rd of the County seems reasonable so little change here: Aldershot (74,538): The current seat with the remainder of the split Yateley East ward from North-East Hants. North-East Hants (74,162): Loses half of the split Yateley East ward to Aldershot, and takes Basing from Basingstoke. Minor change with North-West Hants (Sherborne St John) to align to ward boundaries. North-West Hants (77,892): Minor ward alignments with North-East Hants, but otherwise unchanged. Personally I'd call this seat 'Andover', but... Basingstoke (71,402): Loses it's most 'rural' ward of Basing to become an even more tightly drawn seat around the town as a whole. In an ideal world, the Basing ward might be split for a cleaner 'Town' Constituency. Moving then to the South of the County: Portsmouth South (75,389): The current seat with the addition of Baffins from Portsmouth North Portsmouth North (73,736): Loses Baffins to South, gains the 2 Portchester wards from Fareham. Whilst there is the theoretical possibility to take from Havant (or go over the hill to Meon Valley) Portchester is a natural extension of Cosham and has a natural separation from the rest of Fareham as well making this a very natural join. Havant (77,639): Takes Waterloo ward to bring it back up to quota so it is now only 2 wards short of being co-terminous with the Borough. Gosport (72,357): Unchanged, this seat is compact, logical as is, and in quota. Fareham and the Hamble Estuary (75,528): This takes the previous Fareham seat, less the 2 Portchester wards donated to Portsmouth North, and extends across the Hamble River to include Hamble, Netley and Bursledon from Eastleigh. Whilst there isn't a great connection East and West of the Hamble at this point it still seems a reasonable seat and better than a number of alternatives. Moving up Southampton Water we then get the 2 Southampton seats: Southampton Test (73,344): The current Southampton Test seat with the addition of Bargate from Itchen Southampton Itchen (74,835): The current Itchen seat which loses Bargate to Test so that it stays East of the Itchen at the Southern end. Then adds Bassett and Swaythling from Romsey so that the City is cleanly split to 2 seats. (Alternative splits available to taste) I am now going to move to the New Forest. Here I appear to differ from others in that by my reckoning you can't move all of Lyndhurst, Brockenhurst and Bramshaw from East to West as you also need to move Boldre and Sway which then takes you over quota. As such I keep these as low to minimum quota as possible: New Forest West (71,289): Current seat plus the Lymington surrounds of the Boldre and Sway ward. Test Valley and Forest Waterside (72,520): The current New Forest East seat less the Boldre and Sway ward. Takes Blackwater and Dun Valley from Romsey CC. This isn't a great seat, but I struggle to see any realistic alternative without splitting Romsey in half. Romsey and Chandlers Ford (78,434): This is a considerably changed seat which is based on the outer Southampton 'conurbation' of Romsey, Chandlers Ford and Eastleigh town. It combines the remainder of the old Romsey seat (basically Romsey plus the Test Valley wards not in Andover or New Forest) with the 4 Chandlers Ford wards of Eastleigh previously in Winchester CC, and the 3 Eastleigh town wards West of the Itchen (which is a pretty strong natural boundary despite not being respected by existing boundaries). It means that Eastleigh, Chandlers Ford, Romsey and Chilworth are all in the same seat which makes far more sense than respecting the local Borough boundaries in the area. We now move onto the splits of the remainder which enables the elimination of the horrific Meon Valley seat. Moving back East we have: Butser and Bramshott (74,089): aka Petersfield this is a considerably changed seat from the previous East Hampshire being the bottom 2/3rds of the East Hants District, rather than the Northern 2/3rds (Hence the suitability of a name change). It takes the remaining 2 Havant wards of Cowplain, plus all of East Hants that was previously in Meon Valley before crossing the South Downs over Butser Hill and following the A3 / Portsmouth Main Line north to take in Petersfield, Liss, Liphook, Grayshott and Bordon/Whitehill. It leaves Alton and surrounds out of East Hants and whilst long and thin it follows the North-South lines of communication well. Winchester and the Watercress (78,251): Takes the remaining wards of Winchester CC (basically the city and immediate surrounds) and heads up the A31 / Watercress Line to take in the Alresfords and Alton (the remainder of East Hants) Solent View (78,101) (aka Hedge End and Hambledon or Bishop's Waltham) this is, if anything, a successor to the old Meon Valley, but takes the South Downs as it's Northern boundary instead of trying to cross them, and incorporates the swathe of farmland and pretty Portsmouth/Southampton commuter villages that lie south of the South Downs and north of the M27. Sorry, I left out golden rule number two. Don't cross the Hamble west of the M27. The boundary commission tried that last time and changed their minds PDQ (it is essentially the boundary of the Portsmouth/Southampton orbits). Your Portsmouth/Havant seats are sensible, they respect the natural Portsdown Hill boundary. Also the New Forest seats work well and Aldershot just makes sense. Your Butser and Bramshott is very similar to the pre 2010 East Hants so no name change is needed. Winchester and Alton...  |
|
|
|
Post by islington on Mar 2, 2016 13:30:25 GMT
I've been looking at Pete Whitehead's Berkshire plan from a few days ago. It works really well, but that's not going to stop me from suggesting a few tweaks.
Compared with the plan (not with current seats):
Reading West gains Theale, North Shinfield; loses Katesgrove - 72060
Reading East gains Katesgrove, loses Hawkedon - 73899
Wokingham gains Hawkedon, loses Theale, North Shinfield, Hurst - 73174
Windsor gains Hurst, loses Colnbrook with Poyle - 72914
And that's the point of all this - Colnbrook with Poyle is the only ward realistically available that can be added to Spelthorne district (bringing it within quota at 73703) if you want to avoid the cross-Thames ward in Egham or Walton. This leaves the rest of Surrey with 746225 electors, or 9.98 seats.
|
|
|
|
Post by islington on Mar 2, 2016 14:23:49 GMT
And I've just had a quick look at the rest of Surrey and it turns out to be boringly straightforward.
Apart from Spelthorne, which I've just dealt with above, all the other seats are the right size except for Runnymede & Weybridge (slightly too small) and Esher and Walton (slightly too big). Since these are adjoining seats and the wards are nice and small, it should just be a matter of transferring one ward to balance things up. The problem (but an easily solved one) is that the only possible ward is Hersham South, which one is naturally reluctant to separate from Hersham North. Taking both Hershams, however, shifts too many electors, so the remedy is to switch Oatlands Park the other way to compensate. This results in a much longer boundary but keeps all the communities together and shifts 4502 votes (net). It gives us Runnymede and Weybridge (75141) and Esher and Walton (74043).
For the records the other eight seats are E Surrey (77146), Epsom & Ewell (77417), Guildford (74077), Mole Valley (72400), Reigate (71778), SW Surrey (74494), Surrey Heath (77585); all of which can be left as they are unless there are ward changes somewhere.
|
|
|
|
Post by ajthomson on Mar 2, 2016 21:46:44 GMT
An alternative take on Oxfordshire: while accepting that the Commission prefer minimum change for good reasons, there's a case to be made that Oxford needs to be redrawn so that the bits left out are on the east of the city, not the west. If you start from that premise, and also are happy to split West Oxon between two seats, you could get this:
Banbury (75,505)
Current seat
Minus Bicester wards (x5), Ambrosden, Launton
Plus Kingham, Chipping Norton, Bartons, Milton-under-Wychwood, Ascott, Charlbury, Chadlington
Witney (77,776)
Current seat
Minus Kingham, Chipping Norton, Bartons, Milton-under-Wychwood, Ascott, Charlbury, Chadlington
Plus Kirtlington, Kidlington (x2), Yarnton
Oxford (76,536)
City council
Minus Blackbird Leys, Littlemore, Northfield Brook
Bicester and Thame (76,052)
From Banbury: Bicester wards (x5), Ambrosden, Launton
From Oxford East: Blackbird Leys, Littlemore, Northfield Brook
From Henley: Otmoor, Forest Hill, Wheatley, Garsington, Sandford, Berinsfield, Chalgrove, Haseley Brook, Thame, Chinnor
Henley and Didcot (78,559)
All of South Oxon not in Bicester and Thame (incl. Henley, Wallingford, Didcot)
From VoWH: Blewbury, Hendreds, Drayton, Sutton Courtenay, Steventon and the Hanneys
Abingdon (76,906)
VoWH minus wards in Henley and Didcot
The numbers don't quite work with new wards unless you split Steventon and the Hanneys (Steventon in Henley and Didcot, Hanneys in Abingdon), which I would propose to do.
The changes to West Oxon/Witney are too great to make this a possibility, as (probably) is the need to split a ward, and the prospect of removing the Leys wards and Littlemore from an Oxford seat would not be popular, to put it mildly. On the other hand, the current split of west Oxford is hardly ideal, and, aside from minimum change, I see no reason to maintain the link between Abingdon and Kidlington. Kidlington was linked with Witney prior to 1997, and there's no reason it couldn't be again if required.
|
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Mar 2, 2016 22:09:56 GMT
An alternative take on Oxfordshire: while accepting that the Commission prefer minimum change for good reasons, there's a case to be made that Oxford needs to be redrawn so that the bits left out are on the east of the city, not the west. If you start from that premise, and also are happy to split West Oxon between two seats, you could get this: What precisely is the case for this? And even if you do remove three wards from the east, the ones you've chosen seem hard to justify on non-partisan grounds. Blackbird Leys has no meaningful links to the Oxfordshire countryside, but does have very important links to Cowley. |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Mar 2, 2016 23:25:38 GMT
The case would be similar to the case for removing Cherry Hinton from Cambridge rather than say Castle or Newnham. Littlemore, Marston and Risinghurst are parished areas reflecting the fact that up until 20 years or so ago they were outside Oxford and in South Oxfordshire district. All the wards West of the Cherwell are part of old historic Oxford, so if you were to have a single Oxford seat it would make sense to include all of that and take out peripheral wards from the East.
And I wouldn't worry about the Lib Dems threatening any time soon...
|
|
|
|
Post by ajthomson on Mar 2, 2016 23:38:15 GMT
An alternative take on Oxfordshire: while accepting that the Commission prefer minimum change for good reasons, there's a case to be made that Oxford needs to be redrawn so that the bits left out are on the east of the city, not the west. If you start from that premise, and also are happy to split West Oxon between two seats, you could get this: What precisely is the case for this? And even if you do remove three wards from the east, the ones you've chosen seem hard to justify on non-partisan grounds. Blackbird Leys has no meaningful links to the Oxfordshire countryside, but does have very important links to Cowley. I have to admit I was being mischievous!  That said, a solution that splits North ward and St Margaret's also breaks social ties given the high proportion of students in the former and the relatively high proportion in the latter. And while the university-employed presence in the three northern Oxford wards isn't perhaps as great as it was a generation ago, it's still pretty high. Whichever three wards are removed from Oxford, there will be significant social ties broken. I readily admit that the contrast between Blackbird Leys and rural Oxfordshire is greater than between Summertown and rural Oxfordshire, but that obviously doesn't mean there aren't significant contrasts between Summertown and rural Oxfordshire. I was trying to see if it would be possible to come up with a solution that a) contained a seat that included Abingdon and Wantage, b) avoided a seat that contained Banbury and Kidlington, and c) avoided crossing the Thames being between West Oxon and VoWH. That can still be done with three west Oxford wards being removed, e.g.: Oxford: city council, minus Wolvercote, Summertown and St Margaret's (77,269) Abingdon: as before (76,906, plus the Hanneys) Henley and Didcot: as before (78,559, minus the Hanneys) Bicester and Thame: as before, minus Blackbird Leys, Northfield Brook and Littlemore, plus Kirtlington, Fringford, Caversfield, Astons/Heyfords (73,952) Banbury: as before, minus Fringford, Caversfield, Astons/Heyfords, plus Freeland/Hanborough, Woodstock, Stonesfield/Tackley (77,361) Witney: as before, plus Wolvercote, Summertown and St Margaret's, minus Freeland/Hanborough, Woodstock, Stonesfield/Tackley (77,287) |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Mar 3, 2016 7:42:56 GMT
The case would be similar to the case for removing Cherry Hinton from Cambridge rather than say Castle or Newnham. Littlemore, Marston and Risinghurst are parished areas reflecting the fact that up until 20 years or so ago they were outside Oxford and in South Oxfordshire district. All the wards West of the Cherwell are part of old historic Oxford, so if you were to have a single Oxford seat it would make sense to include all of that and take out peripheral wards from the East. And I wouldn't worry about the Lib Dems threatening any time soon... I can see the case for removing Marston or Risinghurst. But removing Littlemore and Blackbird Leys strikes me as more like removing Abbey from Cambridge (which I believe was the original plan in 1983). I accept the immediate partisan implications are limited, but I do think you'd be able to make a stronger (or at least less weak) case for taking from the north-east rather than the south-east. |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Mar 3, 2016 8:47:31 GMT
I agree that area would make more sense because of better connections to areas outside Oxford, presumably would go in a mooted Bicester & Thame seat
|
|
That said, a solution that splits North ward and St Margaret's also breaks social ties given the high proportion of students in the former and the relatively high proportion in the latter. And while the university-employed presence in the three northern Oxford wards isn't perhaps as great as it was a generation ago, it's still pretty high. Whichever three wards are removed from Oxford, there will be significant social ties broken. I readily admit that the contrast between Blackbird Leys and rural Oxfordshire is greater than between Summertown and rural Oxfordshire, but that obviously doesn't mean there aren't significant contrasts between Summertown and rural Oxfordshire.