|
|
Post by greenhert on May 21, 2016 22:34:41 GMT
Revised proposals for Northamptonshire, Rutland, Leicestershire, and Nottinghamshire:
1. Rutland & East Northamptonshire (77,681). The entire county (unitary authority) of Rutland, all of East Northamptonshire except for the town of Rushden's wards, and the Corby wards of Weldon & Gretton, Rural West, and Stainon & Corby Village.
2. Wellingborough & Rushden (74,126). Same as Wellingborough with minor ward adjustments; name changed since Rushden is in East Northamptonshire and is too large to ignore in my opinion.
3. Corby & Kettering (77,349). All Corby wards except for Rural West, Weldon & Gretton, and Staindon & Corby Village, all wards of the town of Kettering, and the Kettering district ward of Queen Eleanor & Buccleuch (needed to connect the two towns).
4. Daventry (75,300) All Daventry wards except for Weedon and Woodford, and all Kettering wards not included in Corby & Kettering.
5. South Northamptonshire (71,822). The Daventry wards of Weedon and Woodford and all South Northamptonshire wards except for Grange Park and Harpole & Grange.
6. Northampton North (73,207). Adds the wards of Semilong, Spencer, Old Duston and New Duston to its current boundaries.
7. Northampton South (71,411). All Northampton wards not in Northampton North, and the South Northamptonshire wards of Grange Park and Harpole & Grange.
8. Harborough (74,967). Unchanged.
9. North West Leicestershire (71,377). Unchanged.
10. Leicester East (75,755). Unchanged.
11. Leicester South (72,227). Unchanged.
12. Leicester West (77,593). Adds the Blaby wards of Ellis, Fairestone, Ravenhurst & Fosse, and Millfield (the towns of Glenfield and Braunstone, essentially).
13. Leicestershire South (77,555). Loses Ravenhurst & Fosse and Millfield wards, but gains Muxloe and Forest wards.
14. Bosworth (73,537). Loses Markfield, Stanton & Fairhead ward.
15. Loughborough (74,069). Unchanged.
16. Mid Leicestershire (73,368). The Bosworth wards of Markfield, Stanton & Fairhead and Groby, all Charnwood wards not in Loughborough, and all Harborough wards not in Harborough. Similar to current Charnwood constituency.
17. Melton Mowbray & Keyworth (71,572). The entire Melton Mowbray district, and all Rushcliffe wards except for those in Nottingham South & West Bridgford (see below) and the Rushcliffe wards currently in the Newark constituency.
18. Nottingham South & West Bridgford (73,928). All Rushcliffe wards comprising the town of West Bridgford and also Gamston North/South and Radcliffe-on-Trent, and the Nottingham wards of Clifton North/South, Bridge, and Dales.
19. Nottingham Central (74,703). The Nottingham wards of Wollaton West, Wollaton East & Lenton Abbey, Dunkirk & Lenton, Leen Valley, Arboretum, Radford & Park, Berridge, Mapperley and St Ann's.
20. Nottingham North (74,754). The Nottingham wards of Bilborough, Aspley, Basford, Bulwell, Bulwell Forest, Bestwood, and Sherwood.
21. Mansfield (74,066). Unchanged.
22. Bassetlaw (76,764). Unchanged.
23. Newark (71,696). Loses Lowdham ward and is also adjusted for internal ward boundary changes.
24. Carlton (72,117). As Gedling plus Dumbles and Lowdham wards but minus Bestwood Village ward.
25. Beeston (71,413). As Broxtowe plus all Eastwood wards, but minus Nuthall East & Strelley and Watnall & Nuthall West wards.
26. Sherwood (71,073). Loses Dumbles ward, gains Nuthall East & Strelley and Watnall & Nuthall West wards in Broxtowe.
27. Ashfield (73,755). Loses all Eastwood wards, and gains Newstead Abbey ward in compensation.
The abolished constituencies are Rutland & Melton, Corby, Kettering, Rushcliffe, Nottingham East, and Nottingham South. New constituencies include Nottingham Central, Rutland & East Northamptonshire, Corby & Kettering, Melton Mowbray & Keyworth, and Nottingham South & West Bridgford.
|
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,915
|
Post by YL on May 24, 2016 18:42:30 GMT
greenhert 's Nottinghamshire and Leicestershire mapped:   I presume the motivation for the transfer of those four Harborough wards currently in Rutland & Melton to Charnwood/Mid Leics is to stop the cross-border seat sprawling so far south. The Notts plan looks like it's taking the approach of accepting one bad constituency (Sherwood) to try to improve everything else. Outside Nottingham, it's not that different from what I had; in particular Ashfield and Gedling are the same, as are the unchanged Bassetlaw and Mansfield.
|
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,915
|
Post by YL on May 24, 2016 19:14:46 GMT
And here are my and islington 's (in that order) proposals for Notts:   Mine can be combined with greenhert 's Leicestershire with a couple of modifications: basically the cross border seat needs to gain The Wolds ward of Charnwood from Loughborough and Cotgrave ward of Rushcliffe from Newark to get it up to quota. |
|
|
|
Post by islington on May 25, 2016 13:27:16 GMT
Huge thanks to YL for this. It's fascinating to see the plans set out for comparison like this. it's not just about the differences, either - some of the similarities are also striking, for instance the way we've all combined wards from south Nottingham with parts of Rushcliffe including West Bridgford. Greenhert, I think, deserves credit in that this is his only seat to cross the Nottingham border, whereas both YL and I also cross the city boundary elsewhere.
I have to agree with YL about Greenhert's Sherwood, though. But it does have the merit of making my Ashfield look good.
YL's is probably best in terms of 'least change', and in particular his treatment of the 'Sherwood' part of 'Newark & Sherwood' avoids the problems that Greenhert and I have in this area. On the other hand, I was pleased to be able to limit the Gedling seat to one LA and Newark to two; and I do think it's better to have the Notts/Leics seat taking wards from the eastern end of Rushcliffe rather than the western end.
All three schemes have their plusses and minuses, in short.
|
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,742 
|
Post by Adrian on May 25, 2016 15:23:09 GMT
Nhants' entitlement is 6.60 so it has to be paired. A tempting idea would be to link it to Milton Keynes (2.27) = 8.87 = 9 seats. This would leave the rest of Bucks with 4.90 = 5 seats. I forgot you'd said this, and I'd been looking at Northants+Cambs - after all, the Soke was counted with Northants for many years - and then pairing Norfolk with either Cambs or Suffolk. A bit messy, although as always with these things there are a few nice seats created in the process. Anyway, I like the idea of a Towcester & Newport Pagnell seat. The knock-on effects are bearable, and crucially it leaves Leics-Rutland and Notts as two individual review areas. Beaconsfield 73984 Wycombe 72890 Chesham & Amersham 76964 (incl Hazlemere) Aylesbury 71235 (incl 3 Chiltern district wards) Buckingham 71528 (reaches down to Princes Risborough) MK South 71333 MK North 71094 Towcester-Newport 71718 Daventry & Brackley 74372 Noton South 71811 Noton North 74319 (incl 3 Daventry district wards) Wellingboro 74126 Kettering & Corby 77349 Rockingham 77382 (a donut seat) |
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,742
|
Post by Adrian on May 26, 2016 23:37:07 GMT
Notts. I've had a go at Notts a few times and the first map is an example of a "jigsaw" solution. No split wards, and a disregard for the Nottingham city boundary. Adding Clifton to Rushcliffe seems like a nice idea but doesn't by itself solve Nottingham's half-seat problem. Still, if you're going to remove an orphan ward, I think Bulwell is a good choice.
The second maps are my attempts to do the job <cough> scientifically, viz. the electorate of Nottingham is 187371, which is 2 seats, with a remainder of 34843. Therefore the city needs to pair up with somewhere that has an electorate of 41421. The closest possibilities are Beeston (without Stapleford) 37284 and Carlton 38877. Arnold isn't far behind, but isn't a practical option because it plays piggy-in-the-middle with Hucknall and Carlton.
I get the impression that people favour the Beeston solution, partly because Wollaton and Clifton wre later additions to the city, and also because there's a general desire to keep as much of Gedling together as possible.
Interestingly, in both plans (Beeston or Carlton) it helps to add East Nuthall to Nottingham. I don't think this matters too much - I don't see why it's any worse than splitting Eastwood, which the Commission did before and will probably do again.
The ward pattern in the Rufford area is a bit awkward, but this should be tidied up by swapping a couple of parishes between seats. I've also left the Nottingham wards unsplit, but if I lived there I'd give some thought to whether or not some rejigging would create better seats.
|
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,915
|
Post by YL on May 27, 2016 19:59:32 GMT
Anyway, I like the idea of a Towcester & Newport Pagnell seat. The knock-on effects are bearable, and crucially it leaves Leics-Rutland and Notts as two individual review areas. Beaconsfield 73984 Wycombe 72890 Chesham & Amersham 76964 (incl Hazlemere) Aylesbury 71235 (incl 3 Chiltern district wards) Buckingham 71528 (reaches down to Princes Risborough) MK South 71333 MK North 71094 Towcester-Newport 71718 Daventry & Brackley 74372 Noton South 71811 Noton North 74319 (incl 3 Daventry district wards) Wellingboro 74126 Kettering & Corby 77349 Rockingham 77382 (a donut seat) That does have the merit of allowing two largely urban MK seats by hiving off the more rural north of the borough into your Towcester & Newport Pagnell, whereas if MK is grouped with the rest of Bucks you seem to have to end up with the Buckingham seat nibbling at the urban area. But good luck selling crossing the regional boundary to the BCE... |
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,742
|
Post by Adrian on May 27, 2016 21:18:13 GMT
The campaign starts here! The Commission does seem open to the odd trick or two if it makes life easier elsewhere on The Map. e.g. adding Colnbrook from Slough to Surrey.
|
|
|
|
Post by greatkingrat on May 30, 2016 10:08:35 GMT
That would make the cross border seat too large. Assuming you take the 2 Newport Pagnell wards and Olney, that leaves a max of 51001 from Northamptonshire.
|
|
|
|
Post by islington on Jun 14, 2016 15:38:17 GMT
I'm on a roll, so here's Derbyshire.  This is ward-for-ward the same as Greenhert's plan, which I'm delighted to steal endorse. EM-A (Derbyshire): 756550 = 10.12 = 10BOLSOVER - 78029 CHESTERFIELD - 75675 DERBY NORTH - 71267 DERBY SOUTH - 78227. The Derby seats aren't pretty, especially Derby S, but at least Greenhert's plan (unlike mine) maintained a north-south split. EAST DERBYSHIRE - 75342. Some might prefer 'Belper'. I'm not going to the stake over it. NORTH EAST DERBYSHIRE - 77256 SOUTH DERBYSHIRE - 76338 WEST DERBYSHIRE - 77313 HIGH PEAK - 71130 ILKESTON - 75973 |
|
|
|
Post by islington on Jun 14, 2016 16:02:12 GMT
YL was kind enough to post a map of my proposals for Notts above (see 24 May), so here's Leics.  EM-B (Leics, Notts): 1476289 = 19.74 = 20ASHFIELD - 74265. An ugly seat, I know (although I argue that it is better on the ground than appears on the map). BASSETLAW - 76764 BOSWORTH - 73248. Should be called 'Hinckley', really. GEDLING - 75611. I don't like the name but I've kept it because at least Gedling is a real place, albeit a pretty obscure one. And I've kept the seat wholly within the district. HARBOROUGH - 74967 HUCKNALL AND EASTWOOD - 73250. Very loosely, the successor of Sherwood. LEICESTER EAST - 75755 LEICESTER SOUTH - 72227 LEICESTER WEST - 73898 MID LEICESTERSHIRE - 71591 NORTH WEST LEICESTERSHIRE - 71377 SOUTH LEICESTERSHIRE - 73496 LOUGHBOROUGH - 74069 MANSFIELD - 74066 MELTON AND BINGHAM - 76218. I've preferred an approach of taking voters from the eastern end of Rushcliffe rather than the western end as some others have suggested. This helps keep the seat focused on Melton and makes it easier for it to retain the Harborough wards at its southern end (which otherwise are tricky to rehouse - they either needlessly disrupt the Harborough seat or fit very awkwardly into Charnwood (aka Mid Leics)). NEWARK - 71315. An inelegant boundary with Ashfield, but it allows me to keep the seat out of Rushcliffe, which is thus available for the Melton seat. NOTTINGHAM EAST - 75659 NOTTINGHAM NORTH - 71765 NOTTINGHAM WEST AND BEESTON - 72386 WEST BRIDGFORD - 74362. Yes, I admit the inclusion of the Clifton wards means I've crossed the Nottingham city boundary twice, but the river Trent gives a strong northern boundary for this seat. |
|
|
|
Post by islington on Jun 14, 2016 19:40:36 GMT
 EM-C (Lincs): 521281 = 6.97 = 7In Lincs I've preferred names based on the old 'Parts'. NORTH HOLLAND AND SKEGNESS - 71348 SOUTH HOLLAND AND BOURNE - 75851 NORTH KESTEVEN - 74807 SOUTH KESTEVEN - 77919 LINCOLN - 72002 EAST LINDSEY - 76953 WEST LINDSEY - 72401  EM-D (Nhants, Rutland): 520926 = 6.97 = 7I didn't link Rutland with Corby because it's simply asking for trouble; and, compared with other plans, I thought I should try to keep Corby and Kettering separate if I could. CORBY - 71676 DAVENTRY - 76897 KETTERING - 73083 NORTHAMPTON NORTH - 75405 NORTHAMPTON SOUTH - 76047 RUTLAND AND HIGHAM FERRERS - 73692. All right, I admit I may have been influenced by the 'Downton Abbey'-esque character of this name. Alternatives are doubtless possible. WELLINGBOROUGH - 74126 |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Jun 14, 2016 20:31:53 GMT
That rural area that you've detached from Corby and added to Rutland is very attached to the compass point name - East Northamptonshire. Higham Ferrers is a nice historic town (famously the only single-member rotten borough disfranchised in 1832) but it's not the only town in the area.
|
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,742
|
Post by Adrian on Jun 14, 2016 22:12:34 GMT
I approve of the cross-border seat choices.
Higham Ferrers was traditionally the most important town in the district, so it's not a bad choice of name. I usually use Rockingham in the name of NE Northants seats, though I don't think the village itself is in the seat you propose. Not too keen on your Corby and Kettering seats.
|
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Jun 14, 2016 22:25:36 GMT
Adrian, Corby and Kettering were in a seat together, though, until the 1983 general election when they were separated (although the constituency was just called Kettering back then).
|
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Yn Ennill Yma
Posts: 6,144
|
Post by Foggy on Jun 14, 2016 22:35:59 GMT
I think Northants, Bucks and Bedforshire should form a 'Central England' review area – not for administrative or statistical purposes, nor as a Euro-constituency or Regional Assembly area – just for the purposes of drawing Westminster constituencies.
Since that's not going the happen for this Review, then I agree that Rutland has to go into a Northamptonshire seat.
|
|
|
|
Post by Philip Davies on Jun 14, 2016 22:39:53 GMT
I have cousins on different sides of my family in Langham, Rutland and Hughdm Ferrers. I never imagined they could be in the same seat. Stretching it either end to Great Dalby and Rushden would include even more cousins of mine!
|
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Jun 14, 2016 23:14:54 GMT
I have cousins on different sides of my family in Langham, Rutland and Hughdm Ferrers. I never imagined they could be in the same seat. Stretching it either end to Great Dalby and Rushden would include even more cousins of mine! Davies Banks? |
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,742
|
Post by Adrian on Jun 14, 2016 23:31:16 GMT
Adrian , Corby and Kettering were in a seat together, though, until the 1983 general election when they were separated (although the constituency was just called Kettering back then). Seats. I said seats. |
|
|
|
Post by Philip Davies on Jun 15, 2016 20:25:35 GMT
I have cousins on different sides of my family in Langham, Rutland and Hughdm Ferrers. I never imagined they could be in the same seat. Stretching it either end to Great Dalby and Rushden would include even more cousins of mine! Davies Banks? These are my mother's and father's sister's families so no Davieses since my grandad passed away in 1999. |
|
