|
|
Post by ajthomson on May 13, 2016 20:11:52 GMT
A non-ward-splitting alternative for central and north-east Scotland:
1. Banff and Buchan (77,582): Banff, Troup, Fraserburgh, Central Buchan, Peterhead x2, Turriff, Ellon.
2. Gordon and Deeside (73,365): Mid Formartine, E Garioch, Inverurie, W Garioch, Huntly et al, Westhill, Aboyne et al.
3. Angus North and Kincardine (74,099): Banchory, N Kincardine, Stonehaven, Mearns; Montrose, Brechin, Forfar.
4. Angus South and Dundee East (72,307): Arbroath x2, Carnoustie, Sidlaw/Monifieth; North East, The Ferry.
5. Dundee West (76,317): Strathmartine, Lochee, West End, Coldside, Maryfield, East End.
6. Perth and North Perthshire (73,859): Perth x3, Strathtay, Highland, Strathmore, Blairgowrie; Kirriemuir. (Kirriemuir was in the same seat as the non-Perth parts of this arrangement in the days of Tayside North.)
7. Perthshire South and St Andrews (75,716): Carse of Gowrie, Almond/Earn, Strathallan, Kinross; Tay Bridgehead, St Andrews, Cupar, Howe of Fife. (It looks a bit Tay Banks-ish, but there is a direct road link from Bridge of Earn to the Carse of Gowrie in the M90, and the two areas used to be in a Tayside regional electoral division together.)
8. Stirling and Crieff (71,781): Stirling council; Strathearn. (Almost the zombie review proposal for the area.)
9. Clackmannan and Grangemouth (76,094): Clackmannanshire council; Carse et al, Grangemouth, Bo'ness (hat-tip to Piperdave and others for this; the lack of a direct road link is mitigated by the fact that it's impossible to leave the A876 on the north side of the Forth until it enters Clackmannanshire. And the Carse and Clacks have been linked at parliamentary level many times in the past. Ht to Piperdave and others for the idea of this link in the first place.)
10. Falkirk (76,313): Denny, Larbert, Falkirk x2, Braes x2.
Dunfermline and West Fife, Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath, Glenrothes and Anstruther as per ntyuk's arrangement; two Dunbartonshire seats (West = LA + Milngavie; East = LA - Milngavie).
The presence of two seats with orphan wards would doubtless make this a non-starter, but it gets round some of the problems of low electorates in the Stirling/Falkirk/Clackmannanshire area.
|
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,742 
|
Post by Adrian on May 13, 2016 22:05:32 GMT
How about this arrangement for Fife:
South Tay (75957) Strathearn, Strathallan, Almond, Howe, Bridgehead, Cupar, St Andrews, East Neuk
Kirkcaldy (71113) inc Burntisland, Buckhaven, Leven
Glenrothes & Kinross (77287) inc Cowdenbeath, Lochs, Lochgelly
Dunfermline (78254) inc West, Inverkeithing, Rosyth
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 14, 2016 9:19:01 GMT
As for East Neuk - well, I'm sure the locals would rather share a seat with St Andrews than with Glenrothes. I imagine most people would. But somewhere has to go in with Glenrothes, and I don't think East Neuk's preference can be accommodated without destroying an otherwise excellent map. And it is ironic - to put it no more strongly - that BCS thought E Neuk's complaint was a reason sufficiently compelling to revise its plan in this area, whilst simultaneously confirming its decision to drive boundaries through the middle of Dunfermline and Ayr. Isn't there something in the bible about swallowing camels but straining at gnats*? It's because people from North East Fife get very upset at any suggestion to split the area. There were protests in Largo when the last Holyrood boundary review decided to put them in with Glenrothes, with banners and placards and everything. Some people there seemed to think it would negatively affect their house prices. As someone who is moving down the road to the East Neuk in September, I'll accept that arrangement when there is a faster bus from Crail to Glenrothes that doesn't involve going via St Andrews.  |
|
|
|
Post by islington on May 14, 2016 13:09:37 GMT
A non-ward-splitting alternative for central and north-east Scotland: 1. Banff and Buchan (77,582): Banff, Troup, Fraserburgh, Central Buchan, Peterhead x2, Turriff, Ellon. 2. Gordon and Deeside (73,365): Mid Formartine, E Garioch, Inverurie, W Garioch, Huntly et al, Westhill, Aboyne et al. 3. Angus North and Kincardine (74,099): Banchory, N Kincardine, Stonehaven, Mearns; Montrose, Brechin, Forfar. 4. Angus South and Dundee East (72,307): Arbroath x2, Carnoustie, Sidlaw/Monifieth; North East, The Ferry. 5. Dundee West (76,317): Strathmartine, Lochee, West End, Coldside, Maryfield, East End. 6. Perth and North Perthshire (73,859): Perth x3, Strathtay, Highland, Strathmore, Blairgowrie; Kirriemuir. (Kirriemuir was in the same seat as the non-Perth parts of this arrangement in the days of Tayside North.) 7. Perthshire South and St Andrews (75,716): Carse of Gowrie, Almond/Earn, Strathallan, Kinross; Tay Bridgehead, St Andrews, Cupar, Howe of Fife. (It looks a bit Tay Banks-ish, but there is a direct road link from Bridge of Earn to the Carse of Gowrie in the M90, and the two areas used to be in a Tayside regional electoral division together.) 8. Stirling and Crieff (71,781): Stirling council; Strathearn. (Almost the zombie review proposal for the area.) 9. Clackmannan and Grangemouth (76,094): Clackmannanshire council; Carse et al, Grangemouth, Bo'ness (hat-tip to Piperdave and others for this; the lack of a direct road link is mitigated by the fact that it's impossible to leave the A876 on the north side of the Forth until it enters Clackmannanshire. And the Carse and Clacks have been linked at parliamentary level many times in the past. Ht to Piperdave and others for the idea of this link in the first place.) 10. Falkirk (76,313): Denny, Larbert, Falkirk x2, Braes x2. Dunfermline and West Fife, Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath, Glenrothes and Anstruther as per ntyuk's arrangement; two Dunbartonshire seats (West = LA + Milngavie; East = LA - Milngavie). The presence of two seats with orphan wards would doubtless make this a non-starter, but it gets round some of the problems of low electorates in the Stirling/Falkirk/Clackmannanshire area. AJT - Very nice plan in Aberdeenshire, better on its own merits and more in the spirit of minimum change than my suggestion for this area. I'm not so sure about the rest, though: but this really turns on what one does with E Duns, whereof more in a moment. But the number of plans being posted here shows that we now have great swathes of Scotland where there is demonstrably no necessity at all for ward-splitting. Not that that'll stop the BCS. Turning to E Duns: you want to link it with W Duns, which sounds logical. But I don't want to do this for two reasons: - It implies separating Milngavie ward from the rest of E Duns and this means an absolutely terrible boundary in this area, with the Bearsden wards virtually isolated from the rest of E Duns.
- I feel the best solution for the Highlands means putting the two southernmost wards of Highland in an Argyll-based seat, which means in turn that Argyll & Bute needs to shed its southernmost ward to a W Duns seat (I know this means giving Helensburgh a haircut but it's a only light trim, and these things happen). This means the W Duns seat has no room for Milngavie.
I am conscious that elsewhere I've advocated seats with no direct internal line of communication across a river or similar obstacle. Examples include (in Scotland) Renfrew & Johnstone, Rutherglen, Clackmannan & Grangemouth; (in England) Christchurch, New Forest East; and there may be one or two others that I can't call to mind just now. But in each case, there are two extenuating factors: (a) there is at least one readily-accessible good-quality road link even though it involves briefly transiting through an adjoining seat; (b) in the context of the seat as a whole, the common boundary between the two parts is of reasonable length even though it does pass along an unbridged river. But E Duns, with the Bearsden wards but without Milngavie, fails both these tests. The common boundary is no more than 150 yards long, and the shortest road link is a B road (B8049) running across the northern edge of Glasgow - if you want a better road than that, you must drive deep into Milngavie or even deeper into Glasgow itself. Now, I know there are precedents for this sort of thing and I freely admit that I don't know this part of the world at all, so I'm willing to be told that it's the least bad option available. Indeed, I originally also suggested it when I proposed putting Milngavie ward in Stirling, but I've been suffering increasing qualms about this. I want to keep the Stirling link for reasons given above, but I'm debating whether it might be slightly less bad if E Duns surrendered ward 4 instead. This results in better internal connectivity for both seats (especially E Duns); but I'm aware that I'm doing terrible things to the town of Kirkintilloch, a place that has never done me any harm. (But really, is this suggestion any worse than the brutal existing constituency boundary through Kirkintilloch?) The other option is to put Kilsyth in Stirling but this means (a) an additional LA boundary crossing, and (b) that E Duns loses ward 9 instead (to the Airdrie/Cumbernauld seat), which still means a boundary through Kirkintilloch, although perhaps slightly less bad than the one resulting from taking ward 4. I'd welcome a second opinion on this. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on May 14, 2016 13:37:01 GMT
As for East Neuk - well, I'm sure the locals would rather share a seat with St Andrews than with Glenrothes. I imagine most people would. But somewhere has to go in with Glenrothes, and I don't think East Neuk's preference can be accommodated without destroying an otherwise excellent map. And it is ironic - to put it no more strongly - that BCS thought E Neuk's complaint was a reason sufficiently compelling to revise its plan in this area, whilst simultaneously confirming its decision to drive boundaries through the middle of Dunfermline and Ayr. Isn't there something in the bible about swallowing camels but straining at gnats*? It's because people from North East Fife get very upset at any suggestion to split the area. There were protests in Largo when the last Holyrood boundary review decided to put them in with Glenrothes, with banners and placards and everything. Some people there seemed to think it would negatively affect their house prices. As someone who is moving down the road to the East Neuk in September, I'll accept that arrangement when there is a faster bus from Crail to Glenrothes that doesn't involve going via St Andrews. Why do you advance those views on the nature of public transport in connection with the zoning of voters? Being on two side of a river ; not having a major road throughout; agonizing over lack of contiguity generally! Why is this of any interest at all or of any consequence to the average voter? We want and need a vote. Where the other voters live does not matter to them nor does it affect their vote in any way. They do not need to visit each other or even know where the boundaries are. Internal communication in a constituency is only of concern to campaigning teams and the logistics of moving ballot boxes to the count. |
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,742
|
Post by Adrian on May 14, 2016 13:54:56 GMT
It's because people from North East Fife get very upset at any suggestion to split the area. There were protests in Largo when the last Holyrood boundary review decided to put them in with Glenrothes, with banners and placards and everything. Some people there seemed to think it would negatively affect their house prices. As someone who is moving down the road to the East Neuk in September, I'll accept that arrangement when there is a faster bus from Crail to Glenrothes that doesn't involve going via St Andrews. Why do you advance those views on the nature of public transport in connection with the zoning of voters? Being on two side of a river ; not having a major road throughout; agonizing over lack of contiguity generally! Why is this of any interest at all or of any consequence to the average voter? We want and need a vote. Where the other voters live does not matter to them nor does it affect their vote in any way. They do not need to visit each other or even know where the boundaries are. Internal communication in a constituency is only of concern to campaigning teams and the logistics of moving ballot boxes to the count. You overstate this position somewhat. Voters often consider themselves as part of a community, and some of their political views are therefore community views. It's naive to think that an MP simply represents individual voters. S/he also represents towns, and hospitals (i.e. its users), factories (i.e. its workers) etc. and it's difficult to do this if boundaries slice through areas willy-nilly. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on May 14, 2016 14:18:31 GMT
Why do you advance those views on the nature of public transport in connection with the zoning of voters? Being on two side of a river ; not having a major road throughout; agonizing over lack of contiguity generally! Why is this of any interest at all or of any consequence to the average voter? We want and need a vote. Where the other voters live does not matter to them nor does it affect their vote in any way. They do not need to visit each other or even know where the boundaries are. Internal communication in a constituency is only of concern to campaigning teams and the logistics of moving ballot boxes to the count. You overstate this position somewhat. Voters often consider themselves as part of a community, and some of their political views are therefore community views. It's naive to think that an MP simply represents individual voters. S/he also represents towns, and hospitals (i.e. its users), factories (i.e. its workers) etc. and it's difficult to do this if boundaries slice through areas willy-nilly. It was not my intention to overstate or to downplay the community aspect. By the nature of the exercise the drawing up will have odd, unfortunate and consequential effects of having to fit in with other constituencies with a numbers criterion. Many constituencies are obvious in situation, boundary and name, whilst others pose major problems not all of which may be solved. Even in the fairly Conservative areas of say Kent, there are urban areas with poverty sitting close to wealthy, leafy opulence (how else to they get cleaners and gardeners?) and that constituency will also have quite rural parts with a spread from great wealth to many on very basic incomes. What draws them together is shopping in the local town, support for Kent cricket, the Invicta badge, the local schools and hospital, a 'southern' feel, proximity and 'distance' from London, proximity and 'distance' to the Continent, the bus services and train services. They don't need to know each other or to visit each other or to have ready access or any access to all parts of that constituency. What they have in common is Kentishness/London commuting/central shopping town/closeness to Continent/access to two important rivers and a lot of coastline. The particular boundaries are of no real consequence except to the party activists and those attempting to gerrymander best outcomes. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 14, 2016 14:32:10 GMT
I think you're taking me too seriously here. It's more that I'd quite like a faster bus to Edinburgh, and could accept that as compensation for living in an abomination like 'Glenrothes & East Neuk'. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on May 14, 2016 14:37:28 GMT
I think you're taking me too seriously here. It's more that I'd quite like a faster bus to Edinburgh, and could accept that as compensation for living in an abomination like 'Glenrothes & East Neuk'. And my point is wider than your perfect travel arrangements. I have been by train from St Andrews through Crail to Edinburgh..............Would that it were still possible. |
|
|
|
Post by islington on May 15, 2016 11:05:54 GMT
How about this arrangement for Fife: South Tay (75957) Strathearn, Strathallan, Almond, Howe, Bridgehead, Cupar, St Andrews, East Neuk Kirkcaldy (71113) inc Burntisland, Buckhaven, Leven Glenrothes & Kinross (77287) inc Cowdenbeath, Lochs, Lochgelly Dunfermline (78254) inc West, Inverkeithing, Rosyth There are a surprising number of possibilities. How about this? (It assumes that Stirling in linked to E Duns and consequently does not need reinforcement from P&K.) Dunfermline (78254) as above. Kirkcaldy (76998): Kirkcaldy x4, Cowdenbeath, Lochgelly, Buckhaven. Glenrothes, Kinross & S Perthshire (72900): Glenrothes x3, Lochs, Kinross, Strathallan, Strathearn. NE Fife & Bridge of Earn (74459): Rest of Fife plus Almond I'm not advocating this because it doesn't improve Ntyuk's original suggestion (quite the reverse); but it does keep E Neuk and St Andrews together if that's the most important consideration (which it isn't). And I'm sure Crieff won't be any more enthusiastic than E Neuk at the prospect of sharing a seat with Glenrothes. (Or Kirkcaldy and Glenrothes could swap Lochs and Buckhaven if you like.) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2016 14:48:15 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by ajthomson on May 16, 2016 17:02:44 GMT
A non-ward-splitting alternative for central and north-east Scotland: 1. Banff and Buchan (77,582): Banff, Troup, Fraserburgh, Central Buchan, Peterhead x2, Turriff, Ellon. 2. Gordon and Deeside (73,365): Mid Formartine, E Garioch, Inverurie, W Garioch, Huntly et al, Westhill, Aboyne et al. 3. Angus North and Kincardine (74,099): Banchory, N Kincardine, Stonehaven, Mearns; Montrose, Brechin, Forfar. 4. Angus South and Dundee East (72,307): Arbroath x2, Carnoustie, Sidlaw/Monifieth; North East, The Ferry. 5. Dundee West (76,317): Strathmartine, Lochee, West End, Coldside, Maryfield, East End. 6. Perth and North Perthshire (73,859): Perth x3, Strathtay, Highland, Strathmore, Blairgowrie; Kirriemuir. (Kirriemuir was in the same seat as the non-Perth parts of this arrangement in the days of Tayside North.) 7. Perthshire South and St Andrews (75,716): Carse of Gowrie, Almond/Earn, Strathallan, Kinross; Tay Bridgehead, St Andrews, Cupar, Howe of Fife. (It looks a bit Tay Banks-ish, but there is a direct road link from Bridge of Earn to the Carse of Gowrie in the M90, and the two areas used to be in a Tayside regional electoral division together.) 8. Stirling and Crieff (71,781): Stirling council; Strathearn. (Almost the zombie review proposal for the area.) 9. Clackmannan and Grangemouth (76,094): Clackmannanshire council; Carse et al, Grangemouth, Bo'ness (hat-tip to Piperdave and others for this; the lack of a direct road link is mitigated by the fact that it's impossible to leave the A876 on the north side of the Forth until it enters Clackmannanshire. And the Carse and Clacks have been linked at parliamentary level many times in the past. Ht to Piperdave and others for the idea of this link in the first place.) 10. Falkirk (76,313): Denny, Larbert, Falkirk x2, Braes x2. Dunfermline and West Fife, Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath, Glenrothes and Anstruther as per ntyuk's arrangement; two Dunbartonshire seats (West = LA + Milngavie; East = LA - Milngavie). The presence of two seats with orphan wards would doubtless make this a non-starter, but it gets round some of the problems of low electorates in the Stirling/Falkirk/Clackmannanshire area. AJT - Very nice plan in Aberdeenshire, better on its own merits and more in the spirit of minimum change than my suggestion for this area. I'm not so sure about the rest, though: but this really turns on what one does with E Duns, whereof more in a moment. But the number of plans being posted here shows that we now have great swathes of Scotland where there is demonstrably no necessity at all for ward-splitting. Not that that'll stop the BCS. Turning to E Duns: you want to link it with W Duns, which sounds logical. But I don't want to do this for two reasons: - It implies separating Milngavie ward from the rest of E Duns and this means an absolutely terrible boundary in this area, with the Bearsden wards virtually isolated from the rest of E Duns.
- I feel the best solution for the Highlands means putting the two southernmost wards of Highland in an Argyll-based seat, which means in turn that Argyll & Bute needs to shed its southernmost ward to a W Duns seat (I know this means giving Helensburgh a haircut but it's a only light trim, and these things happen). This means the W Duns seat has no room for Milngavie.
I am conscious that elsewhere I've advocated seats with no direct internal line of communication across a river or similar obstacle. Examples include (in Scotland) Renfrew & Johnstone, Rutherglen, Clackmannan & Grangemouth; (in England) Christchurch, New Forest East; and there may be one or two others that I can't call to mind just now. But in each case, there are two extenuating factors: (a) there is at least one readily-accessible good-quality road link even though it involves briefly transiting through an adjoining seat; (b) in the context of the seat as a whole, the common boundary between the two parts is of reasonable length even though it does pass along an unbridged river. But E Duns, with the Bearsden wards but without Milngavie, fails both these tests. The common boundary is no more than 150 yards long, and the shortest road link is a B road (B8049) running across the northern edge of Glasgow - if you want a better road than that, you must drive deep into Milngavie or even deeper into Glasgow itself. Now, I know there are precedents for this sort of thing and I freely admit that I don't know this part of the world at all, so I'm willing to be told that it's the least bad option available. Indeed, I originally also suggested it when I proposed putting Milngavie ward in Stirling, but I've been suffering increasing qualms about this. I want to keep the Stirling link for reasons given above, but I'm debating whether it might be slightly less bad if E Duns surrendered ward 4 instead. This results in better internal connectivity for both seats (especially E Duns); but I'm aware that I'm doing terrible things to the town of Kirkintilloch, a place that has never done me any harm. (But really, is this suggestion any worse than the brutal existing constituency boundary through Kirkintilloch?) The other option is to put Kilsyth in Stirling but this means (a) an additional LA boundary crossing, and (b) that E Duns loses ward 9 instead (to the Airdrie/Cumbernauld seat), which still means a boundary through Kirkintilloch, although perhaps slightly less bad than the one resulting from taking ward 4. I'd welcome a second opinion on this. As a native of Milngavie, I'd say the difficulty with Bearsden is much less than it looks. Boclair Road is the main route out of Bearsden, certainly southern Bearsden, for people travelling to Bishopbriggs and Kirkintilloch, and I doubt most Bearsden residents travelling along that road would be aware that they had entered Glasgow (there doesn't even appear to be a 'welcome to Glasgow' sign on the northern side of the road). There is only one residential property (plus Dobbie's Garden Centre) in the 'Glasgow' part of Boclair Road. The straddling of the Glasgow boundary was also ignored during the existence of Strathkelvin & Bearsden as a Westminster seat between 1983 and 2005, and is still ignored in the Holyrood seat of that name. So I think it can reasonably be ignored this time too. However horrendous it might look, it seems to work for all practical purposes. Re Stirlingshire: Milngavie was once in Stirlingshire, but that was several centuries ago. It's been in Dunbartonshire for a long time now, and beyond Glasgow commuter villages like Strathblane, Balfron and Drymen I wouldn't say it had any close ties with Stirlingshire. It certainly doesn't have any close ties with the town of Stirling. I can't remember when I first visited Stirling when growing up, but at a guess when I was about 7 or 8. I don't imagine that Stirling's links with Lennoxtown and Milton of Campsie in ward 4 are that great either, but both villages were in Stirlingshire until 1974, as was Kilsyth. A Stirling & Kilsyth seat might work, though the only direct road between the two (the Tak-Ma-Doon Road, which leads up to the Carron Valley Reservoir) is steep, narrow, and not greatly used except for local access; it's a less convincing link than Boclair Road, Bearsden, despite the latter's crossing the Glasgow city boundary. Re Helensburgh: I know that you would like to split Helensburgh, and appreciate that this is for non-ward-splitting reasons. I'm not so keen on it, as it's more than just a light trim (I would estimate between a quarter and a third of the entire town). |
|
|
|
Post by ajthomson on May 16, 2016 17:05:22 GMT
How about this arrangement for Fife: South Tay (75957) Strathearn, Strathallan, Almond, Howe, Bridgehead, Cupar, St Andrews, East Neuk Kirkcaldy (71113) inc Burntisland, Buckhaven, Leven Glenrothes & Kinross (77287) inc Cowdenbeath, Lochs, Lochgelly Dunfermline (78254) inc West, Inverkeithing, Rosyth There are a surprising number of possibilities. How about this? (It assumes that Stirling in linked to E Duns and consequently does not need reinforcement from P&K.) Dunfermline (78254) as above. Kirkcaldy (76998): Kirkcaldy x4, Cowdenbeath, Lochgelly, Buckhaven. Glenrothes, Kinross & S Perthshire (72900): Glenrothes x3, Lochs, Kinross, Strathallan, Strathearn. NE Fife & Bridge of Earn (74459): Rest of Fife plus Almond I'm not advocating this because it doesn't improve Ntyuk's original suggestion (quite the reverse); but it does keep E Neuk and St Andrews together if that's the most important consideration (which it isn't). And I'm sure Crieff won't be any more enthusiastic than E Neuk at the prospect of sharing a seat with Glenrothes. (Or Kirkcaldy and Glenrothes could swap Lochs and Buckhaven if you like.) Kinross’s main communication links are north–south along the M90, essentially Perth–Dunfermline. So it could be linked with Dunfermline like so: Dunfermline and Kinross (74,358): Kincardine villages, Dunfermline x 3, The Lochs (for the M90); Kinross. Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath (77,787): Rosyth, Inverkeithing, Cowdenbeath, Kirkcaldy x 4. Glenrothes (74,509): Glenrothes x 3, Lochgelly, Buckhaven, Leven. Crieff and St Andrews (75,957): Strathearn, Strathallan, Almond/Earn, Howe of Fife, Cupar, East Neuk, St Andrews, Tay Bridgehead. The break between Dunfermline and Rosyth isn’t great, but Rosyth has been split between seats in the past. Also questionable is splitting the three wards of the old Fife coalfield (Lochs, Cowdenbeath, Kirkcaldy) between three seats. But it would keep the East Neuk more or less in one seat, and would enable seats based on both Kirkcaldy and Glenrothes, neither of which would be split. |
|
|
|
Post by islington on May 17, 2016 10:54:33 GMT
AJT - Very nice plan in Aberdeenshire, better on its own merits and more in the spirit of minimum change than my suggestion for this area. I'm not so sure about the rest, though: but this really turns on what one does with E Duns, whereof more in a moment. But the number of plans being posted here shows that we now have great swathes of Scotland where there is demonstrably no necessity at all for ward-splitting. Not that that'll stop the BCS. Turning to E Duns: you want to link it with W Duns, which sounds logical. But I don't want to do this for two reasons: - It implies separating Milngavie ward from the rest of E Duns and this means an absolutely terrible boundary in this area, with the Bearsden wards virtually isolated from the rest of E Duns.
- I feel the best solution for the Highlands means putting the two southernmost wards of Highland in an Argyll-based seat, which means in turn that Argyll & Bute needs to shed its southernmost ward to a W Duns seat (I know this means giving Helensburgh a haircut but it's a only light trim, and these things happen). This means the W Duns seat has no room for Milngavie.
I am conscious that elsewhere I've advocated seats with no direct internal line of communication across a river or similar obstacle. Examples include (in Scotland) Renfrew & Johnstone, Rutherglen, Clackmannan & Grangemouth; (in England) Christchurch, New Forest East; and there may be one or two others that I can't call to mind just now. But in each case, there are two extenuating factors: (a) there is at least one readily-accessible good-quality road link even though it involves briefly transiting through an adjoining seat; (b) in the context of the seat as a whole, the common boundary between the two parts is of reasonable length even though it does pass along an unbridged river. But E Duns, with the Bearsden wards but without Milngavie, fails both these tests. The common boundary is no more than 150 yards long, and the shortest road link is a B road (B8049) running across the northern edge of Glasgow - if you want a better road than that, you must drive deep into Milngavie or even deeper into Glasgow itself. Now, I know there are precedents for this sort of thing and I freely admit that I don't know this part of the world at all, so I'm willing to be told that it's the least bad option available. Indeed, I originally also suggested it when I proposed putting Milngavie ward in Stirling, but I've been suffering increasing qualms about this. I want to keep the Stirling link for reasons given above, but I'm debating whether it might be slightly less bad if E Duns surrendered ward 4 instead. This results in better internal connectivity for both seats (especially E Duns); but I'm aware that I'm doing terrible things to the town of Kirkintilloch, a place that has never done me any harm. (But really, is this suggestion any worse than the brutal existing constituency boundary through Kirkintilloch?) The other option is to put Kilsyth in Stirling but this means (a) an additional LA boundary crossing, and (b) that E Duns loses ward 9 instead (to the Airdrie/Cumbernauld seat), which still means a boundary through Kirkintilloch, although perhaps slightly less bad than the one resulting from taking ward 4. I'd welcome a second opinion on this. As a native of Milngavie, I'd say the difficulty with Bearsden is much less than it looks. Boclair Road is the main route out of Bearsden, certainly southern Bearsden, for people travelling to Bishopbriggs and Kirkintilloch, and I doubt most Bearsden residents travelling along that road would be aware that they had entered Glasgow (there doesn't even appear to be a 'welcome to Glasgow' sign on the northern side of the road). There is only one residential property (plus Dobbie's Garden Centre) in the 'Glasgow' part of Boclair Road. The straddling of the Glasgow boundary was also ignored during the existence of Strathkelvin & Bearsden as a Westminster seat between 1983 and 2005, and is still ignored in the Holyrood seat of that name. So I think it can reasonably be ignored this time too. However horrendous it might look, it seems to work for all practical purposes. Re Stirlingshire: Milngavie was once in Stirlingshire, but that was several centuries ago. It's been in Dunbartonshire for a long time now, and beyond Glasgow commuter villages like Strathblane, Balfron and Drymen I wouldn't say it had any close ties with Stirlingshire. It certainly doesn't have any close ties with the town of Stirling. I can't remember when I first visited Stirling when growing up, but at a guess when I was about 7 or 8. I don't imagine that Stirling's links with Lennoxtown and Milton of Campsie in ward 4 are that great either, but both villages were in Stirlingshire until 1974, as was Kilsyth. A Stirling & Kilsyth seat might work, though the only direct road between the two (the Tak-Ma-Doon Road, which leads up to the Carron Valley Reservoir) is steep, narrow, and not greatly used except for local access; it's a less convincing link than Boclair Road, Bearsden, despite the latter's crossing the Glasgow city boundary. Re Helensburgh: I know that you would like to split Helensburgh, and appreciate that this is for non-ward-splitting reasons. I'm not so keen on it, as it's more than just a light trim (I would estimate between a quarter and a third of the entire town). Re the E Duns conundrum: Thanks for the response. There's nothing like local knowledge. Courtesy of Streetview, I took a virtual drive along Boclair Road last night and it's a perfectly reasonable road, definitely better than I thought it might be just from looking at the map. And Ntyuk clearly feels the same way. And there are precedents, as you say. It's just that the boundary looks so terrible on the map, but maybe one shouldn't be excessively influenced by that. Re Helensburgh: You're right; splitting off Argyll & Bute ward 11 takes more of Helensburgh than I thought (although I don't think it's as much as a third). It's a shame to do this to an unoffending small town, but surely it's unavoidable in view of the dramatic growth of the city of Inverness, which means that, compared with the zombie, more of Highland has to be shifted out of the Inverness seat and into Argyll (two whole wards rather than one-and-a-tiny-bit). And before someone suggests it, I don't think ward-splitting would help here because W Duns + A&B ward 11 is only 72650 so even if you did split the ward, there isn't enough slack to carve out the Helensburgh bits. I agree it's a flawed solution, but I still feel it's part of what is the best pattern overall. But it's a fascinating example of the way the 'ripple effect' can mean that a population spurt in Inverness has implications as far away as the Glasgow commuter belt. |
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,742
|
Post by Adrian on May 17, 2016 15:19:18 GMT
Is it worth creating a plan with two Highlands seats with areas between 12-13k with electorates around the 50-60k mark? It's been suggested that that's in the rules, and it might be appreciated by the folks in the areas concerned.
|
|
|
|
Post by greatkingrat on May 17, 2016 15:32:31 GMT
The rules say:
(2)A constituency does not have to comply with rule 2(1)(a) if— .
(a)it has an area of more than 12,000 square kilometres, and .
(b)the Boundary Commission concerned are satisfied that it is not reasonably possible for the constituency to comply with that rule.
It clearly is possible to create constituencies that meet both the area and electorate thresholds, so I don't think you can justify the use of this clause.
Plus as the total number of Scottish seats is fixed, this would bump up the average seat size in the rest of Scotland, making it harder to draw seats within quota.
|
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,742
|
Post by Adrian on May 19, 2016 16:07:52 GMT
wrt the discussion about the apparent awkwardness of having two seats wholly within Dunbartonshire, I think I'll suggest including the Millichen area in my Bearsden/Kirkintilloch seat, i.e moving the border to the Kelvin. (I assume the odd position of the Glasgow border here is the result of a Glaswegian land-grab many moons ago.) Either that, or move the ward boundary to the road junction in Dougalston, which I don't think would affect any voters.
Going in the other direction, I could suggest moving the boundary of the Clydebank/Milngavie seat to the Baljaffray Road, if the no. of electors on Moorfoot is low enough.
|
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,742
|
Post by Adrian on May 19, 2016 17:26:38 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by AustralianSwingVoter on Jun 22, 2016 11:54:02 GMT
SCOTLAND NO WARD SPLITS Caithness, Sutherland & Ross 72542 Argyll & Lochaber OR Argyll, Bute, Lochaber & Skye 72473 Inverness & Nairn OR Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch & Strathspey 76866 Elgin & Banff OR Moray & Banff 78389 Buchan 73634 Gordon & Deeside 75996 Aberdeen North 77350 Aberdeen South 71071 Kincardine 76721 Fofar OR Angus 71071 Dundee 77612 Kinross & St Andrews OR Kinross & North East Fife 76287 Perth 72831 Glenrothes 74747 Kirkcaldy 76713 Dunfermline 74864 Sterling & Clackmannanshire 77602 Milngavie & Teith 74698 Falkirk 74092 Linlithgow OR West Lothian 73582 Livingston 74322 Motherwell & Wishaw 75208 Airdrie & Coatbridge OR Monklands 77228 Cumbernauld, Kilsyth & Kirkintilloch 78018 Dumbarton OR Dumbarton & Clydebank 73913 Glasgow Bishopbriggs 72532 Glasgow Bellshill 77956 Glasgow Central 77199 Glasgow Kelvin 76199 Glasgow Bearsden 73617 Paisley 71098 Glasgow Renfrew 72593 Glasgow Pollok 74196 Glasgow Rutherglen 76788 Hamilton & Cambuslang 75047 East Kilbride 77212 Giffnock OR Eastwood 77180 Greenock OR Inverclyde 77565 Ardrossan OR Cunningham 72916 Kilmarnock & Irvine 78449 Ayr OR Ayr & Carrick 77352 Wigtown, Kirkcudbright & Cumnock OR Galloway & Cumnock 74738 Lanark, Peebles & Shotts 76938 Dumfries 77382 Berwick, Roxburgh & Selkirk OR Scottish Borders 77885 Haddington OR East Lothian 76153 Edinburgh South 73841 Edinburgh North 75718 Edinburgh Central 76799 Midlothian 72849 Edinburgh West 74704     |
|
|
|
Post by islington on Jun 22, 2016 14:16:37 GMT
ASV -
1 - Welcome
2 - I haven't time to comment fully yet (and I have plans of my own I'm trying to upload as quickly as I can), but I'm loving your non-split Edinburgh. Fancy trying Glasgow?
|
|
