Foggy
Non-Aligned
Yn Ennill Yma
Posts: 6,144 
|
Post by Foggy on Sept 14, 2016 0:48:53 GMT
Going through the seats alphabetically, there's one orphan ward in Basildon and Billericay, and two in Broxbourne (which should be renamed 'Cheshunt'). A bad start. Queen Edith's is added to Cambridge as expected, but add me to those assuming Milton would stay in a rural Cambs seat. The new Castle Point boundaries should provide a chance to rename it 'Canvey and Pitsea'. There's no reason for Central Suffolk & North Ipswich to still exist in anything like its current form, as already stated above. An orphan ward has been used to bring Yarmouth into quota. Same goes for Hemel Hempstead and Hertsmere. Pity the voters of Three Rivers district! Luton North and Houghton Hall would be a more appropriate name for that new seat, lest it appear that part of Bedfordshire has been combined with Houghton-le-Spring. Luton South ends up with an orphan ward too. Mid Beds is what it is, but Mid Norfolk could surely be called Dereham instead? NE Beds = Biggleswade, NE Cambs = Wisbech, NE Essex = Wivenhoe. NE Herts = ... a modified version of my 'Letchworth and Sawston' seat!  I never in a trillion years imagined that the Commission would: a) go for something like that; and b) fail to acknowledge the minority county bit in the name, Ireland-style. There's yet another orphan ward in North Norfolk. NW Cambs doesn't appear to contain any part of historic Cambridgeshire proper. NW Norfolk = King's Lynn. The two Norwich seats no longer seem to fit the orientation their names would suggest. Never mind the Ferrers, 'Rayleigh and Woodham' will suffice. Shame about the orphan ward from Maldon, mind. South Basildon and East Thurrock continues to be as hideous as one would imagine from the name. S and SE Cambs both take in an orphan ward each from Hunts, and the latter really should be called Ely and take in Newmarket (if there's anywhere in the country a county boundary shouldn't be respected, it's surely here). S Norfolk = Diss, S Suffolk = Sudbury, SW Beds = Dunstable and Buzzard, SW Herts = Tring, SW Norfolk = Thetford, Suffolk Coastal = Felixstowe, W Suffolk = Haverhill. Witham and Maldon needs to lose its orphan ward from Chelmsford. End communication. |
|
ColinJ
Labour
Living in the Past
Posts: 2,127
|
Post by ColinJ on Sept 14, 2016 2:33:00 GMT
I do believe mattb and ColinJ are both joining me in the St Albans constituency You never know, Pete! If it DOES happen, then Watford BC and Three Rivers DC really must sort out the ghastly borough boundary between Watford and Leavesden ward - the number of split roads is legion - with a view to making a better Parliamentary boundary in due course. |
|
|
|
Post by cuthbertbede on Sept 14, 2016 11:09:51 GMT
Nope. Wivenhoe has less than a tenth of the constituency's electorate. Brightlingsea, Tiptree, Mersea and Stanway are all of similar size to Wivenhoe. The combined Manningtree/Mistley/Lawford settlement can't be too far off, either. Most of the constituency wouldn't identify itself as having anything to do with Wivenhoe - the natural centre is, of course, Colchester. North East Essex is the best name for what is a rural doughnut (if you really want the name of a town, you could acknowledge the hole in the middle and call it something like 'Colchester Outer' or 'Colchester Rural', but I wouldn't support that). |
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Sept 14, 2016 11:29:27 GMT
Going through the seats alphabetically, there's one orphan ward in Basildon and Billericay, and two in Broxbourne (which should be renamed 'Cheshunt'). A bad start. Queen Edith's is added to Cambridge as expected, but add me to those assuming Milton would stay in a rural Cambs seat. The new Castle Point boundaries should provide a chance to rename it 'Canvey and Pitsea'. There's no reason for Central Suffolk & North Ipswich to still exist in anything like its current form, as already stated above. An orphan ward has been used to bring Yarmouth into quota. Same goes for Hemel Hempstead and Hertsmere. Pity the voters of Three Rivers district! Luton North and Houghton Hall would be a more appropriate name for that new seat, lest it appear that part of Bedfordshire has been combined with Houghton-le-Spring. Luton South ends up with an orphan ward too. Mid Beds is what it is, but Mid Norfolk could surely be called Dereham instead? NE Beds = Biggleswade, NE Cambs = Wisbech, NE Essex = Wivenhoe. NE Herts = ... a modified version of my 'Letchworth and Sawston' seat! I never in a trillion years imagined that the Commission would: a) go for something like that; and b) fail to acknowledge the minority county bit in the name, Ireland-style. There's yet another orphan ward in North Norfolk. NW Cambs doesn't appear to contain any part of historic Cambridgeshire proper. NW Norfolk = King's Lynn. The two Norwich seats no longer seem to fit the orientation their names would suggest. Never mind the Ferrers, 'Rayleigh and Woodham' will suffice. Shame about the orphan ward from Maldon, mind. South Basildon and East Thurrock continues to be as hideous as one would imagine from the name. S and SE Cambs both take in an orphan ward each from Hunts, and the latter really should be called Ely and take in Newmarket (if there's anywhere in the country a county boundary shouldn't be respected, it's surely here). S Norfolk = Diss, S Suffolk = Sudbury, SW Beds = Dunstable and Buzzard, SW Herts = Tring, SW Norfolk = Thetford, Suffolk Coastal = Felixstowe, W Suffolk = Haverhill. Witham and Maldon needs to lose its orphan ward from Chelmsford. End communication. What's the definition of an orphan ward? |
|
|
|
Post by lennon on Sept 14, 2016 11:33:27 GMT
Going through the seats alphabetically, there's one orphan ward in Basildon and Billericay, and two in Broxbourne (which should be renamed 'Cheshunt'). A bad start. Queen Edith's is added to Cambridge as expected, but add me to those assuming Milton would stay in a rural Cambs seat. The new Castle Point boundaries should provide a chance to rename it 'Canvey and Pitsea'. There's no reason for Central Suffolk & North Ipswich to still exist in anything like its current form, as already stated above. An orphan ward has been used to bring Yarmouth into quota. Same goes for Hemel Hempstead and Hertsmere. Pity the voters of Three Rivers district! Luton North and Houghton Hall would be a more appropriate name for that new seat, lest it appear that part of Bedfordshire has been combined with Houghton-le-Spring. Luton South ends up with an orphan ward too. Mid Beds is what it is, but Mid Norfolk could surely be called Dereham instead? NE Beds = Biggleswade, NE Cambs = Wisbech, NE Essex = Wivenhoe. NE Herts = ... a modified version of my 'Letchworth and Sawston' seat! I never in a trillion years imagined that the Commission would: a) go for something like that; and b) fail to acknowledge the minority county bit in the name, Ireland-style. There's yet another orphan ward in North Norfolk. NW Cambs doesn't appear to contain any part of historic Cambridgeshire proper. NW Norfolk = King's Lynn. The two Norwich seats no longer seem to fit the orientation their names would suggest. Never mind the Ferrers, 'Rayleigh and Woodham' will suffice. Shame about the orphan ward from Maldon, mind. South Basildon and East Thurrock continues to be as hideous as one would imagine from the name. S and SE Cambs both take in an orphan ward each from Hunts, and the latter really should be called Ely and take in Newmarket (if there's anywhere in the country a county boundary shouldn't be respected, it's surely here). S Norfolk = Diss, S Suffolk = Sudbury, SW Beds = Dunstable and Buzzard, SW Herts = Tring, SW Norfolk = Thetford, Suffolk Coastal = Felixstowe, W Suffolk = Haverhill. Witham and Maldon needs to lose its orphan ward from Chelmsford. End communication. What's the definition of an orphan ward? Where there is a single ward in a (proposed) Constituency from a Local Authority Area. |
|
right
Conservative
Posts: 18,926
|
Post by right on Sept 14, 2016 11:34:00 GMT
Even in the county with minimal change required - Suffolk - they make things messier than they need to be. Ipswich needs an extra ward to meet the quota, but instead of taking in one of the three actual Ipswich wards currently excluded from the seat, they bring in Pinewood from South Suffolk/Babergh, which then in turn has to take in wards from Bury St Edmunds... I lived in the area for some years, and I know that Pinewood is a sort of toytown suburb of Ipswich, but I think there is a more elegant solution: Ipswich - as current seat PLUS the Castle Hill ward from Suffolk Central & Ipswich North - 76284 Suffolk Central - as current seat LESS Castle Hill PLUS Gislingham and Rickinghall & Walsham from Bury St Edmunds - 74451 Bury St Edmunds - as current seat LESS Gislingham and Rickinghall & Walsham - 77642 All other seats in Suffolk unaffected and within quota, and avoids the strangeness of an incomplete Ipswich taking in non-Ipswich wards. Better than the proposal, I reckon. Either Castle Hill or Pinewood would make the seat safer for the Tories (or perhaps closer to a toss up than the Labour leaning seat it is). Labour must be fuming that Whitehouse wasn't moved There's quite a strong Lib Dem tradition in Pinewood. Would that return to the Tories in a two way fight or would they form a base with the very different Liberals in St Margeret's for a revitalised Lib Dem presence in tge seat? |
|
sirbenjamin
IFP
True fame is reading your name written in graffiti, but without the words 'is a wanker' after it.
Posts: 4,979
|
Post by sirbenjamin on Sept 14, 2016 13:08:34 GMT
Even in the county with minimal change required - Suffolk - they make things messier than they need to be. Ipswich needs an extra ward to meet the quota, but instead of taking in one of the three actual Ipswich wards currently excluded from the seat, they bring in Pinewood from South Suffolk/Babergh, which then in turn has to take in wards from Bury St Edmunds... I lived in the area for some years, and I know that Pinewood is a sort of toytown suburb of Ipswich, but I think there is a more elegant solution: Ipswich - as current seat PLUS the Castle Hill ward from Suffolk Central & Ipswich North - 76284 Suffolk Central - as current seat LESS Castle Hill PLUS Gislingham and Rickinghall & Walsham from Bury St Edmunds - 74451 Bury St Edmunds - as current seat LESS Gislingham and Rickinghall & Walsham - 77642 All other seats in Suffolk unaffected and within quota, and avoids the strangeness of an incomplete Ipswich taking in non-Ipswich wards. Better than the proposal, I reckon. Either Castle Hill or Pinewood would make the seat safer for the Tories (or perhaps closer to a toss up than the Labour leaning seat it is). Labour must be fuming that Whitehouse wasn't moved There's quite a strong Lib Dem tradition in Pinewood. Would that return to the Tories in a two way fight or would they form a base with the very different Liberals in St Margeret's for a revitalised Lib Dem presence in tge seat? Politically Ipswich is an interesting place. The council rather foreshadowed the rest of the country with a rather shaky Con-Lib coalition in the Noughties until Labour recovered sufficiently to retake control (albeit then losing the parliamentary seat in 2010). While the coalition there wasn't popular, there didn't seem to be vast numbers of disillusioned LibDems breaking for Labour in the aftermath and the local LibDem organisation is more Orange Booker than Lab-lite. I suspect at least some local LDs aren't that unhappy about having Ben Gummer as their MP. On that basis, any ward that could conceivably be added to the seat will strengthen Tory prospects, unless the LDs in Pinewood or the North Ipswich wards are very different from those in St Margarets and the rest of the seat and are prepared to tactically vote Labour. Incidentally I was a colleague and friend of the 2015 Labour candidate for many years and he hates the LibDems far more than he dislikes Tories! |
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Yn Ennill Yma
Posts: 6,144
|
Post by Foggy on Sept 14, 2016 23:46:49 GMT
Nope. Wivenhoe has less than a tenth of the constituency's electorate. Brightlingsea, Tiptree, Mersea and Stanway are all of similar size to Wivenhoe. The combined Manningtree/Mistley/Lawford settlement can't be too far off, either. Most of the constituency wouldn't identify itself as having anything to do with Wivenhoe - the natural centre is, of course, Colchester. North East Essex is the best name for what is a rural doughnut (if you really want the name of a town, you could acknowledge the hole in the middle and call it something like 'Colchester Outer' or 'Colchester Rural', but I wouldn't support that). You're quite right, of course. I don't like names like NE Essex unless there is a counterpoint SW Essex seat (which would be strange in this case, since the population density is so much higher at the other end of the county). Tiptree would do as an alternative, I suppose. |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Sept 15, 2016 5:48:25 GMT
Tiptree would be daft for the exact same reasons, only more so because it's right on the edge of the seat.
|
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,742
|
Post by Adrian on Sept 15, 2016 7:35:20 GMT
I don't like names like NE Essex unless there is a counterpoint SW Essex seat I think you have to admit that your opinions on seat names are quite peculiar. |
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,742
|
Post by Adrian on Sept 15, 2016 7:40:55 GMT
Going through the seats alphabetically, there's one orphan ward in Basildon and Billericay, and two in Broxbourne (which should be renamed 'Cheshunt'). A bad start. Queen Edith's is added to Cambridge as expected, but add me to those assuming Milton would stay in a rural Cambs seat. The new Castle Point boundaries should provide a chance to rename it 'Canvey and Pitsea'. There's no reason for Central Suffolk & North Ipswich to still exist in anything like its current form, as already stated above. An orphan ward has been used to bring Yarmouth into quota. Same goes for Hemel Hempstead and Hertsmere. Pity the voters of Three Rivers district! Luton North and Houghton Hall would be a more appropriate name for that new seat, lest it appear that part of Bedfordshire has been combined with Houghton-le-Spring. Luton South ends up with an orphan ward too. Mid Beds is what it is, but Mid Norfolk could surely be called Dereham instead? NE Beds = Biggleswade, NE Cambs = Wisbech, NE Essex = Wivenhoe. NE Herts = ... a modified version of my 'Letchworth and Sawston' seat! I never in a trillion years imagined that the Commission would: a) go for something like that; and b) fail to acknowledge the minority county bit in the name, Ireland-style. There's yet another orphan ward in North Norfolk. NW Cambs doesn't appear to contain any part of historic Cambridgeshire proper. NW Norfolk = King's Lynn. The two Norwich seats no longer seem to fit the orientation their names would suggest. Never mind the Ferrers, 'Rayleigh and Woodham' will suffice. Shame about the orphan ward from Maldon, mind. South Basildon and East Thurrock continues to be as hideous as one would imagine from the name. S and SE Cambs both take in an orphan ward each from Hunts, and the latter really should be called Ely and take in Newmarket (if there's anywhere in the country a county boundary shouldn't be respected, it's surely here). S Norfolk = Diss, S Suffolk = Sudbury, SW Beds = Dunstable and Buzzard, SW Herts = Tring, SW Norfolk = Thetford, Suffolk Coastal = Felixstowe, W Suffolk = Haverhill. Witham and Maldon needs to lose its orphan ward from Chelmsford. End communication. You're right to flag up all the orphan wards, but most of the name changes you suggest are pointless. The two Houghtons you mention are pronounced differently, never mind that it should be quite clear which one is meant from the juxtaposition with Luton! What's more, Houghton Hall is in Norfolk. |
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Yn Ennill Yma
Posts: 6,144
|
Post by Foggy on Sept 15, 2016 19:00:34 GMT
I don't like names like NE Essex unless there is a counterpoint SW Essex seat I think you have to admit that your opinions on seat names are quite peculiar. Nope. Everyone else's opinions on seat names are wrong. Fair point about the Houghtons though. |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Sept 15, 2016 19:45:49 GMT
Anyway, Houghton Hall is only ward. Houghton Regis is the name of the town.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Sept 16, 2016 6:06:30 GMT
Foggy Tring would be an absurd name to use for SW Herts - it's right at the seats Northern periphery and is far from being the seats largest town. It isn't even the largest town in the Dacorum part of the seat )that would be Berkhamsted which being more centrally positioned within the seat would be a better name, but still bad). By far the biggest settlement is Rickmansworth, escpecially if you include in that Croxley Green, Moor Park and arguably Chorlewood too (certainly much of Chorleywood East ward is physically part of Rickmansworth). But that still would be a poor name because it is in a corner of the seat and would have no resonance further North (internal connections between the two parts of the seat are not good as the A41 which runs thtough/past Tring and Berko proceed to the other side of Watford from the Rickmansworth 'conurbation'. ditto the railway line. This is really one of those seats which is a collection of small towns where the compass point type of name is most appropriate. In this case though it should obviously West rather than South West
|
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Sept 16, 2016 9:50:47 GMT
Foggy Tring would be an absurd name to use for SW Herts - it's right at the seats Northern periphery and is far from being the seats largest town. It isn't even the largest town in the Dacorum part of the seat )that would be Berkhamsted which being more centrally positioned within the seat would be a better name, but still bad). By far the biggest settlement is Rickmansworth, escpecially if you include in that Croxley Green, Moor Park and arguably Chorlewood too (certainly much of Chorleywood East ward is physically part of Rickmansworth). But that still would be a poor name because it is in a corner of the seat and would have no resonance further North (internal connections between the two parts of the seat are not good as the A41 which runs thtough/past Tring and Berko proceed to the other side of Watford from the Rickmansworth 'conurbation'. ditto the railway line. This is really one of those seats which is a collection of small towns where the compass point type of name is most appropriate. In this case though it should obviously West rather than South West I think Berko is a good name. It is very central, well known and a prominent spot on the map and railway. It might get special attention from the Speaker and afford the member more access to being called. |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Sept 16, 2016 15:59:53 GMT
Aside from Colchester Outer, the only locally acceptable alternative name to North East Essex that I can think of is Colne Valley, which would be confusing anywhere outside Essex.
Looking at Essex, a sensible minimum change map might make the following changes:
1. Golf Green moves to Harwich & Clacton, Little Clacton & Weeley moves to North East Essex. I can only assume the BCE left Little Clacton in because of the name. This is not a good reason. Little Clacton is physically and socially distinct from Clacton proper. Jaywick is physically distinct from Clacton, but socially part of the settlement. And contrary to the BCE's protestations, it is not a village - unlike Little Clacton, it's part of the unparished area formerly covered by the town council.
2. Having a Chelmsford orphan ward in Witham & Maldon at the same time as having a Maldon orphan ward in Rayleigh & Woodham Ferrers is just silly. So move Purleigh into Witham & Maldon, ensuring that the entire Maldon district is in the same seat. Ideally you'd also drop Little Baddow, Danbury & Sandon, but the numbers are a bit too tight for getting three whole seats out of Uttlesford, Braintree and Maldon districts.
3. That lets you move South Hanningfield, Stock & Margaretting from Basildon & Billericay into Rayleigh & Woodham Ferrers, removing an unnecessary three-LA seat.
4. And you can eliminate another three-LA seat by giving the two southern wards of Brentwood to Basildon & Billericay instead of South Basildon & East Thurrock.
5. All this requires some shifting of wards in Basildon, which is no bad thing as the split of the New Town is particularly ugly even by the standards of Basildon seat splits. You could do it just by moving St. Martin's into the southern seat, but if you're going to send the northern seat west along the A127, I'd suggest moving Fryerns too and shifting Laindon Park the other way.
I'll probably submit a plan with rather greater change than that in order to get a single seat covering the entirety of Basildon New Town, but those changes would fix a lot that's wrong with the current map.
|
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Sept 16, 2016 17:25:25 GMT
I'll probably submit a plan with rather greater change than that in order to get a single seat covering the entirety of Basildon New Town, but those changes would fix a lot that's wrong with the current map. It`s very easy to get the Basildon wards in Basildon and Billericay down from two to one, but how do you get it to 0? It's the only part of the Essex map that seems strange and undesirable to my inexpert eyes. |
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,742
|
Post by Adrian on Sept 16, 2016 17:57:22 GMT
I'll probably submit a plan with rather greater change than that in order to get a single seat covering the entirety of Basildon New Town, but those changes would fix a lot that's wrong with the current map. It`s very easy to get the Basildon wards in Basildon and Billericay down from two to one, but how do you get it to 0? It's the only part of the Essex map that seems strange and undesirable to my inexpert eyes. My second Essex plan ukelect.wordpress.com/2016/06/12/2018-essex/ has a united Basildon, and you can add the Crouch ward as well if you rejig things in the Southend/Rochford area slightly. |
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Sept 16, 2016 18:11:12 GMT
Okay. Don't think anyone has the stomach for Brentwood & East Thurrock though.
|
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Sept 16, 2016 18:17:01 GMT
I'll probably submit a plan with rather greater change than that in order to get a single seat covering the entirety of Basildon New Town, but those changes would fix a lot that's wrong with the current map. It`s very easy to get the Basildon wards in Basildon and Billericay down from two to one, but how do you get it to 0? It's the only part of the Essex map that seems strange and undesirable to my inexpert eyes. Adrian's method works if you're ignoring the draft recommendations, but it's also quite possible to do it whilst largely leaving the north of the county unchanged. The East Thurrock seat swings round to the west of Basildon and takes in Billericay; the Castle Point seat extends east into West Leigh instead of West into Pitsea; the Southend West shifts east; Rochford & Southend East takes Hockley and Hawkwell; and Rayleigh keeps Wickford. Mind you, I've not yet found a way of keeping the Billericay seat down to three LAs or less. |
|
I never in a trillion years imagined that the Commission would: a) go for something like that; and b) fail to acknowledge the minority county bit in the name, Ireland-style.
