|
|
Post by John Chanin on Jun 23, 2017 11:11:39 GMT
My Greater Manchester solution retained Bury South, so the problem doesn't exist.
|
|
bsjmcr
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,593 
|
Post by bsjmcr on Jul 11, 2017 23:11:54 GMT
Continuing with the North West ... NW-C (Rochdale): 148410 = 1.98 = 2 seatsHEYWOOD AND MIDDLETON - 75880 ROCHDALE - 72530 NW-D (Oldham): 153751 = 2.06 = 2OLDHAM EAST - 77067 OLDHAM WEST - 76684. I've taken the opportunity to simplify the names. This is all as I've posted before. ALTRINCHAM AND SALE - 77226 ASHTON UNDER LYNE - 77564 BOLTON EAST - 72603 BOLTON WEST - 77948 BURY - 72771. I accept that Radcliffe N isn't a good fit in this seat, but the alternative (Unsworth) seems worse. But I must acknowledge that this is a judgment formed by looking at maps from 200 miles away, and that the local man, Andrew Teale, thinks differently. CHEADLE - 71553 CONGLETON - 74186 CREWE AND NANTWICH - 72890 HAZEL GROVE - 73465 KNUTSFORD - 75536. Note that I've made the 'Bramhall switch' (see discussion upthread), which has the knock-on consequence that Dane Valley ward, instead of being an awkward projecting spur of Macclesfield, is now an awkward projecting spur of this seat. LEIGH - 74381 MACCLESFIELD - 75686 MAKERFIELD - 71857 MANCHESTER BLACKLEY AND PRESTWICH - 77107 MANCHESTER CENTRAL - 77434. I'm particularly pleased to have got Cheetham, an integral part of central Manchester, into this seat. MANCHESTER GORTON - 73688 MANCHESTER MOSS SIDE - 73952 MANCHESTER WYTHENSHAWE - 74315 RADCLIFFE AND FARNWORTH - 76369. See comments on Bury. SALFORD - 73935 STALYBRIDGE AND HYDE - 71050 STOCKPORT AND DENTON - 76088 STRETFORD AND IRLAM - 77141 SWINTON AND WORSLEY - 74495 WIGAN - 72733 bsjmcr - Regarding the treatment of Prestwich: Did you have in mind something like the above? (Originally posted on p16 above.) Welcome to the forum. Probably the best proposal I've seen so far, and it has as many 'Manchester' seats as humanely possible, which is good. Interesting that the Moss Side name returns and Withington disappears. Good to see Broughton/Kersal back in Salford as they should be. Unfortunately due to the opaque map I can't quite see which areas are in which seats, but most look good, but I can't tell if Eccles is in 'Salford' or 'Swinton/Worsley'? Whichever one it's in it's best to put it in the name, the hometown of the famous cake otherwise wouldn't be pleased. 'Eccles and Worsley' would be better over Swinton, if it was in there that is. My Greater Manchester solution retained Bury South, so the problem doesn't exist. The problem will exist if the plan goes forward, Prestwich+Middleton is just wrong even if it was done before. I understand the Radcliffe situation is worse, but provided Radcliffe can stay together, it's much more coherent with Farnworth compared to P&M which is split by a motorway and Heaton Park. The number of times I've been to Middleton I can probably count on my hands. Really, aside from want of a better name, Bury S is probably the best configuration in that the towns within are fairly similar with some slightly affluent suburban areas north of M'cr with more green spaces than the inner city areas of Blackley/Crumpsall, though it's understandable that a big shake up would be required across the board if we are to have 50 fewer MPs, but they can certainly do better, as we can see here with the North M'cr/Blackley links, much more coherent, and some level of inequality is inevitable. The old P&M wiki page sums up that Prestwich had all Tory councillors at the time while Middleton was all Labour, but since then Prestwich overall is more labour/liberal. Being summer holidays I now have quite a bit of time on my hands and am now tinkering with the Boundary Assistant, not sure if my plans would go down entirely well here, it currently involves Failsworth, Droylsden wards and a few Manchester Central wards becoming 'Manchester East'  It's notable that on a poll on here somewhere, more people now think the proposals won't go ahead. A key issue being the outdated electoral numbers I guess. |
|
|
|
Post by islington on Jul 13, 2017 10:17:28 GMT
bsjmcr - Regarding the treatment of Prestwich: Did you have in mind something like the above? (Originally posted on p16 above.) Welcome to the forum. Probably the best proposal I've seen so far, and it has as many 'Manchester' seats as humanely possible, which is good. Interesting that the Moss Side name returns and Withington disappears. Good to see Broughton/Kersal back in Salford as they should be. Unfortunately due to the opaque map I can't quite see which areas are in which seats, but most look good, but I can't tell if Eccles is in 'Salford' or 'Swinton/Worsley'? Whichever one it's in it's best to put it in the name, the hometown of the famous cake otherwise wouldn't be pleased. 'Eccles and Worsley' would be better over Swinton, if it was in there that is. My Greater Manchester solution retained Bury South, so the problem doesn't exist. The problem will exist if the plan goes forward, Prestwich+Middleton is just wrong even if it was done before. I understand the Radcliffe situation is worse, but provided Radcliffe can stay together, it's much more coherent with Farnworth compared to P&M which is split by a motorway and Heaton Park. The number of times I've been to Middleton I can probably count on my hands. Really, aside from want of a better name, Bury S is probably the best configuration in that the towns within are fairly similar with some slightly affluent suburban areas north of M'cr with more green spaces than the inner city areas of Blackley/Crumpsall, though it's understandable that a big shake up would be required across the board if we are to have 50 fewer MPs, but they can certainly do better, as we can see here with the North M'cr/Blackley links, much more coherent, and some level of inequality is inevitable. The old P&M wiki page sums up that Prestwich had all Tory councillors at the time while Middleton was all Labour, but since then Prestwich overall is more labour/liberal. Being summer holidays I now have quite a bit of time on my hands and am now tinkering with the Boundary Assistant, not sure if my plans would go down entirely well here, it currently involves Failsworth, Droylsden wards and a few Manchester Central wards becoming 'Manchester East' It's notable that on a poll on here somewhere, more people now think the proposals won't go ahead. A key issue being the outdated electoral numbers I guess. bsjmcr - Thanks for the kind words. Yes, I wanted to give as much respect as possible to the Manchester boundary; in the end I added four non-Manc wards (the three Prestwich wards from Bury and the (very Manchester-facing) Clifford ward from Trafford) and this allowed me to form five Manchester-based seats that I was very happy with. Manchester Moss Side is effectively the successor to the current Withington seat, although very much altered; I had to change the name because Withington ward itself has been switched into the revised Gorton seat. As a bonus, my approach to Manchester allowed me to get rid of the terrible current boundary through the middle of Sale. I agree with you about linking Radcliffe and Farnworth; and although it's unfortunate to exclude Radcliffe North ward from this seat, I'd point out that the area covered by this ward was (mostly) not historically part of Radcliffe (it was a detached part of Middleton). Eccles was a problem to which I failed to find a solution. I put Eccles ward itself into Salford but the problem is that at least half of the town centre isn't in Eccles ward at all - it's in Barton ward, which I needed for my 'Stretford & Irlam' seat. So i ended up with an unsatisfactory boundary through Eccles town centre, although in my defence this is precisely the same as the existing boundary between Salford & Eccles and Worsley & Eccles S. All in all, I thought it would be better to omit 'Eccles' from the names of both seats. I haven't checked back, but someone upthread came up with a plan that kept Eccles town centre together and I remember posting my congratulations on finding a way of doing this. But unfortunately it had adverse knock-on consequences elsewhere. Regarding the prospects of the review, I agree that it's unlikely to go ahead but this isn't because of the electoral numbers; it's because the Tories' act of political self-harm in throwing away their majority. I don't think they'll get enough support from other parties to pass the necessary statutory instrument implementing the review, which means that all this has become something of an academic exercise (although, as academic exercises go, it's a particularly interesting one). |
|
bsjmcr
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,593
|
Post by bsjmcr on Sept 1, 2017 0:25:41 GMT
Have a lot of time on my hands... I'm sure there used to be a thread of 'Fictional Constituencies' or similar on here, but can't find it, but this is probably more worthy of ending up in there than here.
Nonetheless, it's my 'artist's impression' of if Manchester was to have a 'compass-based' system instead as can be seen in Leeds, Glasgow, Edinburgh, etc.
Of course it's a big shake up, but it raises the point of many of the "City, Suburb" constituency names are getting outdated and don't represent the whole area - whereas compass divisions represent everyone in them no questions asked. My least favourite being 'Blackley and Broughton', not only does nobody know where it is or how to pronounce it, Blackley isn't even the largest part of the Manchester bit of the seat, other larger, well known communities e.g. Cheetham/Crumpsall have strong identities and could equally be worthy of the name . Same goes for Withington/Didsbury, etc. Less so for Gorton and Wythenshawe because they form pretty big parts of their seats, but still.
Edit: Can't seem to attach screenshots, can't find the attach button at all!
So in summary, I'm not listing every single of the (sometimes slightly nonsensical) wards ('Old Moat'?!) but here's a general idea based on the areas contained within:
Manchester North: Basically B&B without the Salford bits, and now taking Moston and Miles Platting/NH from Central. It's what Blackley seat should always have been called in the first place regardless of the other Manchester seats, because amenities in the area are often known as 'North Manchester...[hospital, golf club, college...] anyway.
Manchester Central: Moves south a bit, taking a few of the wards from the west of M'cr Gorton (Longsight, Moss Side, Rusholme... etc) Trafford's Clifford has also crept in here, making it slightly oversized by 600.
Manchester East: Both Gortons, 'Bradford', Ancoats, Droylsden and Audenshaw, the latter two pretty closely linked with Manchester (postcodes etc) despite being in Tameside.
Manchester South East: Didsbury and Withington, plus Fallowfield, Levenshume, Burnage...
Manchester South West: Chorlton and Wythenshawe.
I then got carried away and moved outwards from there, again I won't list them all but I'll list the consequences of the above:
Kersal is now in 'Prestwich and Radcliffe', which is basically Bury South but with Kersal added to bulk it up. I read in Wikipedia that the people of Kersal were a bit miffed with being put in Salford Council, so something tells me they'd prefer Prestwich.
Broughton is now in 'Salford Central and Eccles' - which also has the whole of Eccles so no more ...Eccles South nonsense.
The rest of Salford is 'Salford North and Worsley'. The 'North' denoting Swinton/Pendlebury.
Manchester East of course puts a dent in Ashton UL, so much like their proposals I have put Stalybridge in, to make 'Ashton and Stalybridge' (forget the Under-Lyne). The rest of Tameside is in 'Denton and Hyde' - slightly undersized by 600.
The whole of Sale is now in "Old Trafford and Sale". Bit naughty, but inspired by "Old Bexley and Sidcup". Something tells me Katie Price fans would have had to google 'Stretford and Urmston' to see where she stood in 2001. The rest of Trafford is in an 'Altrincham' seat.
I guess Middleton had to go somewhere under my "anywhere but Prestwich" policy, so it's shoved with Royton and Chadderton. The name could be of any 2 or all three (pushing it!) or Oldham North and Middleton.
|
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,742
|
Post by Adrian on Oct 24, 2017 20:29:34 GMT
The Commission has missed a great opportunity to propose a proper Northwich seat:
Northwich 74877
Halton 75381
Eddisbury 73627
Crewe & Nantwich 72326
|
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Yn Ennill Yma
Posts: 6,144
|
Post by Foggy on Oct 24, 2017 23:45:24 GMT
Yeah... still, 'Eddisbury' though.
|
|
maxque
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,318
|
Post by maxque on Oct 25, 2017 2:45:00 GMT
Yeah... still, 'Eddisbury' though. Winsford and Frodsham? |
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on Oct 25, 2017 7:42:30 GMT
'Makerfield' -> Wigan South (and current Wigan of course to Wigan North) - there's no such place as 'Makerfield' alone as it is, I don't think anyone outside it could tell where it is based on the name as unlike Leigh nobody can say they live 'in Makerfield' as it isn't a town itself. To me, Leigh is the one that's completely unplaceable on a map, as the real Leigh is just west of Tonbridge. Or maybe on-Sea in Essex. At least Makerfield is obviously South Lancashire sprawl somewhere to people who are not from the North West of England. Isn't the Kentish Leigh actually a Lie? |
|
|
|
Post by islington on Oct 25, 2017 8:30:31 GMT
Yeah... still, 'Eddisbury' though. Winsford and Frodsham? I nominate 'West Cheshire' - accurate, comprehensive, references the name of the LA, and tells everyone where and what it is. An excellent bit of boundary-drawing by Adrian btw; I trust he will submit it. |
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,742
|
Post by Adrian on Oct 25, 2017 8:46:44 GMT
I like the quaint constituency names. I'd like the Altrincham seat to be called Bucklow.
|
|
|
|
Post by islington on Oct 25, 2017 9:55:50 GMT
I like the quaint constituency names. I'd like the Altrincham seat to be called Bucklow. Well, Adrian, you drew the seat so it's your call. But I'd have thought we wanted to aim for clarity, rather than obscurity, in naming seats. But in the end, the boundaries matter more than the names so I'd warmly encourage you to submit this scheme. |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Oct 25, 2017 9:59:23 GMT
I like the quaint constituency names. I'd like the Altrincham seat to be called Bucklow. Well, Adrian, you drew the seat so it's your call. But I'd have thought we wanted to aim for clarity, rather than obscurity, in naming seats. But in the end, the boundaries matter more than the names so I'd warmly encourage you to submit this scheme. Eddisbury is hardly obscure as it has been the name of the constituency covering roughly that area for several decades. I don't think 'West Cheshire' adds clarity when the area being described lies in the geographical centre of the county and there are five other Cheshire constituencies lying directly to its West |
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,742
|
Post by Adrian on Oct 25, 2017 11:53:41 GMT
I think West Cheshire is a reasonable name for the seat, although (a) there are some East Cheshire wards in it, and (b) there is an ongoing (and boring to 99.9% of the population) debate about whether it's appropriate for seats to have the same (or similar) names to LAs if they're substantially different.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ben Walker on Oct 25, 2017 11:57:03 GMT
The East Yorkshire constituency in the north west and the north east corners of the East Yorkshire authority seem to be doing alright!
|
|
|
|
Post by islington on Oct 25, 2017 11:58:52 GMT
OK, I surrender. I don't like Eddisbury as a name because hardly anyone outside the area knows what or where it is (it's an iron-age hill fort half-way between Chester and Northwich).
But as Pete says, we've got it now so it's hardly a tragedy if it persists. The naming issue shouldn't get in the way of Adrian's excellent proposal.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2017 17:16:57 GMT
I like the quaint constituency names. I'd like the Altrincham seat to be called Bucklow. Well, Adrian, you drew the seat so it's your call. But I'd have thought we wanted to aim for clarity, rather than obscurity, in naming seats. But in the end, the boundaries matter more than the names so I'd warmly encourage you to submit this scheme. This sentence breaks my fragile heart. |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Oct 25, 2017 17:26:18 GMT
The East Yorkshire constituency in the north west and the north east corners of the East Yorkshire authority seem to be doing alright! On what basis is it 'doing alright'?? It is an absurd name in the circumstances in that not only does it only cover a third or less of the East Riding UA but it is part of a larger county which has over 50 constituencies. If you can imagine any seat being called North Yorkshire, South Yorkshire or West Yorkshire you would appreciate what a crap name this is. It is almost literally crying out to be renamed as Bridlington, or perhaps, in the spirit of Eddisbury as Buckrose |
|
|
|
Post by John Chanin on Oct 25, 2017 17:49:20 GMT
The East Yorkshire constituency in the north west and the north east corners of the East Yorkshire authority seem to be doing alright! On what basis is it 'doing alright'?? It is an absurd name in the circumstances in that not only does it only cover a third or less of the East Riding UA but it is part of a larger county which has over 50 constituencies. If you can imagine any seat being called North Yorkshire, South Yorkshire or West Yorkshire you would appreciate what a crap name this is. It is almost literally crying out to be renamed as Bridlington, or perhaps, in the spirit of Eddisbury as Buckrose Oh, that's where Buckrose was. I've always wondered. Do you know why it was called that? |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Oct 25, 2017 17:55:45 GMT
It was the name of a Wapentake which covered part of the area
|
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Oct 25, 2017 18:03:43 GMT
I think West Cheshire is a reasonable name for the seat, although (a) there are some East Cheshire wards in it, and (b) there is an ongoing (and boring to 99.9% of the population) debate about whether it's appropriate for seats to have the same (or similar) names to LAs if they're substantially different. Surely the obvious solution is to call it Mid Cheshire and have done with it? |
|
