Hackney and Haringey are paired for the creation of a cross-borough constituency which necessitates the splitting of the current Tottenham constituency. I think I have largely avoided the wrath of David Lammy pitchforks by keeping Tottenham proper in one constituency which brings in Wood Green. Harringay and the most northern Hackney wards form the new constituency.
Tottenham and Wood Green BC
Harringay and Hackney North BC
Hackney Central BC
Hackney South and Shoreditch BC
Wouldn't Stamford Hill and Harringay be a more sensible name for the Haringey-Hackney cross borough seat? The seat contains none of Hackney proper and a great majority of the seat is either Stamford Hill or Harringay thus making this the obvious name. Plus then there is no need to change the name of Hackney North and Stoke Newington.
That's fine by me.
'All [people] want is someone to love, somewhere to live, somewhere to work, and something to hope for.'
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Jun 10, 2019 21:46:25 GMT
Had a quick look at Cambridgeshire with 8 seats whilst I was playing around with another project. As an additional constraint, I tried to keep all the seats within 5% +/- of the county average, though due to the ward sizes that doesn't cause many problems.
554,887 electors, meaning with 8 seats you've got an average seat size of 69,361. Four of the authorities concerned have had new boundaries since the last review started and Cambridge will have when the next set of elections come round, but in most cases that's not a huge impact.
With a 5% deviation, both Peterborough (70,623) and Cambridge (67,266) can stay as they are. Alternatively Cambridge could gain Queen Edith's and become co-extensive with the city, but given that the December electorate is a clear undercount of the normal general election electorate I think it's best to leave it as is.
All the other current seats have over 80,000 electors (in the case of NW Cambs, nearly 90k) so need to shrink. Fenland district is the right size for a seat (69,361), so the main question there is whether you keep calling it NE Cambs or rename it after the district. With the other five seats, there are two main options: one is the least change option, crossing fewest local authority boundaries, the other is the prettier options which works best on the ground but is more disruptive.
In both of those options, NW Cambs keeps all its bits of Peterborough, but only five wards of Huntingdonshire in the north and west of the district.
In the least change option, Huntingdon (69,201) loses St Ives but gains Upwood & The Raveleys, whilst SE Cambs (71,566) gains the rest of East Cambs and loses all its portions of South Cambs DC west of the Cam. S Cambs (67,560) grabs Linton from SE Cambs, but in the north of the seat pulls back south of the A14. Mid Cambs (72,098) combines Cambridge suburbs north of the A14 with St Ives and Ramsey, in a classically incoherent leftovers seat. In total, 90,608 electors are moved into a new seat.
The prettier option was something I found by accident, when I was trying to make the 8th seat by moving St Neots out of Huntingdon instead. I kept constructing awkward boundaries around Cambridge until I realised that I was prioritising local authority boundaries over local links. In actual fact, north of Cambridge the Cam and the Ouse are reasonably effective boundaries, with only a few bridges between Cambridge and Ely. If you use the rivers rather than the local authorities as your guideposts, you get the following:
Peterborough, NE Cambs, Cambridge and NW Cambs as above.
Ely (70,811) is the successor to SE Cambs, with a bare majority of electors from the old seat (41,364 out of 82,557) having come from it. It's made up of the west of East Cambs DC, together with parts of South Cambs DC west of the Cam and north of the A14.
SE Cambs (67,188) is then narrowly the new seat - with 41,193 having come from the old SE Cambs and the balance from S Cambs.
SW Cambs (70,808) is made up of the remainder of S Cambs plus St Neots and hence reverts to its prior name.
Huntingdon (71,618) makes up for losing St Neots by adding 5 wards from NW Cambs.
This version moves 139,329 electors and crosses an additional local authority boundary, so on least-change grounds it's clearly inferior to the first option, but in terms of coherence I think it has a lot to be said for it.
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Jun 14, 2019 12:35:38 GMT
I had a quick look at Berkshire with 9 and Kent with 18:
Slough 62,017 Windsor & Slough East 63,436 Maidenhead 67,749 Bracknell 66,068 Wokingham 66,489 Reading East 62,633 Reading Central 64,883 (successor to current Reading East) Reading West 67,180 (new seat) Newbury 67,221
Only Slough differs by more than 5% from the county average and given it got disproportionately hit by IER, it's probably got back up today. 142,812 electors moved.
Dartford 66,541 Gravesham 70,477 Sevenoaks 70,088 Tonbridge 67,681 Tunbridge Wells 69,765 Maidstone 66,896 Strood 66,790 (successor to Rochester & Strood) Rochester & Chatham 67,867 (successor to Chatham & Aylesford) Gillingham & Rainham 68,890 Sittingbourne & Sheppey 65,174 Faversham & Aylesford 68,077 (successor to Faversham & Mid Kent) High Weald 66,442 (new seat) Ashford 65,021 Folkestone & Hythe 67,964 Dover 70,928 Canterbury 699,85 North Thanet 68,490 South Thanet 70,012
Gravesham, Tunbridge Wells, Gillingham, Canterbury and the Thanets are all unchanged (bar realignment to new ward boundaries). Everything is within 5% of the county average (and if you don't want that artificial constraint, a lot of the uglier bits can be tidied away). Maidstone now more or less conforms to the urban area. It would technically have been possible to leave Chatham & Aylesford unchanged, but I think re-uniting Rochester & Chatham is much neater.
194,880 electors are moved. There are definitely going to be approaches that move fewer electors, especially if you hold closer to the current arrangements in Medway, but pure least-change options produce very bad seats in the middle of the county.
Orkney Islands and Shetland Islands 1. Orkney and Shetland CC
Na h-Eileanan an Iar 1. Na h-Eileanan an Iar CC
Highland and Perth & Kinross 1. Caithness, Sutherland and Ross CC 2. Inverness CC 3. Nairn and North Perthshire CC 4. Perth and Kinross CC
Moray 1. Moray CC
Aberdeen City and Aberdeenshire 1. Banff and Buchan CC 2. Gordon CC 3. Kincardine and Deeside CC 4. Aberdeen North BC 5. Aberdeen South BC
Angus and Dundee City 1. Angus CC 2. Dundee East CC 3. Dundee West BC
Argyll & Bute 1. Argyll and Bute CC
Stirling 1. Stirling CC
Clackmannanshire, Falkirk, Fife and West Lothian 1. North East Fife CC 2. Glenrothes CC 3. Clackmannan and Grangemouth CC 4. Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath CC 5. Dunfermline CC 6. Falkirk CC 7. Linlithgow and East Falkirk CC 8. Livingston CC
East Dunbartonshire and West Dunbartonshire 1. Milngavie and West Dunbartonshire CC 2. Bearsden and East Dunbartonshire CC
North Lanarkshire and South Lanarkshire 1. Cumbernauld CC 2. Coatbridge and Airdrie BC 3. Bellshill and Wishaw CC 4. Rutherglen BC 5. East Kilbride BC 6. Hamilton and Motherwell BC 7. Lanark CC
Inverclyde, North Ayrshire and Renfrewshire 1. Inverclyde and North Renfrewshire CC 2. Paisley BC 3. Johnstone and North Cunninghame CC 4. Irvine and South Cunninghame CC
East Lothian 1. East Lothian CC
City of Edinburgh 1. Edinburgh West 2. Edinburgh Noth and Leith 3. Edinburgh East 4. Edinburgh Central 5. Edinburgh Pentlands
Glasgow 1. Glasgow Anniesland BC 2. Glasgow Provan BC 3. Glasgow Kelvin BC 4. Glasgow Shettleston BC 5. Glasgow Pollok BC 6. Glasgow Cathcart BC
Midlothian and Scottish Borders 1. Midlothian and Peebles CC 2. Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk CC
East Ayrshire and East Renfrewshire 1. Eastwood and Annick CC 2. Kilmarnock and Cumnock CC
Dumfries & Galloway and South Ayrshire 1. Ayr CC 2. Galloway and Carrick CC 3. Dumfries CC
Great map as always, "Nairn and North Perthshire" is a horrible constituency though.
Great map as always, "Nairn and North Perthshire" is a horrible constituency though.
Yes, but it spares the Grampian constituencies from a worser fate and has decent road links throughout. The socio-economic profile of North Perthshire is also comparable to that Badenoch, Strathspey and Nairn.
I tried to keep the constituency name short and historically consistent. Otherwise, would have preferred calling it 'Aviemore' or 'Aviemore and Atholl'.
Yeah I would prefer the name you have gone with given Nairn is a traditional county. Plus Aviemore is an overrated sh*thole.