|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jul 19, 2012 10:50:31 GMT
I can do some larger scale maps of the more built up area (as per the key map) if required
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,889
|
Post by The Bishop on Jul 19, 2012 11:55:24 GMT
<applauds>
|
|
|
Post by Philip Davies on Jul 19, 2012 14:23:18 GMT
Very interesting. How did you constitute the Bredbury and Romiley divisions?
|
|
john07
Labour & Co-operative
Posts: 15,780
|
Post by john07 on Jul 19, 2012 14:39:59 GMT
I am interested in the Independents projected. You have Cheadle Gatley down as Independent presumably based on the Heald Green Residents Association performance. However they only seem to contest Heald Green ward and I can't recall them putting up candidates for the Greater Manchester Council electoral division that is very similar to Cheadle Gatley.
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jul 19, 2012 15:19:28 GMT
Very interesting. How did you constitute the Bredbury and Romiley divisions? In an ideal world the two Bredbury wards would have formed a single seat. However I needed to make a cross-borough seat somewhere (as Stockport has an odd number of wards) and Stockport/Tameside here was the least bad available option. Therefore the seat called Bredbury is actually formed from Bredbury and Woodley and Hyde Werneth while Romiley is Bredbury Green and Romiley plus Offerton. I must admit that the 'Bredbury seat is one of the least satisfactory of my creations here I am interested in the Independents projected. You have Cheadle Gatley down as Independent presumably based on the Heald Green Residents Association performance. However they only seem to contest Heald Green ward and I can't recall them putting up candidates for the Greater Manchester Council electoral division that is very similar to Cheadle Gatley. Yes this one is formed from Cheadle & Gatley and Heald Green. Although the residents only contest the latter ward, they won there such a large vote there that they outpolled both the Conservatives and LDs who had candidates in both wards
|
|
|
Post by andrewteale on Jul 19, 2012 18:50:05 GMT
Brilliant work Pete which deserves applause. In the absence of that, have an exalt instead.
Some of the Bolton boundaries look a little odd , but really there isn't anything better I can see. Three divisions in Bolton basically draw themselves - Horwich, Westhoughton, and South Turton - the one you've called Bradshaw but South Turton is a better name - and once you realise that the only ward you can add Kearsley to is Farnworth the rest of the map drops into place.
I'd take issue with Bolton Halliwell as a name though. Halliwell ward is a little misnamed as the area known as Halliwell to locals is the middle and upper Halliwell Road, which is in Crompton ward. (The ward is basically named after the old parish of St Paul's Halliwell.) Queen's Park would probably be a better name for Halliwell ward, and Bolton Gilnow (or Bolton West) for the division.
The name Bolton Leverhulme is a nice touch, and also saves people trying to work out how Breightmet is pronounced.
|
|
|
Post by hullenedge on Jul 19, 2012 20:31:32 GMT
Pete deserves a medal. Brilliant. Can't wait for Yorkshire.
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jul 19, 2012 20:54:49 GMT
Thanks - but given the size of the wards in the Met boroughs (and not just the Met boroughs - East Riding as well), Yorkshire is a nightmare. You may have a long wait
|
|
|
Post by hullenedge on Jul 19, 2012 20:59:36 GMT
Don't mind waiting at all. This may be a huge no-no but have you considered double-member divisions for parts of Yorkshire.?West Yorks County Council had to do it for the Bradford area to make the numbers fit.
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jul 19, 2012 21:25:28 GMT
I have considered that yes but i'd be loath to do it. I'll probably have to setlle for some hideously disparate electorate sizes. Leeds is the particular problem there and it could be soolved by grouping three wards together into two-member divisions - possibly doing the same with Sheffield (this solution could be applied to the slight conundrum I have with Coventry as well)
|
|
tricky
Lib Dem
Building a stronger economy and a fairer society so everyone can get on in life
Posts: 1,420
|
Post by tricky on Jul 19, 2012 21:38:15 GMT
I hope I did the chicken run!
|
|
|
Post by erlend on Jul 19, 2012 21:48:26 GMT
Wouldnt it be easiest to make the seats the size of Leeds wards and adjust the size of the Landtag.
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jul 19, 2012 22:04:39 GMT
If only it were that easy. The average size of Leeds wards is around 16,500 with the largest being 18,500. In the West Midlands Birmingham wards of that size and large can be generally matched by doubling up wards in the other Met boroughs but not so in West Yorkshire. The average electorate in Kirklees for example is 13,000, those in Bradford 11,000 and so on
|
|
|
Post by greatkingrat on Jul 19, 2012 22:04:55 GMT
The problem is that if you pick a convenient seat size for Leeds, it doesn't work for Bradford or Sheffield and vice versa.
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jul 19, 2012 23:17:08 GMT
I've had a crack at West Yorkshire and using three Leeds wards as two-member seats seems to work well - the rest falls into place. I think i'll go with this as the least worst option and it might be able to have limited application elsewhere. Not sure whether in such cases whether to award both seats to the winning party or adopt a D'Hondt system. I'll cross that bridge when I come to it.
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jul 21, 2012 22:15:00 GMT
I accept all the name changes propsed by Andrew and in addition I propse to rename the division I have called 'Atherton' as 'Tyldesley'. I'll consider any other suggested name changes but I can't accept any changes to the actual boundaries as it would require too much work to redo results, maps etc, Here is the result from 2007 for Lancastria | | | Change | seats | change | Con | 598739 | 33.7% | +3.1 | 92 | +18 | Lab | 556772 | 31.4% | -3.6 | 94 | -23 | LD | 430701 | 24.3% | -0.5 | 55 | +4 | Ind | 62566 | 3.5% | -1.0 | 7 | +1 | Grn | 46347 | 2.6% | +0.6 | 2 | +2 | BNP | 35563 | 2.0% | +0.5 | | -1 | Oth | 44956 | 2.5% | +0.9 | | -1 |
The seat lost by 'Others' was Liverpool Tuebrook which was previously held by the Liberal Party
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2012 22:34:01 GMT
Pete, a thousand well dones for your map
If I may suggest some name changes
9) Preston North --> Fulwood 10) Preston East --> Ribbleton 11) Preston South --> Preston 12) Preston West --> Ashton-on-Ribble
Longridge --> Amounderness and Bowland
I'd prefer "Longridge" and "Burscough" to renamed but not sure of the full extent of their boundaries so will leave as per.
But yeah, superb work, very good.
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jul 21, 2012 22:59:13 GMT
Thanks doktorb. I have a Bowland seat which is to the East of Longridge and covers a similar area to the old Bowland RD which was of course in Yorkshire and my division also includes Barnoldswick and Earby. Isnt Amoundness somewhere in Wyre?
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jul 24, 2012 17:38:21 GMT
2003 | | | Change | seats | change | Lab | 602695 | 35.0% | -4.8 | 117 | -17 | Con | 527743 | 30.6% | +2.0 | 74 | +11 | LD | 427174 | 24.8% | +0.1 | 51 | +5 | Ind | 77709 | 4.5% | -0.5 | 6 | | Grn | 35018 | 2.0% | +1.0 | | | BNP | 25578 | 1.5% | +1.5 | 1 | +1 | Oth | 27597 | 1.6% | +0.7 | 1 | |
|
|
tricky
Lib Dem
Building a stronger economy and a fairer society so everyone can get on in life
Posts: 1,420
|
Post by tricky on Jul 24, 2012 18:25:40 GMT
Pete your maps are fantastic and wonderful to look at.
I feel it only right to warn you that I am also finding them to be useful!
|
|