goose
Conservative & Unionist
Posts: 610 
|
Post by goose on Jul 5, 2017 14:49:16 GMT
I find the above totally baffling, under any voting system that isn't based on tory fantasy. In what sense? |
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Yn Ennill Yma
Posts: 6,144
|
Post by Foggy on Jul 5, 2017 22:26:28 GMT
I think that 'Montgomery and Merioneth' seat would be a non-starter! It's clear the Commission has been trying to avoid a constituency that stretches from the English border to the west coast, even under the present rules.
|
|
|
|
Post by andrewteale on Jul 7, 2017 14:33:28 GMT
What are the road links in that Penrith and Windermere seat?
|
|
carlton43
Reform Party
Posts: 51,152
Member is Online
|
Post by carlton43 on Jul 7, 2017 14:43:01 GMT
What are the road links in that Penrith and Windermere seat? Why should that matter at all? There seems to be a persistent delusion That masses of constituents are forever on the move to see each other. They aren't. |
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Jul 7, 2017 14:49:23 GMT
What are the road links in that Penrith and Windermere seat? Why should that matter at all? There seems to be a persistent delusion That masses of constituents are forever on the move to see each other. They aren't. Could explain the rise in postal voting though....  "We're never at home!" |
|
goose
Conservative & Unionist
Posts: 610
|
Post by goose on Jul 7, 2017 15:50:14 GMT
What are the road links in that Penrith and Windermere seat? A592 links Penrith to Windermere |
|
|
|
Post by Lord Twaddleford on Jul 7, 2017 18:21:53 GMT
Alternate Wales Proposals 32 Seats These constituencies assume that Ynys Mon recieves protected status  Oh dear. For one thing, you split Conwy (it's more than just the walled town, the Conwy Community area also includes Deganwy and Llandudno Junction), which is an utter no-no; I would assert that it is better to keep Conwy intact and keep it, Llandudno, Caerhun, and Llansanffraid all together, preferably along with Penmaenmawr and Llanfairfechan too. Also, whilst it is possible to make all of Denbighshire authority as one single constituency, it is not advised. As possibly shown here, it has potential cause problems with drawing the boundaries for neighbouring constituencies. Other people have already mentioned the issue with putting Meirionnydd and Montgomeryshire into the same seat. |
|
goose
Conservative & Unionist
Posts: 610
|
Post by goose on Jul 7, 2017 18:39:23 GMT
Alternate Wales Proposals 32 Seats These constituencies assume that Ynys Mon recieves protected status Oh dear. For one thing, you split Conwy (it's more than just the walled town, the Conwy Community area also includes Deganwy and Llandudno Junction), which is an utter no-no; I would assert that it is better to keep Conwy intact and keep it, Llandudno, Caerhun, and Llansanffraid all together, preferably along with Penmaenmawr and Llanfairfechan too. Also, whilst it is possible to make all of Denbighshire authority as one single constituency, it is not advised. As possibly shown here, it has potential cause problems with drawing the boundaries for neighbouring constituencies. Other people have already mentioned the issue with putting Meirionnydd and Montgomeryshire into the same seat. The only reason that has been given against the combination of Meirionnydd and Montgomeryshire is that it causes an English border - West coast constituency, which I can't see a genuine reason against. I shall duly amend the arrangements in regard to Conwy. I believe it is possible to retain a Denbighshire constituency while maintaining satisfactory boundaries across Wales. |
|
|
|
Post by andrewteale on Jul 7, 2017 20:44:20 GMT
What are the road links in that Penrith and Windermere seat? A592 links Penrith to Windermere As I thought, the Kirkstone Pass. Not the easiest of A-roads at the best of times - it has a gradient of up to 25% - and inadvisable in winter conditions. The MP who would have to represent that seat would have a very difficult task in the winter, and Cumbria does get some appalling weather. It might be a better idea to have a seat combining Penrith with Kendal and put Windermere in the cross-county seat. That would better reflect the communication links in the area and there is historical precedent for a seat containing Lancashire across the sands. |
|
goose
Conservative & Unionist
Posts: 610
|
Post by goose on Jul 7, 2017 21:20:22 GMT
A592 links Penrith to Windermere As I thought, the Kirkstone Pass. Not the easiest of A-roads at the best of times - it has a gradient of up to 25% - and inadvisable in winter conditions. The MP who would have to represent that seat would have a very difficult task in the winter, and Cumbria does get some appalling weather. It might be a better idea to have a seat combining Penrith with Kendal and put Windermere in the cross-county seat. That would better reflect the communication links in the area and there is historical precedent for a seat containing Lancashire across the sands. Yeah that makes more sense, will update. |
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Yn Ennill Yma
Posts: 6,144
|
Post by Foggy on Jul 7, 2017 23:54:40 GMT
Alternate Wales Proposals 32 Seats These constituencies assume that Ynys Mon recieves protected status Oh dear. For one thing, you split Conwy (it's more than just the walled town, the Conwy Community area also includes Deganwy and Llandudno Junction), which is an utter no-no; I would assert that it is better to keep Conwy intact and keep it, Llandudno, Caerhun, and Llansanffraid all together, preferably along with Penmaenmawr and Llanfairfechan too. Also, whilst it is possible to make all of Denbighshire authority as one single constituency, it is not advised. As possibly shown here, it has potential cause problems with drawing the boundaries for neighbouring constituencies. Make that definitely along with Penmaenmawr and Llanfairfechan! Horrendous stuff suggested for NW England too. Just shocking, really. |
|
|
|
Post by Lord Twaddleford on Jul 8, 2017 21:59:38 GMT
Other people may want to have a Plaidimander. I thought that was one of his better efforts, despite the horrible knock-on effects of what has then to happen to Brecon and Radnorshire. Personally I think that Meirionnydd would fit in better with the Llŷn, and/or the Nant Conwy region ("Dwyfor Meirionnydd Nant Conwy", anyone?  ). Despite both areas being sparsely populated and incredibly rural, I don't think there's really all that much to connect Meirionnydd and Montgomeryshire with each other; for example the former is very Welsh in character, whilst the latter (outside of Machynlleth and Mochnant) is possibly considerably more Anglicised- unlike the aforementioned Llŷn and the Upper Conwy Valley. Just my view on the matter... |
|
|
|
Post by andrewteale on Jul 9, 2017 8:18:17 GMT
In case anybody else wants to have a play, here are the entitlements.
Electoral quota 68982
Lower bound 62084
Upper bound 75880
National allocations
England 540+2
Wales 32
Scotland 56+2
Northern Ireland 18
East Midlands 47
Eastern 61
London 74
North East 27
North West 73
South East 87+2
South West 57
West Midlands 58
Yorkshire/Humber 54
|
|
|
|
Post by andrewteale on Jul 9, 2017 10:14:13 GMT
The North West is awkward for 73 seats. It has an overall entitlement of 73.56 and the county entitlements are Cumbria 5.42 Lancashire 15.24 Greater Manchester 27.503 Lancastrian Merseyside 10.78 Wirral 3.41 Cheshire 11.21 Cumbria can stand alone for five seats. The Wirral cannot stand alone and will need to be combined with Cheshire for a combined entitlement of 14.62. That gives Cumbria 5 Lancashire 15 Greater Manchester 28 Lancastrian Merseyside 11 Cheshire and Wirral 15 Total 74 whereas 73 is required. That then forces Greater Manchester to be added to the Cheshire and Wirral group for an entitlement of 42.12 and an allocation of 42. I think goose has the wrong idea trying to combine Cumbria with Lancashire - if you do that you'll end up with too many seats in the North West. Let's try and break up that large region. District entitlements are Bolton 2.74 Bury 1.95 Manchester 5.01 Oldham 2.23* Rochdale 2.15 Salford 2.36* Stockport 3.07 Tameside 2.38* Trafford 2.31* Wigan 3.31* Cheshire East 3.93 CWAC 3.72 Halton 1.35* Warrington 2.22* Wirral 3.41* The Wirral combines with CWAC for an entitlement of 7.12 and an allocation of 7 seats. In East Manchester you could have an Oldham and Tameside pairing for an entitlement of 4.61 and an allocation of 5 seats, but if this is too tight you could add Rochdale for an entitlement of 6.76 and an allocation of 7. That leaves Wigan, Salford, Warrington, Trafford and Halton as the districts which need pairing, and since they form a contiguous group you can group all of them for an entitlement of 11.52 and an allocation of 12. However that would give too many seats to the large region so add Bolton to the mix for an entitlement of 14.28 and an allocation of 14. Which gives you Bolton + Wigan + Salford + Trafford + Warrington + Halton = 14 Bury = 2 Manchester = 5 Oldham + Rochdale + Tameside = 7 Stockport = 3 Cheshire East = 4 CWAC + Wirral = 7 Total = 42 as required. |
|
|
|
Post by andrewteale on Jul 9, 2017 11:00:03 GMT
A quick and dirty allocation in Greater Manchester and Cheshire. Bolton + Wigan + Salford + Trafford + Warrington + Halton = 14 seats My objective here was to try and have as few crossings of the Ship Canal as possible.  Halton (73158). Swaps some wards in eastern Runcorn for Penketh and Cuerdley. Warrington (71751). A compact seat containing most of Warrington town north of the Ship Canal. Runcorn East and Lymm (73556). Or "Mersey Banks" if you prefer... The south bank of the Ship Canal from eastern Runcorn all the way to Partington. Altrincham and Sale South (70328). Gains two of the three Sale East wards presently in a Wythenshawe seat. The ward sizes in Trafford militate against keeping the east/west split in Sale. Stretford and Sale North (75498). The remainder of Trafford. Birchwood, Golborne and Irlam (74085). A completely new seat containing outlying parts of Warrington and neighbouring parts of Salford and Wigan boroughs. Salford and Eccles (73490). Gains the Broughton wards from Blackley and Broughton, gains the whole of Eccles, loses Swinton and Pendlebury. Worsley (74255). Successor to Worsley and Eccles South: swaps Swindon and Pendlebury for Eccles South and Irlam. Leigh (63428). Loses the Golborne wards, gains Hindley Green from Makerfield. Makerfield (63589). Loses Hindley Green, otherwise unchanged. No change to Wigan or the three Bolton seats. Bury (2) No changes required to the two Bury seats. |
|
|
|
Post by andrewteale on Jul 9, 2017 14:55:28 GMT
Yorkshire (54 seats) comes out as
Humberside 9.60 of which
East Yorkshire 6.23
North Lincolnshire 3.37*
North Yorkshire 8.55
South Yorkshire 13.81
West Yorkshire 22.00
10 + 9 + 14 + 22 = 55, but as the allocation is for 54 seats Humberside and North Yorkshire need to be paired for an entitlement of 18.15 and an allocation of 18. Additionally there will have to be a cross-Humber seat as 3.37 quotas into 3 seats does not go.
Entitlements in South Yorkshire are
Barnsley 2.43*
Doncaster 3.06
Rotherham 2.79
Sheffield 5.53
which suggests 8 seats for Sheffield + Barnsley, 3 for Doncaster and 3 for Rotherham.
Entitlements in West Yorkshire are
Bradford 4.74
Calerdale 2.07
Kirklees 4.28
Leeds 7.47
Wakefield 3.44*
which suggests 11 seats for Leeds and Wakefield, 5 for Bradford, 4 for Kirklees and 2 for Calderdale.
The West Midlands (58 seats) comes out as
Herefordshire 1.93
Shropshire 5.06
Staffordshire 11.82
Warwickshire 5.82
West Midlands 27.00
Worcestershire 6.20
which suggests no major changes in the rural counties. In the West Midlands metropolitan county we have
Birmingham 9.96
Coventry 3.04
Dudley 3.47*
Sandwell 3.12
Solihull 2.23*
Walsall 2.71
Wolverhampton 2.47*
which suggests 12 seats for Birmingham and Solihull and 3 for Coventry (or 10 for Birmingham and 5 for Coventry and Solihull, whichever works better) and 12 for the Black Country boroughs (probably 6 each for Dudley+Wolverhampton and Sandwell+Walsall).
|
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,915
|
Post by YL on Jul 9, 2017 16:17:34 GMT
The regional quota for Y&tH with 54 seats would be 68,927. Based on that, entitlements would be W Yorks 22.02 (retain 22 seats), S Yorks 13.82 (retain 14 seats), N Yorks (including York) 8.56 (currently 8 seats), East Riding (including Hull) 6.23, N & NE Lincs 3.37. So I think we're looking at crossing the N Yorks/East Riding border as well as the East Riding/N Lincs one, effectively transferring half a seat from TAFKAH to North Yorkshire. Here is an attempt at 18 seats for North Yorkshire, the East Riding and northern Lincolnshire. As usual I find myself thinking that northern Lincolnshire really would work better with the rest of Lincolnshire, and the shapes of some East Riding wards are awkward even with this tolerance. In North Yorkshire, Richmond and York Central are too big and the obvious way to do the cross-border seat involves the eastern part of Thirsk & Malton. Grimsby & Cleethorpes (75,028). Successor to Great Grimsby; loses Scartho; gains Sidney Sussex, Croft Baker, Haverstoe. Immingham & Brigg (63,158). Successor to Cleethorpse; loses the urban Cleethorpes wards but gains Scartho and Brigg & Wolds. Scunthorpe (65,428). Gains Broughton & Appleby. Goole & Trent Falls (65,691). Successor to Brigg & Goole; loses Brigg & Wolds and Broughton & Appleby on the Lincolnshire side; gains Howden and Howdenshire north of the Ouse. This is a pretty nasty concoction but it's hard to avoid something like it unless the regional boundary is crossed. Cottingham & Pocklington (69,805). Sort of the successor to Haltemprice & Howden, but without Howden and with only the Cottingham part of Haltemprice; loses Howden, Howdenshire, Tranby, Willerby & Kirk Ella; gains Beverley Rural, Wolds Weighton, Pocklington Provincial. Hull West & Hessle (68,186). Loses Myton; gains Tranby, Willerby & Kirk Ella. Hull North (63,112). Unchanged. Hull East (73,262). Gains Myton. Beverley & Holderness (65,852). Loses Beverley Rural. Beverley town is an awkward peninsula here, but the alternative I tried (replacing it with Driffield and East Wolds & Coastal) makes a mess of the cross border seat. Bridlington & Filey (65,953). The cross-border seat; compared with existing East Yorkshire loses Wolds Weighton, Pocklington Provincial; gains North Yorkshire wards of Filey, Hertford, Wolds, Sherburn, Rillington. This area is actually in the East Riding historically speaking. Thirsk & Malton (75,805). Loses Filey area as above; gains Stokesley and Great Ayton from Richmond and Strensall from York Outer. Just below upper limit. York Outer (74,526). Loses Strensall, gains Westfield. York Central (66,640). Loses Westfield. Richmond (Yorkshire) (67,422). Loses Stokesley, Great Ayton. I know removing Great Ayton hasn't been very popular but it needs to be trimmed somewhere. Harrogate & Knaresborough, Skipton & Ripon, Selby & Ainsty unchanged. |
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,840
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Jul 9, 2017 18:59:34 GMT
Yorkshire (54 seats) comes out as Humberside 9.60 of which ...East Yorkshire 6.23 ...North Lincolnshire 3.37* North Yorkshire 8.55 South Yorkshire 13.81 West Yorkshire 22.00 10 + 9 + 14 + 22 = 55, but as the allocation is for 54 seats Humberside and North Yorkshire need to be paired for an entitlement of 18.15 and an allocation of 18. Probably the best place would be the Selby/Goole area, the bit of North Yorkshire that's not really North Yorkshire plus the bit of East Yorkshire that's not really East Yorkshire, and annex the Isle of Axholme back into a Yorkshire seat and put the boundary properly back onto the Trent. |
|
Harry Hayfield
Green
Cavalier Gentleman (as in 17th century Cavalier)
Posts: 2,922
|
Post by Harry Hayfield on Jul 10, 2017 19:42:39 GMT
On the off chance that Pat Glass' amendment ever passes, it is worth mentioning what would happen within the 2018 review of Parliamentary constituencies if we still had 650 constituencies and a 10% deviance limit Going back to the substantive question, is this amendment still being discussed in Parliament? |
|
|
|
Post by greatkingrat on Jul 10, 2017 20:35:54 GMT
Just like all other outstanding Bills, it was dropped when Parliament was dissolved before the General Election. It is of course possible that an MP may choose to reintroduce this bill, or something similar in the current session of Parliament.
|
|
"We're never at home!"
).
