Home
2012
Election Results
Election Info
Weblog
Wiki
Search
Email
Site Info
Store
Welcome,
Guest
. Please
login
or
register
.
Did you miss your
activation email?
May 21, 2013, 01:06:41 pm
News:
Please delete your old personal messages.
Atlas Forum
Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
International Elections
(Moderator:
Sibboleth
)
Let the great boundary rejig commence
« previous
next »
Pages:
[
1
]
2
3
4
5
6
...
41
Author
Topic: Let the great boundary rejig commence (Read 47461 times)
Harry Hayfield
YaBB God
Posts: 1749
Political Matrix
E: -1.55, S: 0.00
Let the great boundary rejig commence
«
on:
May 12, 2010, 05:01:41 pm »
Quote
The parties will bring forward a Referendum Bill on electoral reform, which includes provision for the introduction of the Alternative Vote in the event of a positive result in the referendum, as well as for the creation of fewer and more equal sized constituencies
And because that was the Conservative Party policy, that means all the constituencies have to be 77,658 (and not one elector bigger or smaller than that number). This means that the regions split as follows:
Northern Ireland: 15 (rounding down to the nearest whole seat 15.06)
Scotland: 49 (rounding down) 50 (rounding up) 49.8
Wales: 29 (29.12)
England: 491/492
Allow me to start the ball rolling with my own constituency of Ceredigion. Based on that average, Ceredigion is 18,615 electors too small and needs to be merged with somewhere. I suspect that they might say that the preserved counties must be adhered to so that rules out merging with Dwyfor, Montgomeryshire, Brecon and Radnorshire, so that leaves only Carmarthen East and Preseli Pembrokeshire. Without knowing the exact electorates of the wards of Carmarthen East (which I should point out are being rejigged at the moment) I think that a merger with Preseli Pembrokeshire seems the most likely (as there has been a historical link with that constituency between 1983 and 1997) but would hope that the constituency would be called Ceredigion and the Preselis, or Ceredigion and Preseli and not just Ceredigion and Pembroke North as it was between 1983 and 1997
Logged
You kip if you want to...
change08
YaBB God
Posts: 8044
Re: Let the great boundary rejig commence
«
Reply #1 on:
May 12, 2010, 05:05:03 pm »
When does the boundary commision start... commisioning?
Logged
afleitch
Moderators
YaBB God
Posts: 20137
Political Matrix
E: 2.45, S: -8.17
Re: Let the great boundary rejig commence
«
Reply #2 on:
May 12, 2010, 05:26:29 pm »
Quote from: Harry Hayfield on May 12, 2010, 05:01:41 pm
Quote
And because that was the Conservative Party policy, that means all the constituencies have to be 77,658 (
and not one elector bigger or smaller than that number
). This means that the regions split as follows:
Steady on
That's not quite true unles you want boundaries cutting through peoples front room. They are looking at constituencies of around 80,000 or so. They may not even push for that other than to reduce Welsh contituencies in line with increased devolution.
Logged
All hail the mighty Apollon, god of the sun
Hashemite
YaBB God
Posts: 30170
Political Matrix
E: -1.29, S: -7.30
Re: Let the great boundary rejig commence
«
Reply #3 on:
May 12, 2010, 06:11:59 pm »
Would Na-h-Eileanan-an-Iar, Orkney and Shetlands, Ynys Mon and the Isle of Wight be affected by these changes? They're far under Cammy's 77,658 requirement.
Logged
Quote
20:12 oakvale Taylor Swift's 22 was originally titled 75 in reference to her ex Flanby's proposed tax rate
Quote
20:49 Snowstalker yes, but i'm the kind of fascist who would have backed the allies
20:57 Snowstalker sadly, it's a legitimate ideology tarnished by the incompetent mussolini and the vile hitler
Die-hard Clockworkfan
andrewteale
Sr. Member
Posts: 490
Re: Let the great boundary rejig commence
«
Reply #4 on:
May 12, 2010, 06:55:26 pm »
I did some work on this last year on the Vote UK forum thread "Equal Voting Size".
http://www.vote-2007.co.uk/index.php?topic=3672.0
. We assumed a House of 585 seats.
Some observations:
(1) Getting each constituency to be exactly the same size is an impossible task. Apart from anything else, it's very unlikely that the electorate will be an exact multiple of 500 or 585 or whatever.
(2) The only way to get each constituency the same size would be to divide at property level, which means that the number of possible counter-proposals becomes for all practical purposes unlimited. For example, if we need to transfer two electors from Anytown East to Anytown West is there any reason for us to prefer transferring 1 Avenue Road instead of 2 Avenue Road?
(3) Legal precedent is not on the Conservatives' side here. Back in 1983 Michael Foot (then Leader of the Opposition) took the Boundary Commission for England to judicial review arguing that the Commission had not taken enough weight of having an equal number of voters in each seat. He lost. (If you want to know more, google R v Boundary Commission for England ex parte Foot 1983.)
What we may see is the introduction of a tolerance level of something like +/-10% for all parliamentary constituencies except where there is a
very
good reason to depart from this (I'm thinking Orkney and Shetland,
Na he
Na h-Eili
Western Isles and Wight here). That's how the Local Government Boundary Commission for England (or whatever they're called this week) work. However, even though a 10% tolerance sounds large it would create problems in the metropolitan areas and Scotland where ward sizes are very large - wards would almost certainly have to be split, presumably along polling district lines or some such. The new Scottish Parliament constituencies coming in next year have taken this approach.
Logged
http://www.andrewteale.me.uk/
- UK local election results since 2002.
Quote from: Minion of Midas on February 03, 2012, 05:50:26 am
There cannot have been a by-election here, as I didn't see an Andrew Teale writeup on it. Or else that by-election's validity should be challenged on the grounds that it was held without Andrew's written approval.
Die-hard Clockworkfan
andrewteale
Sr. Member
Posts: 490
Re: Let the great boundary rejig commence
«
Reply #5 on:
May 12, 2010, 07:02:45 pm »
Quote from: Orleanser on May 12, 2010, 06:11:59 pm
Would Na-h-Eileanan-an-Iar, Orkney and Shetlands, Ynys Mon and the Isle of Wight be affected by these changes? They're far under Cammy's 77,658 requirement.
Wight is actually a lot bigger than that - it already has more than 100,000 electors.
I suspect Anglesey might well be subject to this. Anglesey is connected to the mainland by two bridges, which is more than can be said for the rest of the island seats named. You could combine it with Arfon. [waits for Al to explain why this is a bad idea]
Trivia time here - there are actually
five
constituencies which contain no part of the British or Irish mainland. What's the other one?
Logged
http://www.andrewteale.me.uk/
- UK local election results since 2002.
Quote from: Minion of Midas on February 03, 2012, 05:50:26 am
There cannot have been a by-election here, as I didn't see an Andrew Teale writeup on it. Or else that by-election's validity should be challenged on the grounds that it was held without Andrew's written approval.
Verily
Cuivienen
YaBB God
Posts: 16900
Political Matrix
E: 1.81, S: -6.78
Re: Let the great boundary rejig commence
«
Reply #6 on:
May 12, 2010, 07:46:55 pm »
Quote from: Chancellor of the Duchy of Smithills on May 12, 2010, 07:02:45 pm
Quote from: Orleanser on May 12, 2010, 06:11:59 pm
Would Na-h-Eileanan-an-Iar, Orkney and Shetlands, Ynys Mon and the Isle of Wight be affected by these changes? They're far under Cammy's 77,658 requirement.
Wight is actually a lot bigger than that - it already has more than 100,000 electors.
I suspect Anglesey might well be subject to this. Anglesey is connected to the mainland by two bridges, which is more than can be said for the rest of the island seats named. You could combine it with Arfon. [waits for Al to explain why this is a bad idea]
Trivia time here - there are actually
five
constituencies which contain no part of the British or Irish mainland. What's the other one?
One of the Thanet seats? If you consider the Isle of Thanet to be not a part of the British mainland.
Or perhaps Portsmouth South? There's a canal separating Portsmouth from the mainland, but it used to be a part of the mainland.
Edit: You must mean Portsmouth South, as the Thanet seats both contains parts of the original mainland as well (a bit of pro-Tory gerrymandering, that).
Also, Isle of Wight would be affected by it, but by means of having to be split and partially merged with the mainland (or Portsmouth South, since my guess is that they'd connect Ryde to Portsmouth and then leave the rest of Wight intact).
«
Last Edit: May 12, 2010, 07:56:07 pm by Verily
»
Logged
Vasall des Midas
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
Posts: 56594
Re: Let the great boundary rejig commence
«
Reply #7 on:
May 13, 2010, 03:51:43 am »
Quote from: Verily on May 12, 2010, 07:46:55 pm
Also, Isle of Wight would be affected by it, but by means of having to be split and partially merged with the mainland .
And if this were implemented by the Tories alone rather than the current coalition, LD Gain Wight & Hold Forever.
Logged
Quote from: True Federalist on April 28, 2013, 01:25:07 am
Liberate yourself from Free Will
Kitty's beardgrowing advice to Mitty.
Kevinstat
YaBB God
Posts: 1214
Re: Let the great boundary rejig commence
«
Reply #8 on:
June 04, 2010, 06:33:51 pm »
Quote from: the Pooka MacPhellimey on May 13, 2010, 03:51:43 am
Quote from: Verily on May 12, 2010, 07:46:55 pm
Also, Isle of Wight would be affected by it, but by means of having to be split and partially merged with the mainland .
And if this were implemented by the Tories alone rather than the current coalition, LD Gain Wight & Hold Forever.
Wouldn't the voters there appreciate their increased share of representation vis-a-vis the rest of the country, or at least recognize the value in that enough to forgive the Tories for spitting their blessed island?
Logged
Harry Hayfield
YaBB God
Posts: 1749
Political Matrix
E: -1.55, S: 0.00
Re: Let the great boundary rejig commence
«
Reply #9 on:
June 05, 2010, 02:55:47 am »
The Welsh version of the Electoral Reform Society has been having a go at this and will be publishing their report on Wednesday in Cardiff. I have asked for the report to be e-mailed to me following publication (and will post once I get it) but they have raised an interesting statement, namely that according to the Government of Wales Act, the number of constituency AM's in the Assembly
MUST
equal the number of MP's elected. This means that if these plans do indeed go ahead (as expected), then the Assembly will shrink from it's current 60 to as few as 44 (when the Richards Commission called for a long term goal of an Assembly with 80 members).
Logged
Vasall des Midas
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
Posts: 56594
Re: Let the great boundary rejig commence
«
Reply #10 on:
June 05, 2010, 04:34:20 am »
Quote from: Kevinstat on June 04, 2010, 06:33:51 pm
Quote from: the Pooka MacPhellimey on May 13, 2010, 03:51:43 am
Quote from: Verily on May 12, 2010, 07:46:55 pm
Also, Isle of Wight would be affected by it, but by means of having to be split and partially merged with the mainland .
And if this were implemented by the Tories alone rather than the current coalition, LD Gain Wight & Hold Forever.
Wouldn't the voters there appreciate their increased share of representation vis-a-vis the rest of the country, or at least recognize the value in that enough to forgive the Tories for spitting their blessed island?
No. People don't think that way. Even splitting the island into two undersized constituencies (which the commission never planned to - as yet) wasn't a popular suggestion; mostly because there's no readily apparent 50-50 split (I've tried).
Logged
Quote from: True Federalist on April 28, 2013, 01:25:07 am
Liberate yourself from Free Will
Kitty's beardgrowing advice to Mitty.
YL
YorkshireLiberal
YaBB God
Posts: 736
Political Matrix
E: -5.35, S: -6.70
Re: Let the great boundary rejig commence
«
Reply #11 on:
June 05, 2010, 04:43:36 am »
I still have some hope that the Tories will see sense on this (or that the Lib Dems will persuade them to) and go for something like a 10% tolerance retaining the rule which allows it to be ignored in exceptional cases (e.g. Wight, Orkney and Shetland, Na h-Eileanan an Iar). If not there are going to be a lot of controversial recommendations, and see the response to the Boundary Commission's absurd proposal of a cross-Mersey seat in the last review to see the sort of reaction they're likely to get.
Logged
Somewhat reluctant Labour supporter
Kevinstat
YaBB God
Posts: 1214
Re: Let the great boundary rejig commence
«
Reply #12 on:
June 05, 2010, 12:00:28 pm »
Quote from: Chancellor of the Duchy of Smithills on May 12, 2010, 07:02:45 pm
Quote from: Orleanser on May 12, 2010, 06:11:59 pm
Would Na-h-Eileanan-an-Iar, Orkney and Shetlands, Ynys Mon and the Isle of Wight be affected by these changes? They're far under Cammy's 77,658 requirement.
Wight is actually a lot bigger than that - it already has more than 100,000 electors.
I suspect Anglesey might well be subject to this. Anglesey is connected to the mainland by two bridges, which is more than can be said for the rest of the island seats named. You could combine it with Arfon. [waits for Al to explain why this is a bad idea]
Trivia time here - there are actually
five
constituencies which contain no part of the British or Irish mainland. What's the other one?
Does the Ilse of Man send a representative to Westminster? If so, is there a constituency there that contains no part of the British mainland?
Logged
You kip if you want to...
change08
YaBB God
Posts: 8044
Re: Let the great boundary rejig commence
«
Reply #13 on:
June 05, 2010, 12:06:18 pm »
Quote from: Kevinstat on June 05, 2010, 12:00:28 pm
Quote from: Chancellor of the Duchy of Smithills on May 12, 2010, 07:02:45 pm
Quote from: Orleanser on May 12, 2010, 06:11:59 pm
Would Na-h-Eileanan-an-Iar, Orkney and Shetlands, Ynys Mon and the Isle of Wight be affected by these changes? They're far under Cammy's 77,658 requirement.
Wight is actually a lot bigger than that - it already has more than 100,000 electors.
I suspect Anglesey might well be subject to this. Anglesey is connected to the mainland by two bridges, which is more than can be said for the rest of the island seats named. You could combine it with Arfon. [waits for Al to explain why this is a bad idea]
Trivia time here - there are actually
five
constituencies which contain no part of the British or Irish mainland. What's the other one?
Does the Ilse of Man send a representative to Westminster? If so, is there a constituency there that contains no part of the British mainland?
No, the Isle of Man isn't part of the UK, it's just... there. It has its own government.
Logged
Yamor
Full Member
Posts: 201
Re: Let the great boundary rejig commence
«
Reply #14 on:
June 06, 2010, 03:10:21 am »
Portsmouth South?
Logged
Die-hard Clockworkfan
andrewteale
Sr. Member
Posts: 490
Re: Let the great boundary rejig commence
«
Reply #15 on:
June 06, 2010, 05:55:36 am »
Quote from: Verily on May 12, 2010, 07:46:55 pm
Quote from: Chancellor of the Duchy of Smithills on May 12, 2010, 07:02:45 pm
Quote from: Orleanser on May 12, 2010, 06:11:59 pm
Would Na-h-Eileanan-an-Iar, Orkney and Shetlands, Ynys Mon and the Isle of Wight be affected by these changes? They're far under Cammy's 77,658 requirement.
Wight is actually a lot bigger than that - it already has more than 100,000 electors.
I suspect Anglesey might well be subject to this. Anglesey is connected to the mainland by two bridges, which is more than can be said for the rest of the island seats named. You could combine it with Arfon. [waits for Al to explain why this is a bad idea]
Trivia time here - there are actually
five
constituencies which contain no part of the British or Irish mainland. What's the other one?
One of the Thanet seats? If you consider the Isle of Thanet to be not a part of the British mainland.
Or perhaps Portsmouth South? There's a canal separating Portsmouth from the mainland, but it used to be a part of the mainland.
Edit: You must mean Portsmouth South, as the Thanet seats both contains parts of the original mainland as well (a bit of pro-Tory gerrymandering, that).
Also, Isle of Wight would be affected by it, but by means of having to be split and partially merged with the mainland (or Portsmouth South, since my guess is that they'd connect Ryde to Portsmouth and then leave the rest of Wight intact).
Quote from: Yamor on June 06, 2010, 03:10:21 am
Portsmouth South?
Yes, it's Portsmouth South.
Logged
http://www.andrewteale.me.uk/
- UK local election results since 2002.
Quote from: Minion of Midas on February 03, 2012, 05:50:26 am
There cannot have been a by-election here, as I didn't see an Andrew Teale writeup on it. Or else that by-election's validity should be challenged on the grounds that it was held without Andrew's written approval.
Kevinstat
YaBB God
Posts: 1214
Re: Let the great boundary rejig commence
«
Reply #16 on:
June 06, 2010, 01:24:17 pm »
Quote from: the Pooka MacPhellimey on June 05, 2010, 04:34:20 am
Quote from: Kevinstat on June 04, 2010, 06:33:51 pm
Quote from: the Pooka MacPhellimey on May 13, 2010, 03:51:43 am
Quote from: Verily on May 12, 2010, 07:46:55 pm
Also, Isle of Wight would be affected by it, but by means of having to be split and partially merged with the mainland .
And if this were implemented by the Tories alone rather than the current coalition, LD Gain Wight & Hold Forever.
Wouldn't the voters there appreciate their increased share of representation vis-a-vis the rest of the country, or at least recognize the value in that enough to forgive the Tories for spitting their blessed island?
No. People don't think that way.
Yeah, I suppose you're right. There's a woman from Kennebunk, Maine, on a Maine political web forum I frequent who hates that her town is split between (state) House districts even though Kennebunk had enough population for 1.24 House districts as of and according to the 2000 census and has grown by a larger percentage than the state since then according to 2008 estimates. Of course Maine had 8,443 people per State Representative as of an according to the 2000 census and 8,730 people per representative according to 2009 estimates, and has exclusively single member districts unlike New Hampshire, so you end up having to split municipalities that would be a small portion of a Representative or Assembly district in most states.
«
Last Edit: June 06, 2010, 02:25:33 pm by Kevinstat
»
Logged
Harry Hayfield
YaBB God
Posts: 1749
Political Matrix
E: -1.55, S: 0.00
Re: Let the great boundary rejig commence
«
Reply #17 on:
June 09, 2010, 12:13:33 pm »
Welsh Electoral Reform Society Recommendations for Wales
(published June 9th 2010)
Name of constituency Con Lab Lib Dem Plaid UKIP Green BNP Ind Others Totals Electorate Turnout Winner
Barry and Penarth 18,106 16,387 8,112 2,433 1,419 485 0 186 306 47,434 73,652 64.40% Con
Blaenau Gwent and Tredegar 2,781 16,612 4,198 1,981 623 0 1,227 696 4,675 32,795 78,027 42.03% Lab
Breconshire and Montgomeryshire 14,085 3,304 15,520 1,839 994 181 0 152 409 36,485 73,630 49.55% Lib Dem
Bridgend 10,213 15,024 7,870 2,514 796 0 1,072 0 0 37,489 75,991 49.33% Lab
Caerphilly 6,038 16,700 5,587 4,996 893 0 1,450 985 14 36,662 78,773 46.54% Lab
Cardiff Central 10,637 13,184 12,753 1,437 912 532 0 191 341 39,988 74,574 53.62% Lab
Cardiff North East 13,568 15,702 10,680 1,589 1,043 479 0 236 361 43,658 75,345 57.94% Lab
Cardiff West 13,851 17,175 8,066 2,335 1,125 607 0 106 165 43,428 74,061 58.64% Lab
Carmarthen 11,546 11,885 5,156 9,011 1,173 13 0 134 16 38,934 75,798 51.37% Lab
Ceredigion and Rhaeadr 7,325 3,406 16,990 8,634 980 528 0 34 66 37,963 74,042 51.27% Lib Dem
Conwy and Abergele 13,623 8,667 5,765 5,561 759 0 18 54 194 34,642 74,374 46.58% Con
Denbigh, Llangollen and the Vale of Conwy 12,256 12,428 5,762 3,543 764 0 711 21 80 35,564 74,357 47.83% Lab
Flint and Rhyl 12,629 15,043 4,982 1,978 571 0 834 0 76 36,114 73,720 48.99% Lab
Gwynedd and Machynlleth 6,367 5,220 4,325 10,863 774 0 0 788 31 28,369 75,318 37.67% Plaid
Llanelli 7,203 14,349 4,590 10,804 1,063 0 118 0 0 38,127 75,776 50.32% Lab
Merthyr Tydifl and Ystrad Mynach 4,034 15,421 8,002 3,495 891 0 1,338 1,303 111 34,596 78,860 43.87% Lab
Mold and Shotton 12,868 15,638 6,949 1,617 928 0 1,247 0 0 39,247 75,949 51.68% Lab
Monmouth 18,945 12,211 9,526 1,140 1,017 445 283 0 30 43,598 78,292 55.69% Con
Neath and Aberavon 4,681 16,768 5,183 3,531 615 0 1,284 556 338 32,955 74,811 44.05% Lab
Newport 10,524 14,672 8,710 935 924 238 1,176 0 58 37,237 75,491 49.33% Lab
Pembroke 16,827 12,691 5,414 3,883 1,001 0 0 145 0 39,961 75,339 53.04% Con
Pontypridd and Aberdare 3,845 15,315 6,302 5,011 1,037 110 0 135 250 32,004 76,594 41.78% Lab
Rhondda and Ogmore 3,300 17,213 4,727 4,712 564 41 313 1,648 94 32,612 75,838 43.00% Lab
Swansea East and the Vale of Neath 5,861 15,564 6,960 4,863 806 120 1,286 81 96 35,637 77,901 45.75% Lab
Swansea North and Loughdor 8,123 15,936 7,478 2,280 758 221 1,345 52 25 36,217 74,988 48.30% Lab
Swansea West and Gower 9,345 13,539 10,561 1,870 695 272 927 252 120 37,581 77,775 48.32% Lab
Torfaen 9,213 16,527 6,474 1,826 922 449 1,492 1,594 0 38,497 78,434 49.08% Lab
Vale of Ely 11,178 15,772 8,758 2,776 1,234 479 84 0 374 40,657 73,196 55.55% Lab
Wrexham 9,003 12,505 7,744 2,322 787 0 1,124 0 0 33,486 74,020 45.24% Lab
Ynys Môn and Bangor 7,223 10,322 3,105 8,805 1,035 0 0 1,526 123 32,140 74,167 43.33% Lab
Could I ask someone more skilled than me to table that please and could I also ask for a named current ward map of Wales so I can show which wards go into which seats? (please e-mail me direct with map)
Logged
Die-hard Clockworkfan
andrewteale
Sr. Member
Posts: 490
Re: Let the great boundary rejig commence
«
Reply #18 on:
June 09, 2010, 05:19:09 pm »
I haven't drawn many Welsh ward maps but tend to be fairly useless in my experience - some Welsh wards are absolutely
tiny
.
Also I can't see this on the ERS website - do you have any further details?
One more thing:
Quote
Ceredigion a Rhaeadr
WTF??!?!?!?? If you're going to combine Cardiganshire with anywhere presumably the Preseli or Machynlleth would be a better idea - at least there aren't a load of mountains in the way.
Logged
http://www.andrewteale.me.uk/
- UK local election results since 2002.
Quote from: Minion of Midas on February 03, 2012, 05:50:26 am
There cannot have been a by-election here, as I didn't see an Andrew Teale writeup on it. Or else that by-election's validity should be challenged on the grounds that it was held without Andrew's written approval.
Harry Hayfield
YaBB God
Posts: 1749
Political Matrix
E: -1.55, S: 0.00
Re: Let the great boundary rejig commence
«
Reply #19 on:
June 09, 2010, 05:27:57 pm »
Quote from: Chancellor of the Duchy of Smithills on June 09, 2010, 05:19:09 pm
I haven't drawn many Welsh ward maps but tend to be fairly useless in my experience - some Welsh wards are absolutely
tiny
.
Also I can't see this on the ERS website - do you have any further details?
One more thing:
Quote
Ceredigion a Rhaeadr
WTF??!?!?!?? If you're going to combine Cardiganshire with anywhere presumably the Preseli or Machynlleth would be a better idea - at least there aren't a load of mountains in the way.
The Welsh part of the ERS e-mailed me the designs of the new constituencies and they were embaroged until a meeting today in Cardiff. If they have not yet appeared on the website, then pass. As to the idea of Ceredigion and Rhaedr, the wards in question are:
Ceredigion
All wards
Powys
Blaen Hafren, Llandinam, Llanfair Caereinion, Llanidloes, Rhiwcynon, Llanyre, Nantmel, Rhaeadr Gwy and the northern half of the electoral division of Llanafanfawr
Pembrokeshire
Cilgerran, Clydau, Crymych, Dinas Cross, Newport, Scleddau
Logged
Die-hard Clockworkfan
andrewteale
Sr. Member
Posts: 490
Re: Let the great boundary rejig commence
«
Reply #20 on:
June 09, 2010, 05:41:36 pm »
OK, so it looks like it already
has
the Mynydd Preseli in it. Still, communication links between Aberystwyth and Rhayader consist of the A44 road via Llangurig. And, er, that's it.
Surely the ERS Cymru can't be trying for the most insane constituencies they can think of in order to discredit FPTP? Nah, that can't be right.
Logged
http://www.andrewteale.me.uk/
- UK local election results since 2002.
Quote from: Minion of Midas on February 03, 2012, 05:50:26 am
There cannot have been a by-election here, as I didn't see an Andrew Teale writeup on it. Or else that by-election's validity should be challenged on the grounds that it was held without Andrew's written approval.
Teddy (IDS Legislator)
nickjbor
YaBB God
Posts: 8353
Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -1.91
Re: Let the great boundary rejig commence
«
Reply #21 on:
June 10, 2010, 01:03:57 am »
What's all this hogwash about you cant redo the boundaries cause the list of electors is out of date.
Do you use registered electors to determine boundaries? I can't think of anything less democratic. Canada uses citizens, all citizens (old, young). You could also use citizens over 18 (IE can vote).
Logged
TEDDY - ARKANSAS - IDS - Liberal Whip
Note to self: use brain more.
dialectical fetishist
Winston Disraeli
YaBB God
Posts: 12196
Re: Let the great boundary rejig commence
«
Reply #22 on:
June 10, 2010, 03:15:34 am »
Oh, just brilliant
Logged
Harry Hayfield
YaBB God
Posts: 1749
Political Matrix
E: -1.55, S: 0.00
Re: Let the great boundary rejig commence
«
Reply #23 on:
June 10, 2010, 06:03:25 am »
Quote from: Teddy on June 10, 2010, 01:03:57 am
What's all this hogwash about you cant redo the boundaries cause the list of electors is out of date.
Do you use registered electors to determine boundaries? I can't think of anything less democratic. Canada uses citizens, all citizens (old, young). You could also use citizens over 18 (IE can vote).
The agrument that Harriet Harman used in the Commons yesterday is that what is the point of rejigging the boundaries if not everyone who can vote is allowed to vote (and cited all the data listed). My response would be "that did not stop you rejigging the boundaries of Scotland for the 2005 elections, and the rest of the UK for the 2010 elections"
Logged
Vasall des Midas
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
Posts: 56594
Re: Let the great boundary rejig commence
«
Reply #24 on:
June 11, 2010, 05:50:01 am »
Quote from: Teddy on June 10, 2010, 01:03:57 am
What's all this hogwash about you cant redo the boundaries cause the list of electors is out of date.
Do you use registered electors to determine boundaries? I can't think of anything less democratic. Canada uses citizens, all citizens (old, young). You could also use citizens over 18 (IE can vote).
The UK lets noncitizens vote (on certain conditions), so they've still got you beat.
Logged
Quote from: True Federalist on April 28, 2013, 01:25:07 am
Liberate yourself from Free Will
Kitty's beardgrowing advice to Mitty.
Pages:
[
1
]
2
3
4
5
6
...
41
« previous
next »
Jump to:
Please select a destination:
-----------------------------
Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
-----------------------------
=> 2016 U.S. Presidential Election
===> 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls
===> 2016 U.S. Presidential Primary Election Polls
=> U.S. Presidential Election Results
===> 2012 U.S. Presidential Election Results
===> 2008 U.S. Presidential Election Results
===> 2004 U.S. Presidential Election Results
===> 2000 U.S. Presidential Election Results
=> Presidential Election Trends
=> Election What-ifs?
===> Past Election What-ifs (US)
===> Alternative Elections
===> International What-ifs
-----------------------------
Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
-----------------------------
=> Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections
===> 2013 & Odd Year Gubernatorial Election Polls
===> 2014 Gubernatorial Election Polls
=> Congressional Elections
===> 2014 Senatorial Election Polls
=> International Elections
=> Election Predictions
-----------------------------
Questions and Answers
-----------------------------
=> Presidential Election Process
===> Electoral Reform
===> Polling
=> The Atlas
===> How To
-----------------------------
General Discussion
-----------------------------
=> Constitution and Law
=> Religion & Philosophy
=> History
===> Alternative History
-----------------------------
General Politics
-----------------------------
=> U.S. General Discussion
=> Political Geography & Demographics
=> International General Discussion
=> Economics
=> Individual Politics
=> Political Debate
===> Political Essays & Deliberation
===> Book Reviews and Discussion
-----------------------------
Election Archive
-----------------------------
=> 2012 Elections
===> 2012 Senatorial Election Polls
===> 2012 House Election Polls
===> 2012 U.S. Presidential Primary Election Polls
===> 2012 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls
===> 2012 Gubernatorial Election Polls
=> 2010 Elections
===> 2010 House Election Polls
===> 2010 Senatorial Election Polls
===> 2010 Gubernatorial Election Polls
=> 2008 Elections
===> 2008 Senatorial Election Polls
===> 2008 Gubernatorial Election Polls
===> 2008 U.S. Presidential Election Campaign
===> 2008 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls
===> 2008 U.S. Presidential Primary Election Polls
=> 2004 U.S. Presidential Election
===> 2004 U.S. Presidential Election Campaign
===> 2004 U.S. Presidential Election Polls
=> 2006 Elections
===> 2006 Senatorial Election Polls
===> 2006 Gubernatorial Election Polls
-----------------------------
Forum Community
-----------------------------
=> Forum Community
===> Forum Community Election Match-ups
=> Election and History Games
===> Mock Parliment
===> Town Hall
===> Survivor
===> Interactive Timelines
=> Off-topic Board
-----------------------------
Atlas Fantasy Elections
-----------------------------
=> Atlas Fantasy Elections
===> Voting Booth
=> Atlas Fantasy Government
===> Constitutional Convention
===> Regional Governments
1 Hour
1 Day
1 Week
1 Month
Forever
Login with username, password and session length
Powered by SMF 1.1.18
|
SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Loading...