Let the great boundary rejig commence

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Let's have a look map by map...

Gwent & Mid Glamorgan: overall impression... urgh, but I've seen worse. Some of the constituencies make a degree of sense (putting all of Nye's old seat in one constituency is something I approve of, of course) but some are very odd. Their Caerphilly would not survive the hearings process. Also, stupid names... they don't seem to be aware that Tredegar is actually in Blaenau Gwent already.

South Glamorgan: overall impression... ghastly. Words don't exist to describe the utter stupidity of 'Vale of Ely'. The overall map like a desperate attempt to keep a LibDem seat in Cardiff with less seats to play with and I don't have any nicer words for it than that.

West Glamorgan: overall impression... these people should never be allowed to have anything to do with drawing electoral boundaries ever. A clear attempt to draw a non-Labour constituency in the Swansea area. There are not words. Vile. And they don't seem to know what the Gower actually is. Idiots.

Dyfed: this is just insane. I know Mid Wales quite well and I think you'll find that transport links make severl constituencies there impossible. I also don't know what the hell they think they're doing with Llanelli.

Gwynedd: surprisingly reasonable, though I don't think there's any way that Gwynedd & Machynlleth would survive hearings.

Clwyd: again, better than other areas though I don't like it. I would have to question whether the interests of the people of Chirk have much to do with those of the people of Llanrwst, though will admit that interior NE Wales is a problem.

Powys: DIAF

[Filuwaúrdjan]

That's true. But some of the worst proposals are easily avoidable,

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Interesting solution to the Manchester problem.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I think he's using the method that assumes that all parts of a given constituency vote the same way; which will obviously get a situation like Lancaster and Morecambe wrong.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Given the source I was half-expecting an amusing attempted gerrymander, but, no, quite reasonable for the most part. Much better than the atrocity produced by a certain organisation supporting electoral reform...

Generally South is better than North (though a closer look at Cardiff would have been helpful and I don't like that split of the Gower). I don't think that adding the Conwy valley to Anglesey/Bangor is a good idea and the Wrexham-area seats are a little on the crazed side. But, yeah. Not so bad overall.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I would have thought the obvious solution wrt the Wirral would be to re-create the 1974-1983 Wirral and Bebington & Ellesmere Port constituencies? The main problem is after all with the suburban seats and not with Burke & Hare or Welsh Island.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Well, to answer one point, Hendon is currently Edgware, Hale, Mill Hill, Hendon, West Hendon, Burn Oak and Colindale. Going off the borough elections, that's four Tory wards to three Labour ones. Your Finchley & Hendon has just two Tory wards. It's pretty ugly, but not worse than the current split (Barnet seems to be tricky to split in a pretty way) and has a certain logic to it.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Want a map of your London? Would be easier to comment that way.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

and only the Trough of Bowland to link them.

There's a dirty joke hiding in there somewhere.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Yeah. Not good. I guess that might mean Hartlepool & Billingham or some such horror?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I guess Hartlepool will probably just have some rural territory slapped on.

Sod all people live in the rural areas around Monkeytown. You'd have to extend north to Blackhall (which has very strong links with Peterlee) or west to Sedgefield proper (blech).

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I was trying not to think about that. Especially given the awful record of post-1983 boundary reviews in the area.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes, but it always looks that way. Oh...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That might not be quite so bad, as the boundary is pretty artificial

[Filuwaúrdjan]

If by the other bits of Weardale you mean Crook and Willington, that would work nicely. But doing Teeside with an absurdly tight quota-thingy-you-know was always likely to be hell, fwiw. You'll probably have to changes things elsewhere and hope that things fit when you get to the land of the chemical smog. I suppose you could try drawing a really tight Middlesbrough constituency and hoping that things will fall into place around it? Probably not, actually.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Just to add emphasis... the constituency as it was 1997-2010:

[Filuwaúrdjan]

There were a lot of deeply horrible constituencies drawn in 1983; most of the worst went in the 1995 review.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Corby has no community of interest with east Northants. Is there any way it could be paired in the other direction, or do the figures not allow for that?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I suggest that we just deport all the rich idiots from the Home Counties who have been ruining Northants for decades back to where they came from. That's what my late Grandma would have argued for, anyway.

But, yeah, any constituency would be ugly. But as ugly as the current one? Alright, it doesn't look so bad, but it's dreadful, almost as good an argument against single-member districts as Rossendale & Darwen (though for different reasons).

[Filuwaúrdjan]

A cross-Mersey doesn't make sense

fyp

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I suggest that we just deport all the rich idiots from the Home Counties who have been ruining Northants for decades back to where they came from. That's what my late Grandma would have argued for, anyway.

But, yeah, any constituency would be ugly. But as ugly as the current one?

Possibly worse.

Corby + anything in Kettering borough west of Kettering proper (Desborough etc) + those three Daventry wards listed above + the fairly empty northernmore bits of East Northants to just north of Oundle (73,031) vs
Kettering proper + the central and south central bits of East Northants from Irthlingborough north to Oundle (78,580)?

What do you say, Al? Best I can do.

It would make more sense than keeping the current division, yeah.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

And for some comic relief, we cut to my inept attempts at drawing Shropshire:
Telford 74,734
Current constituency and Muxton and Donnington wards
Wellington, Newport & Market Drayton 73,234
Remainder of Telford & Wrekin; in northern Shropshire, Shawbury, Wem, and points east.
Ludlow 77,157
All of the former Bridgnorth and South Shropshire districts, ie gaining the Shifnal area from Wrekin
Shrewsbury & Atcham 75,076
Unchanged
Oswestry 79,500
The remaining wards in northwestern Shropshire (a somewhat larger area than the former Oswestry district), and from the abolished Eddisbury constituency the West Cheshire ward of Cholmondesley and the Cheshire East & Cheshire ward of Broxton and most of Gowy (see above, City of Chester)

Alrighty then.

Adding Donnington to Telford makes a lot of sense, adding Muxton less so. Part of the problem with Telford is that it doesn't have anything like a normal urban structure; thus Donnington might belong in the Telford constituency and Muxton might belong with Donnington, but Muxton does not really belong in the Telford constituency.
An alternative would be add the Hadley part of Hadley & Leegomery into Telford instead of Muxton. Hadley is very much part of Telford proper (insofar as there is such a thing) and Muxton isn't.
Actually, if I were drawing the boundaries I'd also split the Wrockwardine ward to include Little Wenlock (and thus the summit of the Wrekin) in the constituency, and cross the river to include Broseley and unite the Gorge in one constituency. Broseley ought to be in Telford & Wrekin UA anyway. Or you could base a constituency on the former Liberty of Great Wenlock

Wellington, Newport & Market Drayton is a horror. You might be better off scrapping the current order of constituencies and trying to unite Shrewsbury and Wellington and working things out around that. Figures might not work though. So maybe not.

That thought out of the way... you're combining with Cheshire in the wrong places, I think. If Oswestry isn't Shropshire its Welsh; it doesn't have much to do with anywhere in Cheshire. The area around Whitchurch and Market Drayton however... yeah. That would be a better way of going about things. Hope that doesn't wreck the Cheshire map, though.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Hmm... how far south would the East Shropshire seat have to go? Because the whole of the eastern fringe of the county has a lot in common, so that might not be so bad. And the current boundary between Shrewsbury & Atcham and Ludlow makes no sense on the ground, fwiw. You could probably extend as far north as Hanwood without too many problems if it was necessary.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I'd been wondering that. Not sure how much exactly of Sandwell is West Brom proper?

More or less the southern half (geographically) of the West Brom East constituency. Though it depends how you define West Brom; I think the old county borough may have gone further north than that.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

To an extent, yes (even the stupid name 'Sandwell' hints at the dominance of West Brom, btw). But also, I think West Brom West of 1983-1997 did contain a small part of West Brom proper.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

WBW could be "Tipton" or "Tipton and Wednesbury" at the moment.

No it couldn't. Oldbury is pretty big, and they'd lynch you if you included those places and left them out.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

More serious comment later, maybe.

Birmingham Yardley 71,968+x
minus Acocks Green, plus Shard End and part of Bordesley Green (19,690)

LOL
 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Birmingham Handsworth

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Constituencies in Birmingham are traditionally named for wards. Sparkbrook is a nice name and an important one (at least as regards constituency names) in Birmingham's history.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

haha

But if you're going to do that, part of Erdington ward (which has community of interest with Slutton) rather than part of Kingstanding (which... erm... doesn't).

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yo-Yo with Yam-Yam?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Birmingham Selly Oak 73,548+x
Minus most of Selly Oak (18,297), plus Kings Norton. The other wards are Billesley, Bournville, and Brandwood.

There was a Kings Norton constituency until the early 50s. Sort of like current Northfield, but bigger. Surprisingly, was actually the first part of Birmingham to elect a Labour MP and in 1924 of all years. Herbert Austin (yes, that one) was the Tory incumbent and his defeat was entirely his own making.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Hahahaha... oh... dear Lord... I mean, there's a certain logic there but... LOL. The reaction would be something to see!

Also, pro-German gerrymandering obviously.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

What's so funny?

Many, many things, thus the bolding. The most blatant white-flight territory in Birmingham itself (most of the Sheldon ward, parts of the Stechford & Yardley North ward) in the same constituency as the Small Heath area? Epic. And there's screwing incumbents and there's screwing incumbents . And this one happens to be quite a whiner. 'twud be fun to watch.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Ever heard anyone from the Black Country talk?