Let the great boundary rejig commence

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Yeah, it makes things complicated. Mundell seems to be as absolutely fycked as any incumbent anywhere, but that doesn't mean that all Tory hopes in the South of Scotland have been killed off. Especially as he only really owes his seat to a previous wacky decision by the boundary doodlers.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Alexander will lose his seat no matter the boundaries, so why bother playing that sort of game?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Except for the target seats, the party essentially collapsed. In part this was due to the removal of Tony Blair - and of the issues that people had opposed him from the left for - and the fact that Labour were neither winning nor being clobbered. But it also was policy - the brand owners gave up on building a political party and instead attempted to become independent MPs.

Given that that's what they've been doing in local elections in certain places (Stroud for example, but see also random unexpected parts of Herefordshire and - more recently - Suffolk) for a long time, it's surprising that it took them so long.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

More to the point, Russell Brown will run in whichever constituency Dumfries is in. He's one of those people who can produce large personal votes as if by magic, and a lot of Labour votes in Galloway in 2010 will be those.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Brighton Whatever and... er...? Just for the record, and all that, the results (just showing Con/Lab/Lib/Grn) in selected constituencies at the last election:

Brighton Pavilion: Green 31.3, Labour 28.9, Con 23.7, LDem 13.8
Norwich South: LDem 29.4, Labour 28.7, Con 22.9, Green 14.9
Cambridge: LDem 39.1, Con 25.6, Labour 24.3, Green 7.6
Deptford: Labour 53.7, LDem 23.4, Con 13.5, Green 6.7
Brighton Kemptown: Con 38, Labour 34.9, LDem 18, Green 5.4
Hove & Portslade: Con 36.7, Labour 33, LDem 22.6, Green 5.2
Hackney North & Stoke Newington: Labour 54.9, LDem 23.8, Con 14.5, Green 4.6

Of course the Green vote fell in most places because there were pressures on possible Green voters that weren't there in 2005... but those pressures are hardly going to go away in 2015. And, once again 'of course', the Greens have done much better in local government elections in many of these places. But that support does not seem to translate very well upwards and, anyway, is often kind of dependent on low turnout.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

And now it is the turn of Wales

Initial reaction:

Newport West & Sirhowy Valley and Glyndwr and North Powys are some of the worst things drawn during this sick joke of a process. Also, look at Cardiff. And Swansea. And the general ignorance of the existence of, you know, mountains in The Valleys.

And for a very local gripe: they've literally drawn a random line between the communities that sprung up around Dinorwic. Which is like dousing the idea of 'community of interest' with petrol and setting it alight. Not the worst thing (not even close) to come out of this process, even for Wales, but I'm still very much not happy.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

And has it been partly named after a district which no longer exists, or is there some other reason for the name?

Owain Glyndŵr is associated with Corwen. But, basically, yes, for the old local government district.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Don't use Clywd, unless you're referencing the river.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Delyn really ought to be avoided as well.

All three towns are in the historic county of Flintshire, if that's any help. They weren't all in the old West Flint constituency though; Flint was in East Flint.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

You might want to mention that the historic links between Rhymney and Tredegar extend to the fact that they were in the same constituency for ages (at least 1918-1983 and maybe before then; can't remember at the moment). Also that Llanberis has overwhelming CoI ties with Deiniolen.

Anyway I'm going to have a closer look at the mess around Wrexham later to see if things can be improved without altering the general pattern.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The internets just ate my post. Fyck. So this will be even less useful than would have otherwise been the case.

Basically the problem is the old Denbighshire Coalfield; the way it's been cut up is deeply unsatisfactory (even more so than the current split, which is far from logical) and none of it belongs with Mid Wales. Accepting that there's no way round this big issue without redrawing the map from scratch, the very worst thing is the inclusion of Rhosllanerchrugog in the Welshpool-to-Denbigh horror story. I don't think that's acceptable. I also don't like it being split from Ruabon. Cefn in that seat is also bad (because although there are ties to Llangollen - not that Llangollen is really the magical centre of that seat or anything - the Dee there is a natural barrier, which is why they built the aqueduct. That was also the boundary between the Denbigh and Wrexham constituencies on the old political map of Wales) but is a slightly lesser sin. Chirk isn't good either, but it presumably unavoidable (and easier to argue for if required; it was in Glyndwr DC, for what little that matters).

That's probably deeply unhelpful. One possible crazed solution is a dash for the English Maelor, maybe (that area is always a problem as it belongs with nowhere). You'd have to do an absolutely ridiculous split of Penycae & Ruabon South (to include a small area where basically no one lives) and probably of Marchwiel as well (maybe even just to include Erbistock), and then work from there. Which would still be obviously absurd, but there would be a degree of deranged logic lurking somewhere (i.e. that constituency as rural north borderlands or something), probably. Maybe.

Btw, this is the reason why I hate that proposed constituency. It is two wards wide at one point; actually doubly so, but I'll just draw attention to the Powys half of that. Maps of the wards in question:

https://www.nomisweb.co.uk/maps/700/1308631485.aspx

https://www.nomisweb.co.uk/maps/700/1308631486.aspx

sigh

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Would you consider that an improvement worth recommending?

It would make things slightly better* as it wouldn't split that area up, yeah. And slightly better is slightly better, you know?

*Also from a *cough* partisan point of view as it would increase our chances of winning the monster, but let's pretend I didn't write that.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

And I sort of like the Glyndwr name. If Britain is to start having constituencies named after people like Quebec or Australia, Owain Glyndwr and Shane Crosagh O'Mullan are just the kind of people I want constituencies named after.

I think they're the only ones so far, but I'd definitely approve of Epping Forest being renamed Turpin:D

I maintain that any constituency including Wem should be called Hazlitt.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

are the constituencies in Australia named after local notables as a rule?

Not always that local, but, kind of.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Worth pointing out that Montgomery (est. 1918) isn't that historic a constituency, at least not compared to some of the other seats going by the wayside. We're losing Anglesey/Môn and Gower, after all.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Surely, as a historic county, there's been a Montgomeryshire constituency in some form or other since way back, like Henry VIII?

Yeah, but they only put the towns back in in the 1917 review.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Win.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

For their own constituency their plan is to have a Shipley and Bradford North containing Shipley, Baildon, Bingley, Windhill & Wrose, Heaton, Manningham and Toller.

O.K, that deserves a

[Filuwaúrdjan]

So where's the Frankfurt map, Al?

About half done. For some reason I've decided to do the top seven candidates.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

No one can say Llanelli right, never mind Caerfyrddin.

Significantly more pathetic is the all too frequent inability to pronounce Rhondda correctly.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Caer can vary but Kare is the usual and Kaier is basically non embarrassing in most places, though runs the risk of sounding perhaps a little bit BBC Pontcanna. Kuh is quite common as well (as in Caernarfon). Anyways, the last syllable is vurthin. That's a thick 'th', of course.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The only arguments against seemed to be sentimentality; a misguided belief that other, divisive, cultures should be fostered and nurtured; and Welsh nationalism.

To which it could be claimed that the only arguments in favour of your position are consistent only with being a bigoted cretin.

Or the abuse and the arrogance could be dropped and things could be looked at more reasonably. In which case it would seem obvious that attempts to accommodate the Welsh language (so to speak) are quite reasonable. Bilingualism is the order of the day anyway; there are no monoglot communities left now and no prospect of bringing them back. So why get angry?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

A majority of people in Carmarthenshire claim to be able to speak Welsh to some level. There are actually only a handful of wards in the county there were a majority don't understand the language at all, and the only one where it's a large majority is Laugharne (which is south of the Landsker). Parts of Carmarthenshire - the Amman Valley especially - are almost as Welsh speaking as Arfon.

And, of course, most people in Wales who don't speak the language have no problems with Welsh place names.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Yes, technically this is just another review (even if it isn't) and won't just stop because those behind it just rolled two ones.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The legislation itself was politically motivated and so can be fairly accused of being an attempt at gerrymandering, even if the work of the map doodlers themselves was not; that would be more an incompetence thing.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The reason why Labour MPs call it a gerrymander, is because it will cancel out part of the systematic bias in favour of Labour which has existed in recent decades (as Labour seats, on average had smaller electorates than Tory ones). The rest of the bias (because Labour voters are more advantageously clustered in particular geographical areas) will remain, as the Conservatives are not prepared to abandon single member constituencies and first past the post voting.

Actually there is no systematic bias in favour of Labour; or at least, not in favour of Labour alone (fptp is good for the Tories as well, which is why they don't want rid of it). A quick look at summary figures from the last General Election will confirm this. The issue is that Labour can run up much higher totals when they do well than the Tories can when they do. I'm half tempted to argue that this has less to do with the usual reasons given (differential turnout, etc) than two other factors; the fact that the Tories are strikingly less competitive in and around the industrial conurbations that was once the case (eleven seats in Greater Manchester in 1983, just two in 2010, five seats in Birmingham proper in 1983, none in 2010...), and the fact that a small but critically significant proportion of Tory 'base' constituencies now have LibDem MPs...

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The idea of naming a constituency after Leeds Met is f[inks]ing hilarious.