Archive for the ‘redistricting’ Category

Articles

How to produce a fair arrangement of constituencies

In boundary changes,boundary commission,redistricting on July 18, 2015 by dadge

Just before the general election, the Political and Constitutional Reform Committee of the House of Commons issued a report on the parliamentary boundary review system. Sensibly, they recommended that the 5% rule be replaced with a 10% rule, i.e. that seats can have electorates up to 10 per cent above or below the average. But otherwise the report is quite conservative in its conclusions.

My input was as follows:

This submission is divided into two parts: recommendations within the current framework; and recommendations for a new framework.

 

In order to work effectively, Britain’s First Past The Post System requires a fair arrangement of constituencies.

 

PART A: Recommendations within the current framework

 

  1. Some of the current problems with seat distribution are caused by the philosophy of “minimum change”. Minimum change leads to the perpetuation of arrangements of seats which contribute to the unfairness of the system. For example, smaller seats tend to stay smaller, marginals tend to stay marginals, and so on. The arrangement of constituencies is not for anyone’s convenience, least of all that of political parties, it’s for the effective and fair representation of voters and their communities, and hence each review should start with a blank canvas, as it were, rather than any attempt being made to keep changes to a minimum.
  2. In order to reduce the disruption this causes, the period between reviews should be as long as possible. Given that each review is allowed to make wholesale changes, and these will take time to get used to, I would suggest that the period be 15 years. Interim reviews can take place where constituencies grow or shrink very quickly.
  3. While the review areas at previous Reviews had often been too small, e.g. Northumberland, the Wirral, and the London boroughs, such that constituencies varied wildly in size, the policy at the last review changed to what I call “amorphous blobbism”: regional review areas with very little respect for the boundaries within them. All sorts of unnatural cross-border constituencies were recommended, many of which were removed on appeal. For reasons of tradition, belonging, and practicality it’s good to use counties and metropolitan boroughs as the basic review units. Just considering the review process, it’s rather unfair on a member of the public who wants to oppose a particular proposed constituency if they have to consider the knock-on effects across a huge region, most of which they won’t know.
  4. The size of review areas needs to be a compromise between working within known units and having areas big enough to give flexibility with regard to constituency electorate and formation. The normal review area should be the top-level local authority, i.e. county, metropolitan borough or unitary authority, but this is not possible with the new 5% tolerance in electorate, since this will only work if every review area has an electorate of 800,000+. Hence the tolerance should be put up to 10%. (At the last review, this would’ve allowed constituencies of between 68,977 and 84,305.) With these limits, review areas need an electorate of at least 414,000, which would once again allow review areas to be based on counties and the larger metropolitan boroughs.
  5. The Commission needs to be expressly told to protect communities from being split by the process whenever possible. During the last Review the English and Welsh Commissions were obsessively committed to completing their duties without splitting any wards. In several review areas there were very few constituency arrangements that were possible without splitting a ward, which meant they had effectively tied their own hands, as well as removing almost any element of choice in the consultation discussions and leaving some areas with constituencies that split established communities and forced unconnected areas together. The classic case was Cheshire, but the stubbornness also detrimentally affected the outcome of the Review in Birmingham, Leeds, Portsmouth, and several other areas.
  6. Wards are useful building blocks but they should be considered less, not more, sacrosanct than town or county boundaries. Despite the ludicrous claim by the Commission that there is no agreed way of splitting wards, polling districts with known electorates exist in every area and can be used in a limited way in order to create better constituencies.
  7. Working on the data from the last Review (with the current 5% tolerance),
    Constituency electorate: minimum 72,810, maximum 80,473. Once ward size reaches 8,000 redistricting is effectively impossible: 9×8,000=72,000, 10×8,000=80,000 and 8×9,000=72,000, 9×9,000=81,000 and 7×10,000=70,000, 8×10,000=80,000.

    There is a way for the Commission to allow ward-splitting without opening the floodgates: allow it only in districts where it is mathematically necessary, i.e. with an average ward size of a certain amount. I calculated this amount as 102.5% of the average constituency size, divided by 10, which at the last review was 7,856.

    Most, if not all, metropolitan boroughs would qualify (Rochdale’s average is 7,867, for example), giving the Commission the necessary flexibility in those places.

    A cap can also be put on how many splits are allowed in a particular review area, and I suggest this could be: number of seats divided by two, rounded down. In Rochdale’s case this would be 1, in Leeds 3, in Birmingham 4, in Cheshire-Wirral 5.

  8. Orphan wards. The Commission’s current policy of not splitting wards has led to the proliferation of orphan wards: a single ward from a particular authority is tacked on to a constituency otherwise formed entirely from wards in a different authority. This is unfair to electors since the MP will spend most of their time interacting with the “main” authority and will be seen as that authority’s MP. Therefore the policy should aim to reduce the number of such wards.
  9. Packing/cracking. If a town has an electorate of say, 120,000, the decision must be made whether to have an inner and an outer seat or a west and an east seat. In the jargon, to pack or to crack. This makes an important difference to the way the area is represented, and often makes a difference to which parties win seats. In these cases the Commission should listen particularly to the views of local people in general, rather than to the (biased) views of local parties. And there should be careful analysis to ensure that the national balance between packing and cracking is such that there is no national bias towards a particular party.
  10. Islands and sparsely populated areas. The vote of every elector should be of equal worth. Therefore it’s unacceptable to have places like the Isle of Wight where an elector’s vote is worth less, and places like the Western Isles where an elector’s vote is worth more.
  11. In the case of the Isle of Wight, part of the island should form a constituency with part of the New Forest.
  12. In the case of the Northern and Western Isles, I suggest that each sends a “proportional member” to parliament. This would mean that the Northern Isles would send an MP with 0.5 of a vote in parliament, and the Western Isles would send an MP with 0.33 of a vote. This is the best compromise, since it reduces the over-representation without attempting to combined these islands with the distant mainland.
  13. In the case of other sparsely populated areas (generally distant from Westminster), the rules have already correctly been changed to stop their over-representation. Funds should be available for extra staff for MPs in such areas in order that electors get the same level of service that is available to voters in more compact constituencies.
  14. The electoral register. Boundary reviews rely on correct electoral registers. Most (or all?) electoral registers have not been correct for many years. From my own experience of canvassing for Birmingham City Council I know how hard it is for local authorities to get everyone onto the register. If parliament is serious about accuracy in its parliamentary boundary reviewing, it needs to allocate more resources into getting everyone onto the register, especially as registration varies so widely between areas according to such factors as income and nationality. Among the poor practice that comes to mind from my researches is the extremely inaccurate register that Preston had a few years ago (I seem to remember that almost 20% of voters were missing), and the unavailability of any evidence for Leeds’s ward electorate data at the last Review. These issues are just the tip of the iceberg.
  15. Mapping. The Commission’s mapping was quite good at the last review, but pdf’s are unwieldy, and it was shameful that it was left up to third parties to come up with interactive mapping. If the Commission is serious in wanting members of the public to submit counter-proposals it needs to provide an online mapping tool to help them do this.
  16. The Commission should promote co-operation over confrontation. Why not invite proposals right at the outset and incorporate those ideas into its own initial proposals, rather than coming up with its own, often bizarre, ideas without consultation and then getting all precious about them when they’re criticised?
  17. The Review hearing system is still terribly biased in favour of political parties. They use their resources to produce comprehensive counter-proposals that appear to take up at least half of the process, even though they only provide about 10% of the counter-proposals by number. Although some local parties are quite good at representing local views, my main conclusion from sitting through hearings at the last and the previous Review is that, by and large, parties’ proposals are mainly directed at keeping their MPs (and gaining new ones).
  18. Make-up of Commission. At the last review the Commission was made up of two lawyers and a council manager, only one of whom appeared to be an expert in electoral law, and none of whom was a geographer or a statistician. This meant it was difficult to have faith that they knew what they were doing. The Commission should be increased in size to ensure a greater breadth of expertise.

PART B: Recommendations for a new framework

 

B1. A much simpler and easier-to-manage framework for the redistribution of parliamentary constituencies is a rolling review. This would operate as follows.

 

B2. Initial allocation and distribution. A constituency electorate would be decided. Let’s say 80,000. (This would give several fewer MPs than now, but it’s a good idea to use a round number in order to keep future data analysis as simple as possible.) Each review area receives the number of constituencies it’s entitled to. For example, if the electorate in Area P is 420,000, it would have 5 seats (420/80=5.25); and if the electorate in Area Q is 460,000, it would have 6 seats (460/80=5.75). In every area, the distribution of seats would be decided by an independent body. This could be a national body, as now, or a local body for each area.

 

B3. Subsequent reviews. There would be no national or regional boundary reviews. When the electorate of a review area increases or falls such that its entitlement increases or falls, then a review takes place in that review area. But not immediately. In order to avoid frequent reviews in areas which have an entitlement of approximately half a seat (For example, if the electorate in Area R is 441,000, it would have an entitlement to just over 5 and a half seats (441/80=5.51)) the entitlement would need to have increased/decreased for 3 consecutive years before the review takes place.

 

B4. Within a review area, if the electorate of any constituency goes beyond acceptable limits (the limits could either be +/- 10% of the average in the review area or +/- 10% of the national average, or whatever tolerance is agreed on) for 3 consecutive years, the boundary of that seat should be reviewed. This will of course require the review of at least one neighbouring seat, and possibly several others. Furthermore, if any seat in the review area remains over 10% smaller or larger than any other seat in the same review area over a period of 10 years, there should be a review of the seat (and its neighbours). This will avoid the long-term over- or under-representation of electors.

 

17 October 2014

Articles

Response to Revised Proposals

In boundary changes,redistricting on December 10, 2012 by dadge

Review of Parliamentary Constituencies in England

Response to Revised Proposals

10 December 2012

  

Contents

3. East Kent

7. Kent & East Sussex

10. North Buckinghamshire

12. West Surrey (& Berkshire)

20. Plymouth & West Devon

22. South Essex

30. South West Hertfordshire

31. North Lancashire

33. East Lancashire

34. Manchester

36. Cheshire

37. North East England

38. County Durham

40. Tyneside & Northumberland

 


 

East Kent

Problems with Commission’s revised proposals:

  1. Whitstable split between seats
  2. Margate split between seats
  3. Dover and Folkestone seats both contain orphan wards

Benefits of Locus counterproposal:

  1. Whitstable and Margate are not split between seats
  2. Folkestone & Hythe seat is conterminous with Shepway district

Disadvantages of Locus counterproposal:

  1. Canterbury seat contains 2 orphan wards
  2. Canterbury seat contains parts of 4 districts

Swapping the Little Stour and Marshside wards between the Canterbury and North Kent Coast seats would deal with these matters (albeit that the links are weak between the Minster and Ash areas) at the expense of constituency shape.

 

Constituency Electorate Ward Electorate
Folkestone & Hythe

80060

Lydd

4870

Romney Marsh

1859

New Romney Town

2799

New Romney Coast

2953

Hythe West

3442

North Downs West

3612

Lympne and Stanford

1614

Tolsford

1626

Folkestone East

3475

North Downs East

6529

Folkestone Harbour

3779

Folkestone Harvey Central

4296

Folkestone Harvey West

3557

Folkestone Sandgate

3339

Hythe East

3400

Hythe Central

4893

Dymchurch and St Mary’s Bay

5320

Folkestone Park

4837

Folkestone Morehall

3244

Folkestone Foord

3891

Folkestone Cheriton

4964

Elham and Stelling Minnis

1761

Dover & Deal

77565

Capel-le-Ferne

1904

Town and Pier

1456

Maxton, Elms Vale and Priory

5249

St Margaret’s-at-Cliffe

3441

Mill Hill

5852

Middle Deal and Sholden

5833

Aylesham

3530

Buckland

5347

Castle

1704

Eastry

3946

Eythorne and Shepherdswell

3702

Lydden and Temple Ewell

1902

North Deal

5513

Ringwould

1687

River

3737

St Radigunds

3518

Sandwich

5572

Tower Hamlets

3744

Walmer

6039

Whitfield

3889

East Thanet

75112

Beacon Road

3246

Bradstowe

3230

Central Harbour

5319

Cliffsend and Pegwell

3710

Cliftonville East

4987

Dane Valley

5167

Eastcliff

4741

Kingsgate

1746

Nethercourt

3393

Northwood

4808

St Peters

5522

Salmestone

3549

Sir Moses Montefiore

3456

Viking

5347

Newington

3177

Margate Central

2884

Cliftonville West

4319

Garlinge

3463

Westbrook

3048

North Kent Coast

74210

Thanet Villages

4753

Birchington South

4973

Westgate-on-Sea

5068

Birchington North

3181

Marshside

2313

Reculver

6988

Herne and Broomfield

6289

Greenhill and Eddington

4491

Chestfield and Swalecliffe

6755

Seasalter

6206

Gorrell

4572

Harbour

3936

Tankerton

3742

West Bay

4834

Heron

6109

Canterbury & Faversham

76364

Chartham and Stone Street

4251

Barham Downs

2153

North Nailbourne

2146

Little Stour

2086

Barton

5829

Wincheap

5891

Harbledown

1994

St Stephens

4973

Northgate

4083

Sturry South

2246

Sturry North

2127

Blean Forest

4878

Boughton and Courtenay

4193

East Downs

2105

Watling

3997

Abbey

4425

Davington Priory

1904

St Ann’s

3844

Westgate

5911

Downs North

1931

Little Stour and Ashstone

5397

Ashford

80090

Aylesford Green

1906

Beaver

3931

Bockhanger

1814

Boughton Aluph and Eastwell

2287

Bybrook

1944

Downs West

1892

Godinton

4054

Great Chart with Singleton North

2571

Highfield

1905

Isle of Oxney

2135

Kennington

1778

Little Burton Farm

2171

Norman

1933

North Willesborough

3862

Park Farm North

2432

Park Farm South

2045

Saxon Shore

4096

Singleton South

2240

South Willesborough

2417

Stanhope

1745

Stour

3664

Victoria

3675

Washford

2360

Weald Central

3889

Weald East

1737

Weald South

4208

Wye

1797

Charing

2026

Rolvenden and Tenterden West

1910

Tenterden South

1916

St Michaels

1900

Tenterden North

1850

 

Kent/East Sussex

Problems with Commission’s revised proposals:

  1. The Hailsham/Hellingly area is split between seats
  2. The shape of the Bexhill seat

Locus counterproposal to solve those problems:

–          Include Hellingly area in Bexhill seat

–          include Heathfield area in Uckfield seat

–          include Battle area in High Weald seat.

 

 

Constituency Electorate Ward Electorate
Bexhill & Hailsham 75230 Central

4056

Collington

3813

Kewhurst

3953

Old Town

3014

Sackville

3655

St Marks

3847

St Michaels

3809

St Stephens

3770

Sidley

3919

Ninfield and Hooe with Wartling

1966

Pevensey and Westham

7455

Polegate North

4168

Polegate South

2045

Hailsham East

1969

Hailsham South and West

6318

Hailsham Central and North

4349

Herstmonceux

2240

Hellingly

4478

East Dean

1920

Alfriston

2024

Chiddingly and East Hoathly

2462

High Weald 73750 Mayfield

2090

Rotherfield

1980

Crowborough East

3968

Crowborough West

3874

Crowborough St. Johns

2006

Frant/Withyham

4072

Crowborough North

4283

Crowborough Jarvis Brook

1977

Wadhurst

3967

Salehurst

3549

Ticehurst and Etchingham

3470

Rother Levels

3762

Ewhurst and Sedlescombe

2042

Hawkhurst and Sandhurst

4606

Benenden and Cranbrook

5133

Frittenden and Sissinghurst

1674

Goudhurst and Lamberhurst

3291

Brenchley and Horsmonden

3860

Darwell

4054

Battle Town

4012

Crowhurst

2058

Biddenden

2102

Weald North

1920

Lewes & Uckfield 73040 Kingston

1602

Ouse Valley and Ringmer

5102

Lewes Bridge

3600

Lewes Castle

3544

Lewes Priory

5347

Barcombe and Hamsey

1609

Plumpton, Streat, East Chiltington   and St John (Without)

1743

Ditchling and Westmeston

1968

Chailey and Wivelsfield

3805

Newick

1964

Buxted and Maresfield

4277

Uckfield Central

2401

Uckfield New Town

2073

Uckfield Ridgewood

2375

Uckfield North

4169

Framfield

2200

Cross in Hand/Five Ashes

2000

Heathfield North and Central

6123

Heathfield East

2032

Horam

2123

Newhaven Valley

2858

Danehill/Fletching/Nutley

4162

Forest Row

3838

Hartfield

2125

 

 

North Buckinghamshire

 

The Commission’s revised proposals take two small bites out of Bletchley and include them in the Buckingham seat. It would be more sensible to include the two wards east of Bletchley – which are separated from the town by the A5, the river, the canal and the park – in the Buckingham seat.

Also, since Aylesbury town has now expanded into the Weedon ward, it would be sensible to include it in the Aylesbury seat.

 

 

 

 

Changes compared to Commission’s revised proposals:

From Milton Keynes South to Buckingham: Walton Park, Danesborough

From Buckingham to Milton Keynes South: Waddon, Eaton Manor

From Buckingham to Aylesbury: Weedon, Bierton

 

Revised electorates:

Milton Keynes South            75,647

Buckingham               76,607

Aylesbury                   80,288

 


 

Surrey/Berkshire

Including one ward from Berkshire in a Surrey seat is one of the most ridiculous things the Commission has ever done. While I dare say you think you have found a clever solution to a difficult situation, neither the electors concerned, nor their MP, will be well served by such an arrangement.

Alternative 1

 

 

Constituency Electorate Ward Electorate
Egham, Chertsey & Staines 74683 Staines

5574

Staines South

5219

Riverside and Laleham

5271

Englefield Green West

3358

Englefield Green East

3795

Egham Town

4076

Egham Hythe

4676

Thorpe

4217

Virginia Water

4194

Foxhills

4190

Chertsey St Ann’s

4757

Chertsey Meads

4377

Addlestone North

4193

Chertsey South and Row Town

4080

Woodham

4168

New Haw

4329

Addlestone Bourneside

4209

Walton, Ashford & Sunbury 76533 Stanwell North

5394

Ashford North and Stanwell South

5604

Ashford Town

5329

Ashford East

5606

Ashford Common

6047

Laleham and Shepperton Green

6063

Sunbury Common

5688

Sunbury East

5319

Halliford and Sunbury West

4704

Shepperton Town

5393

Oatlands Park

4566

Walton South

4701

Walton Central

4756

Walton North

4489

Walton Ambleside

2874

Esher, Weybridge & Horsley 79173 Cobham and Downside

4652

Oxshott and Stoke D’Abernon

4591

Claygate

5192

Hinchley Wood

3418

Long Ditton

4548

Thames Ditton

4552

Molesey East

4716

Molesey South

4792

Molesey North

4548

Hersham North

4268

Esher

4654

Weston Green

2690

Cobham Fairmile

2894

Hersham South

4627

St George’s Hill

4416

Weybridge South

3050

Weybridge North

3029

Lovelace

1799

Clandon and Horsley

6737

Woking 73049 Goldsworth East

5294

Goldsworth West

3736

Hermitage and Knaphill South

3865

Horsell East and Woodham

3602

Horsell West

5179

Kingfield and Westfield

4001

Knaphill

6934

Maybury and Sheerwater

6493

Mayford and Sutton Green

1878

Mount Hermon East

3680

Mount Hermon West

4134

St John’s and Hook Heath

3438

Old Woking

2107

Pyrford

3935

West Byfleet

4177

Byfleet

5432

Send

3264

Brookwood

1900

Guildford & Godalming 74602 Shalford

4250

Merrow

5882

Christchurch

3869

Stoke

4443

Stoughton

6966

Westborough

6526

Onslow

7014

Friary and St Nicolas

6521

Holy Trinity

5589

Burpham

4086

Godalming Holloway

3257

Godalming Central and Ockford

3400

Godalming Farncombe and Catteshall

3489

Godalming Charterhouse

2719

Godalming Binscombe

3152

Bramley, Busbridge and Hascombe

3439

Farnham 73867 Ash Vale

4169

Ash Wharf

4731

Ash South and Tongham

5988

Farnham Castle

3262

Farnham Upper Hale

3125

Elstead and Thursley

2980

Farnham Bourne

3079

Farnham Firgrove

3145

Farnham Moor Park

3549

Farnham Wrecclesham and Rowledge

3272

Frensham, Dockenfield and Tilford

3119

Farnham Weybourne and Badshot Lea

3340

Farnham Hale and Heath End

3280

Farnham Shortheath and Boundstone

3094

Hindhead

3221

Haslemere Critchmere and Shottermill

4396

Haslemere East and Grayswood

5040

Milford

3104

Witley and Hambledon

3035

Chiddingfold and Dunsfold

2998

Pilgrims

1940

Camberley & Frimley 74543 Chobham

2992

West End

3365

Bisley

2734

Windlesham

3316

Lightwater

5356

Bagshot

4301

Old Dean

3114

Town

3427

St Michaels

3606

Watchetts

3755

St Pauls

4522

Parkside

4772

Heatherside

4519

Frimley

4418

Mytchett and Deepcut

5009

Frimley Green

4359

Normandy

2380

Pirbright

2163

Worplesdon

6435

 

 

Alternative 2

 

 

Constituency Electorate Ward Electorate
Egham, Chertsey & Staines 74683 Staines

5574

Staines South

5219

Riverside and Laleham

5271

Englefield Green West

3358

Englefield Green East

3795

Egham Town

4076

Egham Hythe

4676

Thorpe

4217

Virginia Water

4194

Foxhills

4190

Chertsey St Ann’s

4757

Chertsey Meads

4377

Addlestone North

4193

Chertsey South and Row Town

4080

Woodham

4168

New Haw

4329

Addlestone Bourneside

4209

Weybridge, Ashford & Sunbury 75640 Stanwell North

5394

Ashford North and Stanwell South

5604

Ashford Town

5329

Ashford East

5606

Ashford Common

6047

Laleham and Shepperton Green

6063

Sunbury Common

5688

Sunbury East

5319

Halliford and Sunbury West

4704

Shepperton Town

5393

Oatlands Park

4566

Weybridge North

3029

Weybridge South

3050

St George’s Hill

4416

Byfleet

5432

Esher & Walton 76962 Cobham and Downside

4652

Oxshott and Stoke D’Abernon

4591

Claygate

5192

Hinchley Wood

3418

Long Ditton

4548

Thames Ditton

4552

Molesey East

4716

Molesey South

4792

Molesey North

4548

Hersham North

4268

Esher

4654

Weston Green

2690

Cobham Fairmile

2894

Hersham South

4627

Walton South

4701

Walton Ambleside

2874

Walton North

4489

Walton Central

4756

Woking 73959 Goldsworth East

5294

Goldsworth West

3736

Hermitage and Knaphill South

3865

Horsell East and Woodham

3602

Horsell West

5179

Kingfield and Westfield

4001

Knaphill

6934

Maybury and Sheerwater

6493

Mayford and Sutton Green

1878

Mount Hermon East

3680

Mount Hermon West

4134

St John’s and Hook Heath

3438

Old Woking

2107

Pyrford

3935

West Byfleet

4177

Send

3264

Brookwood

1900

Lovelace

1799

Pirbright

2163

Normandy

2380

Guildford 73697 Shalford

4250

Merrow

5882

Christchurch

3869

Stoke

4443

Stoughton

6966

Westborough

6526

Onslow

7014

Friary and St Nicolas

6521

Holy Trinity

5589

Burpham

4086

Worplesdon

6435

Pilgrims

1940

Clandon and Horsley

6737

Bramley, Busbridge and Hascombe

3439

South West Surrey 73056 Farnham Castle

3262

Farnham Upper Hale

3125

Elstead and Thursley

2980

Farnham Bourne

3079

Farnham Firgrove

3145

Farnham Moor Park

3549

Farnham Wrecclesham and Rowledge

3272

Frensham, Dockenfield and Tilford

3119

Farnham Weybourne and Badshot Lea

3340

Farnham Hale and Heath End

3280

Farnham Shortheath and Boundstone

3094

Hindhead

3221

Haslemere Critchmere and Shottermill

4396

Haslemere East and Grayswood

5040

Milford

3104

Witley and Hambledon

3035

Chiddingfold and Dunsfold

2998

Godalming Holloway

3257

Godalming Central and Ockford

3400

Godalming Charterhouse

2719

Godalming Farncombe and Catteshall

3489

Godalming Binscombe

3152

Surrey Heath 78453 Chobham

2992

West End

3365

Bisley

2734

Windlesham

3316

Lightwater

5356

Bagshot

4301

Old Dean

3114

Town

3427

St Michaels

3606

Watchetts

3755

St Pauls

4522

Parkside

4772

Heatherside

4519

Frimley

4418

Mytchett and Deepcut

5009

Frimley Green

4359

Ash Vale

4169

Ash Wharf

4731

Ash South and Tongham

5988

 

 

Plymouth and West Devon

The main remaining problem with the Commission’s proposals is the inclusion of Moor View in a non-Plymouth seat. It is possible to reverse this decision without splitting any wards (see below) although two better-formed seats could be constructed by splitting one ward.

 

Changes compared to Commission’s revised proposals:

From Plymouth Devonport to Plymouth Sutton: Stoke, St Peter

From Plymouth Sutton to Plymouth Devonport: Eggbuckland, Peverell

Revised electorates:

Plymouth Devonport                        79,069

Plymouth Sutton                   80,373

Changes compared to Commission’s revised proposals:

From Tavistock to Plymouth Sutton: Moor View

From Bideford to Central Devon: Torrington

From South Devon to Tavistock: Erme Valley

From Central Devon to South Devon: Ashburton & Buckfastleigh

Revised electorates:


Tavistock & Plympton           74,564

Bideford & Bude                    73,243

Central Devon                                    73,054

South Devon                          75,625

 

 

 

 

South Essex

The issue that jumps at you from the Commission’s revised proposals for Essex is that Basildon town is split between 4 seats, which must be a record. This has been partly caused by the successful campaign to have Leigh removed from the Canvey Island seat.

Another poor aspect of the proposals is the Billericay-Great Dunmow seat. There is no connection between the two towns apart from the fact that they are in the same county.

A reasonable conclusion from the unsatisfactory outcome of the consultation is that the geography of Essex means that one is searching for the “least worst” solution. I submit the counterproposal below as being less ungood than the compromise the Commission has come up with.

Advantages:

  1. All of Basildon together in one seat
  2. Uttlesford district all in one seat instead of split between 3
  3. Braintree and Halstead in the same seat

Disadvantages

  1. Castle Point district is divided between seats, although I would suggest that the two seats combine areas of similar character and interest.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Constituency Electorate Ward Electorate
Grays Thurrock 77667 Aveley and Uplands

6337

West Thurrock and South Stifford

5974

South Chafford

4610

Chafford and North Stifford

5227

Grays Riverside

6682

Grays Thurrock

6122

Little Thurrock Rectory

4461

Stifford Clays

4850

Little Thurrock Blackshots

4498

Belhus

6563

Ockendon

6726

Tilbury Riverside and Thurrock Park

4298

Tilbury St Chads

4172

Chadwell St Mary

7147

Canvey & East Thurrock 73618 Stanford-le-Hope West

4682

Corringham and Fobbing

4485

Stanford East and Corringham Town

6476

The Homesteads

6667

Canvey Island East

4587

Canvey Island North

4962

Canvey Island Winter Gardens

4570

Canvey Island South

4701

Canvey Island Central

4636

Canvey Island West

3394

St Mary’s

4635

Appleton

5018

East Tilbury

4746

Boyce

5003

St James

5056

Basildon 78374 Langdon Hills

6900

Laindon Park

8252

Lee Chapel North

8705

Nethermayne

8748

Vange

6750

Pitsea North West

9136

Fryerns

9261

St Martin’s

5798

Crouch

6367

Pitsea South East

8457

Brentwood & Billericay 74939 Burstead

8482

Billericay East

9170

Billericay West

9338

Herongate, Ingrave and West Horndon

2940

Warley

4508

South Weald

1407

Pilgrims Hatch

4553

Brentwood North

4556

Brentwood West

4973

Brentwood South

4211

Hutton South

3047

Hutton Central

2885

Hutton East

2851

Hutton North

3079

Shenfield

4167

Orsett

4772

Southend West 73861 West Leigh

7089

Leigh

7298

Belfairs

7422

Eastwood Park

7616

St. Laurence

7537

Prittlewell

7575

Blenheim Park

7786

Westborough

7369

Chalkwell

7088

Victoria

7081

Southend East 77736 Thorpe

7414

Southchurch

7423

West Shoebury

7443

Shoeburyness

7942

Foulness and Great Wakering

4477

Barling and Sutton

1444

Rochford

5740

Hawkwell South

3349

Hawkwell North

3540

Ashingdon and Canewdon

3503

Kursaal

7113

St. Luke’s

8068

Milton

6986

Hawkwell West

3294

Chelmsford Rural 74545 South Hanningfield, Stock and   Margaretting

4403

Bicknacre and East and West   Hanningfield

4048

South Woodham-Elmwood and Woodville

6242

South Woodham-Chetwood and   Collingwood

6474

Rettendon and Runwell

3908

Little Baddow, Danbury and Sandon

6570

Chelmsford Rural West

2188

Writtle

4330

Broomfield and The Walthams

6295

Boreham and The Leighs

4688

High Ongar, Willingale and The   Rodings

1737

Chipping Ongar, Greensted and Marden   Ash

3313

Shelley

1705

Ingatestone, Fryerning and   Mountnessing

4769

Tipps Cross

3042

Moreton and Fyfield

1720

Galleywood

4409

Brizes and Doddinghurst

4704

Rayleigh 80403 Cedar Hall

4407

St Peter’s

4812

Victoria

4365

Downhall and Rawreth

3708

Grange

2811

Rayleigh Central

3360

Sweyne Park

3261

Trinity

2905

Wheatley

3245

Whitehouse

3250

St George’s

4416

Wickford Park

6887

Wickford North

9532

Wickford Castledon

6198

Lodge

3231

Hockley Central

5256

Hockley North

1676

Hockley West

1658

Hullbridge

5425

Epping Forest 73939 Buckhurst Hill West

5154

Loughton Forest

3373

Loughton St John’s

3407

Theydon Bois

3258

Loughton Alderton

3311

Loughton St Mary’s

3373

Loughton Roding

3470

Buckhurst Hill East

3438

Chigwell Village

3221

Grange Hill

4797

Chigwell Row

1813

Loughton Broadway

3173

Loughton Fairmead

3227

Waltham Abbey High Beach

1775

Lambourne

1573

Passingford

1772

Epping Hemnall

4805

Epping Lindsey and Thornwood Common

4874

Waltham Abbey Honey Lane

4569

Waltham Abbey South West

3042

Waltham Abbey North East

3186

Waltham Abbey Paternoster

3328

Harlow 72847 Little Parndon and Hare Street

5750

Netteswell

5377

Mark Hall

5029

Old Harlow

5338

Church Langley

6204

Harlow Common

5486

Staple Tye

4978

Sumners and Kingsmoor

5300

Great Parndon

5062

Toddbrook

5284

Bush Fair

5572

Lower Nazeing

3198

Roydon

1743

Hastingwood, Matching and Sheering   Village

1671

Lower Sheering

1708

Broadley Common, Epping Upland and   Nazeing

1618

North Weald Bassett

3529

Saffron Walden 73380 Broad Oak and the Hallingburys

2746

Hatfield Heath

1408

Birchanger

1076

Stansted South

2378

Stansted North

2606

Elsenham and Henham

2826

Takeley and the Canfields

3395

Great Dunmow South

3849

Great Dunmow North

2830

The Eastons

1213

Stebbing

1228

Stort Valley

1174

Clavering

1152

Newport

2668

Thaxted

2676

Wimbish and Debden

1727

The Sampfords

1464

Saffron Walden Shire

4093

Saffron Walden Audley

3754

Littlebury

1303

Wenden Lofts

1207

The Chesterfords

1278

Saffron Walden Castle

3635

Ashdon

1336

Stour Valley North

1795

Yeldham

1640

Upper Colne

1716

Bumpstead

2015

Three Fields

3147

Felsted

3871

The Rodings

1369

Barnston and High Easter

1346

Rayne

1744

Panfield

1715

Braintree 72947 Braintree Central

5893

Braintree East

4965

Braintree South

5242

Great Notley and Braintree West

5185

Bocking South

4104

Bocking Blackwater

5977

Bocking North

3483

Gosfield and Greenstead Green

2041

Halstead St Andrew’s

5247

Halstead Trinity

3512

The Three Colnes

3958

Cressing and Stisted

1791

Black Notley and Terling

3075

Coggeshall and North Feering

3975

Bradwell, Silver End and Rivenhall

3671

Kelvedon

3934

Stour Valley South

1733

Hedingham and Maplestead

5161

Maldon & Witham 76408 Great Totham

2944

Heybridge West

3074

Heybridge East

3232

Tolleshunt D’Arcy

3252

Tollesbury

1616

Tiptree

6106

Maldon North

3251

Wickham Bishops and Woodham

2913

Maldon East

1654

Maldon South

3036

Maldon West

3078

Tillingham

1779

Southminster

3181

Burnham-on-Crouch South

3141

Burnham-on-Crouch North

3016

Mayland

3409

Althorne

3331

Purleigh

2712

Witham South

6242

Witham Chipping Hill and Central

3546

Witham North

3432

Witham West

4989

Hatfield Peverel

3474

Chelmsford Urban 73426 Springfield North

6714

Chelmer Village and Beaulieu Park

8127

The Lawns

4220

Patching Hall

6705

St Andrews

6729

Marconi

5167

Waterhouse Farm

4424

Moulsham and Central

7329

Trinity

4425

Great Baddow East

6416

Great Baddow West

4512

Moulsham Lodge

4311

Goat Hall

4347

 

 

 

South West Hertfordshire

The communities south of Watford (i.e the South Oxhey area) have been split between 3 seats. In this counterproposal I put them together in the Watford seat:

 

Changes compared to Commission’s revised proposals:

From Hertsmere to Watford: Carpenders Park

From SW Herts to Watford: Ashridge (Three Rivers), Northwick, Hayling

From Hemel to SW Herts: Ashridge (Dacorum), Watling, Kings Langley

From Watford to Hemel: Langleybury, Leavesden, Abbots Langley

From Welwyn Hatfield to Hertsmere: Northaw & Cuffley

Revised electorates:

Watford                      77,724

SW Herts                    80,212

Hemel Hempstead     76,841

Hertsmere                  75,036

Welwyn Hatfield        75,496

North Lancashire

Problems with the Commission’s revised proposals:

  1. Fulwood and Carleton are split between seats.
  2. Preston district is split between 3 seats, including the orphan ward of Lea in the Fylde seat.

Benefits of Locus counterproposal:

  1. Fulwood and Carleton are not split between seats.
  2. The part of Preston district not included in the Preston seat is all in the Fylde seat, including the neighbouring urban wards of Ingol and Lea.

 

 

 

 

Changes compared to Commission’s revised proposals:

From Preston to Fylde: Ingol

From Lancaster to Preston: Greyfriars

From Lancaster to Fylde: Preston Rural North, Preston Rural East

From Blackpool North to Lancaster: Carleton

From Fylde to Lancaster: Tithebarn, High Cross, Breck, Hardhorn, Singleton, Elswick

 

Revised electorates:

Preston                                   77,763

Fylde                                       78,633

Lancaster & Wyre                  79,192

Blackpool N & Fleetwood     77,073

 


 

East Lancashire

The Commission’s revised proposals split Accrington between seats. It is acceptable for Oswaldtwistle, Church and Clayton to be included in the Rossendale seat, but Accrington’s Central ward needs to be kept with the rest of the town. The simplest way of doing this is by swapping it with the Baxenden ward. This is also an Accrington ward, but it is on the outskirts of town and it is well-connected with Rossendale.

Revised electorates:

Rossendale & Oswaldtwistle            79,054

Burnley & Accrington                       78,838

 


 

Manchester

Like in other cities, e.g. Birmingham, the Commission’s proposals are unacceptable because of the number of orphan wards that have been created. With a city of Manchester’s size there may be the need for one or two cross-border seats, but the mess in the revised recommendations is an artefact of a flawed methodology.

Orphan wards:

Manchester Central includes one Tameside ward (Droylsden West), thereby splitting Droylsden.

Manchester Gorton includes one Stockport ward (Reddish North), thereby splitting Reddish.

Bury South includes one Manchester ward (Crumpsall), thereby carving a hole in North Manchester.

Stretford & Urmston includes one Manchester ward (Whalley Range), thereby carving a hole in South Manchester.

These egregious failures of the redistricting process are in addition to the more acceptable cross-border seats of Blackley & Broughton and Wythenshawe & Sale East, which were created at a previous Review because of the unbalanced electorates of the 3 metropolitan boroughs concerned (Manchester, Salford and Trafford).

Look at the consequences of the Commission’s policy:

  1. Unnecessary splitting of towns and other communities
  2. Unnecessary splitting of cities and districts
  3. Extra work for MPs who have to deal with an additional authority
  4. Extra work for authorities who have to deal with an additional MP
  5. Penalising districts with smaller wards which are leeched by neighbouring, larger authorities to make the numbers up

These are all serious problems and they all spring from the misguided belief that splitting wards is less acceptable than splitting cities, districts, towns and communities. To back itself up in this charade, the Commission includes various misstatements in its documentation. Very little in paragraph 31 of its Guide to the Review is true, and what’s more it gives the erroneous impression that ward boundaries have primacy over county or district boundaries. Specifically the guide is misleading in stating that:

  1. wards “are generally indicative of areas which have a broad community of interest.” In fact, although the local government boundary commission does (with the assistance of local authorities) make an effort to map communities to wards, the priority is electoral equality, just as it is for the parliamentary commission.
  2. splitting wards would be likely to “cause difficulties for electoral registration officers,” which is nonsense since nearly every ward is subdivided into parishes or polling districts.

The Commission’s conclusion that “it would not be appropriate to divide wards in cases where it is possible to construct constituencies [without doing so]” was wilfully shortsighted and ignorant and has proved disastrous for parliamentary democracy.

Take a metropolitan borough or unitary authority where the ward size is 17,000. Four wards total 68,000, which is too small. Five wards total 85,000, which is too big. In such a case (and there a many similarly problematic areas up and down the country), the Commission has prejudged what the seats will be in that case, either by finding the single possible combination of wards in the area that happens to fit the electoral requirement, or by leeching a small ward or wards from the neighbouring authority. This is a travesty.

 


 

Cheshire

I guessed correctly that the Commission would split a ward in Gloucestershire in order to avoid a single instance of nonsense, and I also guessed that they would not do the same in Cheshire in order to avoid a whole county’s worth of nonsense. That is a great shame, but the Commission is determined to lie in the bed it’s made for itself.

I’ve already discussed the Cheshire farce in my representation to the Chester hearing, so I won’t repeat myself here. Suffice it to say, they’ve made a pig’s ear of a dog’s breakfast. See:

Kafka in Chester https://ukelect.wordpress.com/2011/10/12/kafka-in-chester/

Powerpoint that accompanied my presentation https://ukelect.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/chester-presentation-a-bailey.ppt

Mersey Banks https://ukelect.wordpress.com/2011/09/13/mersey-banks/

and

Is Halton the whipping boy? https://ukelect.wordpress.com/2011/10/20/is-halton-the-whipping-boy/

(Yes!)

 

 

 

North East England

Although the Commission’s revised proposals are much better than what went before, there is one strange anomaly: a single Gateshead ward is included in a County Durham seat. Don’t get me wrong, Gateshead is traditionally a Durham town, but having seats cross three county boundaries makes the North East map unnecessarily complicated. The other main problem with the proposals is that there are 4 orphan wards associated with North Tyneside borough.

 

 

County Durham

Changes compared to Commission’s revised proposals:

From NW Durham to another seat (see Tyneside/Northumberland versions 1 &2): Chopwell

From Durham City to NW Durham: Deerness Valley

From Durham City to Sedgefield: Ferryhill

From Bishop Auckland to Durham City: Spennymoor, Tudhoe

From Bishop Auckland to Billingham: Chilton

From Stockton N to Bishop Auckland: Aycliffe E, Aycliffe W, Aycliffe N

From Easington to Billingham: Trimdon

From Durham to Easington: Coxhoe

Revised electorates:

NW Durham                           73,876

Bishop Auckland                    73,931

Durham City                           74,576

Easington                               74,840

Billingham & Sedgefield        76,834

 

 

 

 

Tyneside and Northumberland

The two versions differ as to the fate of the Chopwell ward. In version 1 it’s merged into Gateshead; in version 2 it’s included in Hexham. Both versions address the issue of the orphan wards, the main difference with the Commission’s proposals being that Cramlington forms a seat with Longbenton instead of with western Newcastle.

 

Version 1, Part 1

Changes compared to Commission’s revised proposals:

From NW Durham to Gateshead W: Chopwell

From Gateshead W to Gateshead E & Jarrow: Low Fell

From Gateshead E & Jarrow to Gateshead W: Felling

Revised electorates:

Gateshead W                                     79,316

Gateshead E & Jarrow           79,284

 

 

 

Version 1, Part 2

 

Constituency Electorate Ward Electorate
Newcastle Newburn 76805 Castle

7497

Woolsington

7837

Newburn

7065

Westerhope

7600

Denton

7805

Lemington

7461

Benwell and Scotswood

8473

Elswick

7231

Fenham

7908

Blakelaw

7928

Newcastle Gosforth 73238 Parklands

7670

Fawdon

7169

Dene

7507

East Gosforth

7297

West Gosforth

7437

Kenton

8032

Wingrove

8047

Westgate

5739

South Jesmond

7003

North Jesmond

7337

Wallsend & Walker 74570 North Heaton

7698

South Heaton

6943

Byker

6953

Walker

7527

Walkergate

7077

Wallsend

7766

Howdon

8257

Battle Hill

8331

Northumberland

6860

Ouseburn

7158

Tynemouth 76494 Chirton

8267

Preston

7040

Tynemouth

8407

Cullercoats

7513

Collingwood

8578

Monkseaton South

7686

Whitley Bay

7168

Monkseaton North

6996

St Mary’s

6909

Riverside

7930

Cramlington & Longbenton 78971 Weetslade

7646

Killingworth

7935

Benton

7863

Longbenton

8147

Camperdown

7882

Cramlington West

3922

Cramlington Village

3715

Cramlington South East

3284

Cramlington East

4164

Cramlington Eastfield

3885

Cramlington North

4220

Holywell

4043

Seghill with Seaton Delaval

4211

Valley

8054

Blyth & Ashington 75304 South Blyth

3381

Wensleydale

3362

Plessey

3496

Isabella

3378

Cowpen

3383

Croft

3310

Newsham

3396

Kitty Brewster

3980

Bedlington Central

3383

Bedlington West

4359

Bedlington East

3446

Sleekburn

3040

Stakeford

3766

Bothal

3576

Newbiggin Central and East

3765

Hirst

3540

Ashington Central

3717

Haydon

3711

College

3741

Seaton with Newbiggin West

3531

Hartley

4043

 

 

 

Version 2

Advantages:

  1. No orphan wards
  2. Choppington ward in Ashington seat
  3. Wallsend not divided between seats
  4. Tynemouth seat same as current (2010) seat
  5. No change to Commission’s proposed Gateshead seats

Disadvantages:

  1. Berwick seat is larger

 

 

 

Changes compared to Commission’s revised proposals:

From Durham NW to Hexham: Chopwell

From Hexham to Berwick: Bellingham

From Berwick to Blyth & Ashington: Choppington

From Blyth & Ashington to Cramlington: Seghill, Hartley

Revised electorates:

Hexham                      79,014

Berwick                       72,891

Blyth & Ashington     74,892

Other seats:

Constituency Electorate Ward Electorate
Newcastle Newburn 76805 Castle

7497

Woolsington

7837

Newburn

7065

Westerhope

7600

Denton

7805

Lemington

7461

Benwell and Scotswood

8473

Elswick

7231

Fenham

7908

Blakelaw

7928

Newcastle Gosforth 80396 Kenton

8032

Fawdon

7169

Parklands

7670

West Gosforth

7437

East Gosforth

7297

Dene

7507

North Jesmond

7337

Wingrove

8047

Westgate

5739

Ouseburn

7158

South Jesmond

7003

Wallsend & Walker 75342 Byker

6953

South Heaton

6943

North Heaton

7698

Walker

7527

Walkergate

7077

Wallsend

7766

Northumberland

6860

Battle Hill

8331

Howdon

8257

Riverside

7930

Tynemouth 76618 Chirton

8267

Preston

7040

Tynemouth

8407

Collingwood

8578

Cullercoats

7513

Monkseaton South

7686

Whitley Bay

7168

Monkseaton North

6996

St Mary’s

6909

Valley

8054

Cramlington & Longbenton 74960 Longbenton

8147

Benton

7863

Killingworth

7935

Camperdown

7882

Weetslade

7646

Cramlington West

3922

Cramlington North

4220

Cramlington Village

3715

Cramlington South East

3284

Cramlington East

4164

Seghill with Seaton Delaval

4211

Holywell

4043

Hartley

4043

Cramlington Eastfield

3885

 

Articles

I won my bet…

In boundary changes,boundary commission,Gloucestershire,News,redistricting on October 15, 2012 by dadge

…that the English Boundary Commission would split a ward. And I guessed which one it would be – the Coombe Hill ward in Gloucestershire. In fact they’ve gone crazy and split one of the wards in Gloucester as well, even though they didn’t need to.

Unfortunately they’ve still refused to split wards in places like Birmingham, but throughout the country they have made loads of revisions to their rushed initial proposals, mostly for the better, and in quite a few places looking suspiciously like my suggestions. 😉

They’re gluttons for punishment, so they now have to endure another 8 weeks of consultation. View everything here and get writing. Oh, and copy everything to Nick Clegg, esq. of Whitehall. (Though rumours have it that his address may soon change to Brussels.)

Articles

Hampshire

In Hampshire,redistricting,South East on October 26, 2011 by dadge

Hampshire has a TE of 17.13 seats and an allocation of 17 @ 77,232.

The main complaints I’ve heard about the Commission’s proposals for Hampshire come from Fareham Borough, which the Commission proposes to split in four. It’s inevitable that part of Fareham will be in the Gosport seat, and it’s difficult to avoid Portchester being added to the Portsmouth seat, but we can reunite the rest of the Borough.

The resulting pattern of seats in the county is pretty good and not too different from what has existed before. The two oddities are:

1. The Test Valley seat, encompassing Chandlers Ford, the Bassett ward from Southampton, Romsey and the entire length of the eponymous valley.

2. The arrangements in Rushmoor and Hart. It’s hard to avoid splitting a community. The best I can come up with at the moment is to split Fleet and Church Crookham. I don’t suppose there is anybody alive who can remember Crookham being a separate parish – it became part of Fleet in 1932.

I’ve given Portsmouth back its North and South seats. Baffins polling districts (pdf) HA and HB (4,100 voters) are in the North seat.

My Southampton seats are also more similar to the current ones. Bevois polling districts CA and CB (5,301 voters) are in the Test seat.

Electorates:

Gosport 72,845
Fareham 76,894
Portsmouth North 79,438
Portsmouth South 78,964
Havant 80,453
Southampton Itchen 77,634
Southampton Test 77,320
Eastleigh 78,313
Winchester 74,480
New Forest East 73,277
New Forest West 73,385
Test Valley 79,006
Basingstoke 77,703
Rushmoor 78,797
Andover 78,562
Alton & Hart 77,232
Petersfield 78,649

Click to send the Commission your comments.

Articles

Kent and East Sussex

In Kent,redistricting,South East,Sussex on October 26, 2011 by dadge

Kent – theoretical entitlement 16.12 seats
East Sussex – 7.69 seats
Combined – 23.81; allocation 24 seats, average 76,030

Click to see the Commission’s plan.

The first thing to say about this area is that this is not a natural pairing, but it might survive for a Review or two because of the relative population growth of the two counties.

1. Brighton: the Commission have gone for a Brighton & Hove Inner and Brighton & Hove Outer arrangement – I prefer a Hove seat and a Brighton seat.

2. The Weald, Hailsham and Bexhill: Crowborough-Cranbrook makes quite a good cross-border seat but it throws out the pattern all around. In the Commission’s plan, Uckfield, Heathfield and Crowborough are all in different seats, and the Hailsham-Polegate area is split between seats.

Although it’s an Odd Couple, the eastern side of the High Weald can be put together with Bexhill to form a seat that respects the boundary of Rother district and allows Ashford district to be separated into two sensible sections, one based on Tenterden.

This also allows Uckfield, Heathfield and Crowborough to be in a single seat, as well as the creation of a seat based on Seaham and Hailsham.

3. Folkestone: Shepway district has an electorate of 80,060, so the constituency can be exactly the same.

4. Thanet/Canterbury: I’ve got nothing against Sandwich being in the Thanet seat, but it isn’t necessary. If you move the boundary between Margate and Westgate to the correct place, you can also create a coastal-towns constituency which will allow the Whitstable and Canterbury areas not to be split between seats.

5. Medway: Including Snodland in the Rochester seat (i.e. the border with the Chatham seat follows the river) allows a much better division of the Medway wards between seats, even without splitting any of them.

6. North West: I’ve included Swanley in the Dartford seat and New Barn in the Gravesham seat.

7. West: Sevenoaks district has an electorate close to the quota so I don’t see the point of ignoring the boundary. The question then remains of what to do with the Low Weald. The Commission tacks it on to Tonbridge, which is a valid option, but I don’t see why it can’t form a seat on its own. This does of course have the consequence that Tonbridge and Tunbridge Wells would be reunited in a single constituency for the first time since 1970…

Electorates:

  • Hove 78,212
    Brighton Central 76,013
    Lewes 76,356
    Hailsham & Newhaven 74,573
    West Weald 73,884
    Eastbourne 76,978
    Hastings & Rye 76,422
    Bexhill & East Weald 80,009
    Folkestone & Hythe 80,060
    Ashford 74,230
    Dover 77,565
    East Thanet 75,112
    North Kent Coast 74,210
    Canterbury & Faversham 74,433
    Sittingbourne & Sheppey 74,796
    Maidstone 76,365
    Gillingham 76,487
    Rochester 76,943
    Chatham & Aylesford 73,808
    Mid Kent 73,862
    Dartford 80,284
    Gravesham 75,604
    Sevenoaks 74,799
    Tonbridge 73,722

Comparison with the Commission’s proposals:

Brighton, Medway and East Kent in 1944.

Click here to give the Commission your opinions.

Articles

West Sussex

In redistricting,South East,Sussex on October 25, 2011 by dadge

This is a good one. Worthing has an electorate of 79,045, so can form a constituency by itself, so I wondered if there was a way to redistrict the county without splitting the town down the middle. It turns out that if the Bognor seat goes down as far as Selsey Bill you can make four neat seats for Bognor, Littlehampton/Arundel, Worthing and Lancing/Shoreham. Simples.

Chichester 73390 Chichester South 5184
    Chichester East 5875
    Chichester North 5064
    Chichester West 3805
    Fishbourne 1856
    Donnington 1793
    Bosham 3469
    Southbourne 5621
    Westbourne 1770
    Funtington 2163
    Boxgrove 1792
    Lavant 1758
    Harting 1671
    Stedham 1778
    Midhurst 4015
    Easebourne 1962
    Rogate 2020
    Fernhurst 3974
    Petworth 3869
    Plaistow 3802
    Wisborough Green 1999
    West Wittering 3985
    East Wittering 4165
Bognor 74570 Pagham and Rose Green 6076
    Aldwick West 4027
    Aldwick East 4165
    Pevensey 3681
    Marine 3414
    Orchard 3878
    Hotham 3621
    Felpham West 3975
    Bersted 6003
    Felpham East 3888
    Middleton-on-Sea 4174
    Selsey South 3542
    Selsey North 5153
    Sidlesham 1928
    North Mundham 1745
    Yapton 4257
    Barnham 6825
    Tangmere 1914
    Walberton 2304
Worthing 79045 Salvington 7134
    Heene 6035
    Central 6695
    Selden 6042
    Broadwater 6671
    Gaisford 6630
    Offington 6257
    Goring 6712
    Castle 6143
    Northbrook 3503
    Durrington 4394
    Tarring 6379
    Marine 6450
Arundel 72958 Beach 3771
    River 3519
    Brookfield 4386
    Wick with Toddington 4138
    Ham 3562
    Rustington West 6641
    East Preston with Kingston 5997
    Rustington East 4410
    Ferring 3975
    Angmering 5870
    Arundel 3497
    Findon 2115
    Chantry 7682
    Pulborough and Coldwatham 4991
    Chanctonbury 6593
    Bury 1811
Adur 78658 Widewater 4676
    Mash Barn 3304
    Peverel 3407
    Cokeham 3381
    Churchill 3436
    Manor 3156
    Marine 3512
    Eastbrook 3300
    Southwick Green 3514
    Southlands 2925
    St Mary’s 3253
    St Nicolas 3084
    Buckingham 3108
    Hillside 3340
    Hurstpierpoint and Downs 5669
    Bramber, Upper Beeding & Woodmancote 4277
    Henfield 4097
    Cowfold, Shermanbury & West Grinstead 4273
    Bolney 2121
    Hassocks 5775
    Steyning 5050
Mid Sussex 74923 Haywards Heath Lucastes 4123
    Haywards Heath Heath 3922
    Haywards Heath Ashenground 3937
    Haywards Heath Franklands 3473
    Lindfield 5388
    Haywards Heath Bentswood 3914
    High Weald 3888
    East Grinstead Herontye 3610
    East Grinstead Imberhorne 3330
    East Grinstead Baldwins 3811
    East Grinstead Town 3553
    East Grinstead Ashplats 4127
    Ashurst Wood 2058
    Cuckfield 3766
    Burgess Hill St Andrews 3423
    Burgess Hill Leylands 3670
    Burgess Hill Franklands 3857
    Burgess Hill Meeds 3440
    Burgess Hill Victoria 3946
    Burgess Hill Dunstall 3687
Horsham 73259 Holbrook East 4123
    Holbrook West 4369
    Roffey North 4825
    Roffey South 4804
    Rusper and Colgate 2002
    Ardingly and Balcombe 4184
    Nuthurst 2303
    Southwater 7556
    Forest 2945
    Horsham Park 5951
    Denne 4300
    Trafalgar 4717
    Broadbridge Heath 2344
    Itchingfield, Slinfold and Warnham 4275
    Rudgwick 2125
    Billingshurst and Shipley 7111
    Crawley Down and Turners Hill 5325
Crawley 75535 Langley Green 5343
    Pound Hill North 4790
    Northgate 3426
    Ifield 6313
    Gossops Green 3795
    Bewbush 5701
    Broadfield North 4005
    Broadfield South 3879
    Tilgate 4405
    Southgate 5734
    Furnace Green 4117
    West Green 3288
    Pound Hill South and Worth 6060
    Three Bridges 4787
    Maidenbower 6150
    Copthorne and Worth 3742

Articles

Surrey

In redistricting,South East,Surrey on October 25, 2011 by dadge

Surrey is keeping its 11 seats so not much is changing. It’s Orphan-ward Central though, on account of the fact that none of its boroughs are quite in the 73-80 thousand range.

The three-way split of Weybridge is an especial shame, though it’s hard to do anything about it without radical change. For example, my Crouch Oak seat including Weybridge, Chertsey and Sunbury – a big problem with which is that it includes parts of 4 different boroughs.

Woking: I’ve left Bisley out, kept Byfleet in and added Send.

The Reigate seat needs an extra ward and I’ve added Charlwood rather than Chaldon.

Egham & Staines 74,423
Crouch Oak 73,460
Elmbridge 76,962
Farnham & Godalming 76,495
Woking 73,049
Guildford 74,437
Camberley 74,890
Epsom & Ewell 76,916
Mole Valley & Cranleigh 73,017
Reigate & Banstead 73,790
East Surrey 77,145