The new proposed parliamentary boundary changes.

Talk about anything you want in here.

Moderators: botrash, mikkyx, charlie, uncovered

Post Reply
Darlo_Pete
Posts: 12110
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:13 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

The new proposed parliamentary boundary changes.

Post by Darlo_Pete » Tue Sep 13, 2016 12:38 pm

Had a look on the website and Darlo's boundaries are changing. The constituency of Darlington will now include all the rural villages that form the Darlington Borough Council current area. Bet our MP isn't too happy, as at best it's a very marginal seat for Labour to hold on too.

Henley
Posts: 508
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2014 9:49 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: The new proposed parliamentary boundary changes.

Post by Henley » Tue Sep 13, 2016 5:42 pm

Darlo_Pete wrote:Had a look on the website and Darlo's boundaries are changing. The constituency of Darlington will now include all the rural villages that form the Darlington Borough Council current area. Bet our MP isn't too happy, as at best it's a very marginal seat for Labour to hold on too.
:clap:

Darlo_Pete
Posts: 12110
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:13 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: The new proposed parliamentary boundary changes.

Post by Darlo_Pete » Wed Sep 14, 2016 11:32 am

Not surprisingly I guess, but a good few Labour MP's aren't very happy with the proposed changes.

SwansQuaker83
Posts: 691
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 4:46 pm
Team Supported: Swansea (and Darlo of course)

Re: The new proposed parliamentary boundary changes.

Post by SwansQuaker83 » Wed Sep 14, 2016 11:51 am

Darlo_Pete wrote:Not surprisingly I guess, but a good few Labour MP's aren't very happy with the proposed changes.
It's been engineered to boost the tory majority... democracy at its finest (I'm not a hardcore labour voter)

lo36789
Posts: 8180
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 10:58 pm
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Liverpool

Re: The new proposed parliamentary boundary changes.

Post by lo36789 » Wed Sep 14, 2016 12:14 pm

Darlo_Pete wrote:Had a look on the website and Darlo's boundaries are changing. The constituency of Darlington will now include all the rural villages that form the Darlington Borough Council current area.
I hadn't realised they weren't included before how small was the Darlington constituency before, must have been pretty tiny.

I'd be surprised if we were hitting the 75,000 of eligible voters across DBC.

Henley
Posts: 508
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2014 9:49 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: The new proposed parliamentary boundary changes.

Post by Henley » Wed Sep 14, 2016 9:40 pm

SwansQuaker83 wrote:
Darlo_Pete wrote:Not surprisingly I guess, but a good few Labour MP's aren't very happy with the proposed changes.
It's been engineered to boost the tory majority... democracy at its finest (I'm not a hardcore labour voter)
You are talking complete and utter bollocks.

:roll:

Darlo_Pete
Posts: 12110
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:13 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: The new proposed parliamentary boundary changes.

Post by Darlo_Pete » Thu Sep 15, 2016 6:18 am

SwansQuaker83 wrote:
Darlo_Pete wrote:Not surprisingly I guess, but a good few Labour MP's aren't very happy with the proposed changes.
It's been engineered to boost the tory majority... democracy at its finest (I'm not a hardcore labour voter)
The Boundary Commission has no political ties. The fact is that lots of Northern constituencies are based around small towns and unfortunately for Labour the vast majority are labour held. In the South were populations are growing, towns are getting bigger and the constituencies too large. Fortunately for the Tories the vast majority of these areas are Conservative.

lo36789
Posts: 8180
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 10:58 pm
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Liverpool

Re: The new proposed parliamentary boundary changes.

Post by lo36789 » Thu Sep 15, 2016 8:01 am

The other problem for labour is as the constituencies get larger they start to take in more of the more conservative folk from the surrounding villages.

In my opinion regardless of boundary changes until Labour dislodge SNP from Scotland they don't have a chance of being elected with a majority anyway. The more even the constituencies the better ultimately.

Does anyone know why there is an even number of constituencies - to me that creates an unnecessary risk of an election being split 50:50.

If you have 600 seats in theory the 2 main parties could get 300 each and then where do you go? At least with 601 there would be a deciding vote. I know it's unlikely and people will say with 601 you could have 300 each plus 1 for a third party - but that means the coalition can produce the majority.

User avatar
DarloBear
Posts: 145
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:04 pm
Team Supported: Darlington / Rangers

Re: The new proposed parliamentary boundary changes.

Post by DarloBear » Thu Sep 15, 2016 11:10 am

I don't think The Speaker is allowed a vote so if everyone turns up for a vote it is an uneven number.

DB

Darlo_Pete
Posts: 12110
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:13 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: The new proposed parliamentary boundary changes.

Post by Darlo_Pete » Thu Sep 15, 2016 12:36 pm

You'd think with our population growing pretty steadily the number of constituencies would be growing, rather then declining.

User avatar
THE PRINCE OF WALES
Posts: 78
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2009 1:38 pm
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Northallerton

Re: The new proposed parliamentary boundary changes.

Post by THE PRINCE OF WALES » Sun Sep 18, 2016 5:10 pm

Pete,
the villages of Manfield,Aldborough St John and West and East Layton are under Richmond ward has this been always been the case ?

Darlo_Pete
Posts: 12110
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:13 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: The new proposed parliamentary boundary changes.

Post by Darlo_Pete » Sun Sep 18, 2016 10:35 pm

Naturally villages South of the Tess are in Yorkshire and so would come under the Richmond constituency.

lo36789
Posts: 8180
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 10:58 pm
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Liverpool

Re: The new proposed parliamentary boundary changes.

Post by lo36789 » Tue Sep 20, 2016 11:28 am

Darlo_Pete wrote:You'd think with our population growing pretty steadily the number of constituencies would be growing, rather then declining.
Well maybe if you judge the outcome/impact of something based on a single factor.

Post Reply