Boundary Commission, revised proposals

[Likelife]

The revised proposals have been published, very similar to the old proposals some years ago. Ditching the proposal of the Lewisham West and Peckham nonsense and the madness of splitting SE26 postcode area into 5, Dulwich & Sydenham is again being proposed. Covering all but the Bromley side of Sydenham and Bell Green. The Bromley side would be covered by Beckenham and Bell Green would be covered by Lewisham & Catford. Surprisingly, even with all the green space, the electorate is higher in the proposed Dulwich and Sydenham than in Lewisham & Catford.

If this goes ahead (its doubted, but I think it will just get through parliament), Dulwich and Sydenham could very well be a Labour-Tory marginal like it was up until '97. No doubt Beckenham would remain Tory and Lewisham & Catford remaining Labour.

Compared to earlier, I think if the constituencies must change, this is the best we're going to get. Whilst I am sceptical on why the Tory party want them to be changed, I think they do have a point about electorate numbers per constituency.

Edit: link here to the map: https://www.bce2018.org.uk/node/6485

[admin]

Many commentators seem to believe that they won't get past parliament. The issue is the loss of 50 MPs. Turkeys won't vote for Christmas!

[Likelife]

Many commentators seem to believe that they won't get past parliament. The issue is the loss of 50 MPs. Turkeys won't vote for Christmas!

Didn't stop UKIP MEPs in June 2016.

I hadn't seen NIs plans when I posted earlier. I admit NI makes it much less unlikely to go ahead. But in this barmy political climate of systematic madness, I wouldn't be surprised if they begged for Christmas.

[rbmartin]

Pengites aren't happy with the proposals which would see their Labour majority voters being lumped back into the Tory safe seat of Beckenham. (Same for SE26 voters on the Bromley side of the border).

I largely support the Dulwich and Sydenham proposal, yet a shame that Bell Green will be in a seat that represents the majority of people who live in Lewisham and Catford rather than an MP who represent people less than 500 yards away.

What it also means is that we could lose Ellie Reeves for Dulwich's Helen Hayes, who has been an MP since 2015.

[mikej]

I'm not sure how safe Beckenham will be in this rejigged constituency....of the 3 wards that are joining from Penge and Lewisham West, two voted strongly Labour at the last election (Penge & Cator and Crystal Palace) and the third (Clock House) was more or less 50/50 between Tory and Labour. Plus Beckenham is losing strong Tory wards to Bromley & Chiselhurst. So who knows whether Colonel Bob will lose his seat?

[Likelife]

That is a fair point. I saw the BBC reporting the Tories would've had a majority if this was already in place. Would have been good if they'd published a map showing the results.

[mosy]

Likelife, I think it might be an assumption that because a lot of the 50 MPs who will lose their seats are currently held by Labour, then with a similar voting pattern those Labour votes will be "lost" in what will become safe Tory seat areas.

The previous attempt at changing boundaries was abandoned after immutable dissent from the devolved governments (Scotland, N Ireland and Wales), who are again unhappy they say with the new plan, though not necessarily for the same reasons as before.

I thought it was due for debate in November. Is that still so?

[Likelife]

Likelife, I think it might be an assumption that because a lot of the 50 MPs who will lose their seats are currently held by Labour, then with a similar voting pattern those Labour votes will be "lost" in what will become safe Tory seat areas.

The previous attempt at changing boundaries was abandoned after immutable dissent from the devolved governments (Scotland, N Ireland and Wales), who are again unhappy they say with the new plan, though not necessarily for the same reasons as before.

I thought it was due for debate in November. Is that still so?

I think it is the case but I can't find out anywhere

[mosy]

It seems Tory political eagerness to reduce 50 seats has dissipated considerably, so if something is debated in parliament it probably won't be the latest review proposal according to the following:

First, I found this quite comprehensive suggestion (updated) of how seats might look "now":
http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/boundaries2018.html
If you scroll down, you can click on specific areas to see the suggested outcome stats. (There is a map, but I don't find it very user friendly.)

Further down, it refers to press reports of the current change in the Tories' political eagerness suggesting that they might now propose keeping 650 seats. Please read the section since it relates to relevant statute implications.

The Guardian's Sept 2017 report that's linked is here:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... 650-to-600
---
My opinion is that it seems bonkers to cut MPs to 600 yet leave 850 Lords. But if new boundaries is another thing the government is either dithering about or backtracking on, then maybe we don't need to be concerned about the specifics yet. Hopefully money isn't being spent on consultations on this review proposal if the government intends to scrap it anyway.

[Likelife]

Very interesting website. I am quite surprised at the idea that not a single ward in Dulwich voted Tory. Even Dulwich Village. It does like everything this government wants, it will be scrapped. There are talks that energy cap proposals will probably go soon, as of course, you can't have very rich people being affected by an anti-rip-off (not really one anyway) Tory policy. That's outrageous