And it's back again (Shrinking the House : Take Two)

[Kevinstat]

I'm anxiously awaiting the release of the Electoral roll numbers as of 1 December 2015 (which will be the basis of the next review), by country, local authority and ward.  Once that data comes in, people will be able to play around with the redistricting with actual "hard" numbers (I don't see why we need to wait until the Boundary Commissions make their provisional recommendations).

My focus is on Northern Ireland, which looks like it will have 16 MPs (it barely would have had 16 in the abortive last review, but I think that was after the changes to the electoral register had happened in Northern Ireland but before they happened elsewhere in the UK).  I kind of hope it drops to 15 or only drops to 17 which might allow for slightly neater lines in that area (with 16 you'll have to have a major crossing of either the Bann or the Blackwater, although that might be the case with 15 or 17 as well).  That would also be different from what people like Nicholas Whyte have already drawn plans for during the abortive last review.

[Kevinstat]

Has the size of the House of Commons ever shrank before?

Ever is a long time.  Starting from the "co-option" of the first Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and (all of) Ireland in 1801, there were 658 MPs then.  The number bounced around in the 650s in the mid- to late 19th century (the last decrease being from 658 to 652 in 1874) but only increased after that (going to 670 in 1885 and 717 in 1918) until what is now the Republic of Ireland, which then had 75 seats broke away (originally as the Irish Free State under the crown).  The House of Commons thus was at 642 MPs going into the 1922 election, but declined further in that election to 615 as Northern Ireland, which now had a Parliament of it's own, was stripped of 17 MPs to go from 30 seats to 13.

The size of the House of Commons rose to 640 for the 1945 election, but dropped to 625 by the next election in 1950 as the Labour Government abolished the University MPs among other changes.  After 1950, the next reduction was from 659 seats to 646 in 2005 as the era of Scottish overrepresentation in the House of Commons was ended now that it had a its own parliament with devolved powers.  The reduction and redrawing of Scottish seats was part of the same Fifth Periodic Review of Parliamentary constituencies as the rest of the UK, but only in Scotland was the review completed in time for the 2005 elections.  Even if all four constituent countries had had their changes go into effect for the same election, though, there still would have been a reduction in the size of the House of Commons as it only rose from 646 to 650 as a result of the Fifth Periodic Review outside Scotland.

It's possible that the number of non-university MPs in England has only increased since sometime in the 19th century, but I'm not sure and anyway this should make it clear that the size of the House of Commons has gone down before.

[Kevinstat]

The data's out now, I think, but I'm still having a hard time finding everything.  You can view the Electoral Commission's press release at http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/i-am-a/journalist/electoral-commission-media-centre/news-releases-reviews-and-research/electoral-commission-report-on-1-december-2015-electoral-registers-in-great-britain or view their report at http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/197516/IER-assessment-December-2015-registers.pdf .

In the present parliament, counting any vacancies as seats, England has 533 seats/constituencies (which could be thought of for comparison purposes as 532 + 1 (Isle of Wight)), Scotland 59 (57+1+1), Wales 40 and Northern Ireland 18.

Under the abortive last review, England was going to have 502 seats/constituencies (500 + 2 on the Isle of Wight), Scotland 52 (50+1+1), Wales 30 and Northern Ireland 16.

From other sources, I can see that changes in the electoral roll from 1 December ? (2011 was it?) to 1 December 2015 have resulted in Scotland and Northern Ireland each "gaining" a seat (or losing one less) and England and Wales each losing (an additional) one.

In the coming review, England will be divided into 501 seats/constituencies (499 + 2 on the Isle of Wight), Scotland 53 (51+1+1), Wales 29 and Northern Ireland 17.

[Kevinstat]

Minimum electorate* of new constituencies (outside Northern Ireland): 71,031
The "quota": 74,769.19, or just 74,769 (doesn't matter here, even when calculating the below fractional quotas to four decimal places)
Maximum electorate* of new constituencies: 78,507
Electorate* of "Devon, Plymouth and Torbay": 852,765 (11.4053 quotas, within 5% of both 11 and 12)
Electorate* of "Cornwall & Isles of Scilly": 393,874 (5.2679 quotas)
   this number ÷ 5: 78,774.8 (267.8 electors too many, darn.  But wait...)
Electorate* of Cornwall "proper" (not including the Isles of Scilly): 392,223 (5.2458 quotas)
   this number ÷ 5: 78,444.6 (62.4 electors below the maximum)
Electorate* of the Isles of Scilly: 1,651 (0.0221 quotas)

*as of 1 December 2015

Devonscilly anyone?

[Kevinstat]

Minimum electorate* of new constituencies (outside Northern Ireland): 71,031
The "quota": 74,769.19, or just 74,769 (doesn't matter here, even when calculating the below fractional quotas to four decimal places)
Maximum electorate* of new constituencies: 78,507
Electorate* of "Devon, Plymouth and Torbay": 852,765 (11.4053 quotas, within 5% of both 11 and 12)
Electorate* of "Cornwall & Isles of Scilly": 393,874 (5.2679 quotas)
   this number ÷ 5: 78,774.8 (267.8 electors too many, darn.  But wait...)
Electorate* of Cornwall "proper" (not including the Isles of Scilly): 392,223 (5.2458 quotas)
   this number ÷ 5: 78,444.6 (62.4 electors below the maximum)
Electorate* of the Isles of Scilly: 1,651 (0.0221 quotas)

*as of 1 December 2015

Devonscilly anyone?

You know, if it actually meant they could find a way of covering Cornwall "proper" with five constituencies I wouldn't put it past the BCE to do that; they could put them with Lundy in a "North Devon and Atlantic Islands" constituency or something.

I just e-mailed the Boundary Commission for England asking for a breakdown of the Clovelly Bay ward (in the Torridge district, and on the opposite side of Westward Ho! and all that from the North Devon district (which does have a convenient 0.9796 or 0.9795 quotas, depending on whether you round the quota to the nearest integer or not), between Lundy and the mainland.  I strongly hinted at your "North Devon and Atlantic Islands" idea, without mentioning you beyond that my quandy was partly inspired by something a fellow interested party who I thought lived in England (unlike me) had mentioned.  You might not have known that Lundy was in the Torridge district (in a ward with a part of the mainland not adjacent to North Devon) though.

Anyway, here is my first attempt at South Yorkshire + one ward from Wakefield borough.

One issue is that Sheffield has new ward boundaries coming in in May; past form suggests the BCE will use the old ones, and try not to split them, though I suspect it's not possible to avoid splitting them altogether.  Another thing is that Barnsley and Rotherham combined at 4.81 quotas are a bit tight for five seats, so I think it's worth considering throwing Stocksbridge & Upper Don ward from Sheffield (which isn't really part of the city) in with them.  (Sheffield has 5.10 quotas with it and 4.91 without, so it could work either way.)  This is what I did below.

In Sheffield, if we work with the old wards (the ones we have figures for) Sheffield Hallam (71,249) can take Walkley instead of Dore & Totley.  Elsewhere I'm going to split a couple of wards.  The Ecclesfield wards come into Sheffield Hillsborough (82,308-x) which, compared with the existing Brightside & Hillsborough, needs to lose Burngreave and the Brightside part of Shiregreen & Brightside.  The latter joins the existing Sheffield South East which I'm going to rename Sheffield Attercliffe & Brightside (66,987+x).  Sheffield Central (67,319+y) loses Walkley and gains Burngreave and the Norfolk Park part of Arbourthorne, the rest of which stays in Sheffield Heeley (79,238-y) which took on Dore & Totley.  That's not too much change in Sheffield all things considering.

If you use the new wards in Sheffield, I assume Hallam must come within quota by realigning with the new ward boundaries.  Walkley can then stay in Central, which should probably then take on Hillsborough instead of Burngreave (giving some naming issues) and split Manor Castle with Heeley (which doesn't need Dore) instead of Arbourthorne.

Do you know if the Stocksbridge & Upper Don ward in (officially) Sheffield remain unchanged, or close enough to unchanged that you could probably keep it in your proposed Barnsley West & Stocksbridge constituency regardless of which vintage of wards are used in Sheffield?

Btw I love "The Full Monty".  That's what I think about when I think of Sheffield.  That and Def Leopard.  (There's a statue of Steve Clark there, right?)

[Kevinstat]

Doncaster's three seats are all slightly below quota, and there are new ward boundaries (in this case, already being used by the Commission).  To deal with this, I'm going to borrow South Elmsall & South Kirkby ward from Wakefield.  The borough and county numbers suggest crossing this boundary, and that ward is the obvious way to do it.  Anyway, it goes into Doncaster North & Moorthorpe (75,064) which is otherwise the existing Doncaster North without its parts of Thorne & Moorends and Stainforth & Barnby Dun wards.  The latter goes to Doncaster Central (72,729) and the former to Don Valley (75,835) which also takes in all of the split Tickhill & Wadworth ward.  The eastern extension to Doncaster Central looks a bit odd on the map, but it's a fairly simple solution.

NB the rest of Wakefield is workable without that ward, though one slightly ugly seat seems necessary.

I tried quickly to look for an alternative.  I suppose you already looked at crossing the Doncaster-Barnsley or Doncaster-Rotherham border, but you already crossed the Barnsley border twice and the Rotherham border once in your plan.  The southern two districts in Humberside (east of Doncaster, within the Yorkshire and the Humber region) add up to 3.1090 quotas (Doncaster has 2.8296), but the northern two districts of Humberside at 5.7449 could use that excess population to give more flexibility within that region, plus you'd be crossing the metropolitan boundary if you put any of North Lincolnshire in a Doncaster has constituency.

Wakefield has 3.1738 quotas, so it fits nicely with Doncaster's 2.8296, and while Leeds with 6.8919 quotas might seem like a better place to put Wakefield's excess, being within West Yorkshire and all, Bradford to the west of Leeds has 4.3706 quotas.  Bradford could just combine with Calderdale (1.9107 quotas) for six constituencies, but shedding a ward to a Leeds constituency (perhaps the two "bulges", although shedding both would probably mean two constituencies crossing the Bradford-Leeds border) would give more flexibility there.  The remaining district in West Yorkshire, Kirklees, has a nice 3.9509 quotas and can be kept intact with four constituencies.  I haven't divided up those areas (or anything yet really) into constituencies, but at first glance what you did with the Doncaster-Wakefield crossing seems like the best solution.

[Kevinstat]

Minimum electorate* of new constituencies (outside Northern Ireland): 71,031
The "quota": 74,769.19, or just 74,769 (doesn't matter here, even when calculating the below fractional quotas to four decimal places)
Maximum electorate* of new constituencies: 78,507
Electorate* of "Devon, Plymouth and Torbay": 852,765 (11.4053 quotas, within 5% of both 11 and 12)
Electorate* of "Cornwall & Isles of Scilly": 393,874 (5.2679 quotas)
   this number ÷ 5: 78,774.8 (267.8 electors too many, darn.  But wait...)
Electorate* of Cornwall "proper" (not including the Isles of Scilly): 392,223 (5.2458 quotas)
   this number ÷ 5: 78,444.6 (62.4 electors below the maximum)
Electorate* of the Isles of Scilly: 1,651 (0.0221 quotas)

*as of 1 December 2015

Devonscilly anyone?

You know, if it actually meant they could find a way of covering Cornwall "proper" with five constituencies I wouldn't put it past the BCE to do that; they could put them with Lundy in a "North Devon and Atlantic Islands" constituency or something.

I just e-mailed the Boundary Commission for England asking for a breakdown of the Clovelly Bay ward (in the Torridge district, and on the opposite side of Westward Ho! and all that from the North Devon district (which does have a convenient 0.9796 or 0.9795 quotas, depending on whether you round the quota to the nearest integer or not), between Lundy and the mainland.  I strongly hinted at your "North Devon and Atlantic Islands" idea, without mentioning you beyond that my quandy was partly inspired by something a fellow interested party who I thought lived in England (unlike me) had mentioned.  You might not have known that Lundy was in the Torridge district (in a ward with a part of the mainland not adjacent to North Devon) though.

Heard back from the BCE today:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

British government folks who field inquiries like to use the word "trust" when making replies, don't they.

[Kevinstat]

The Boundary Commission for Northern Ireland tweeted a link to the ward electorate data: http://tinyurl.com/hpdz88k

Have fun!

Thanks.  I've (for the time being at least) lost my interest in doing NI redistricting myself (I started to try a 5-constituency Cornwall minus Scilly but didn't like the things I would have to do - there's very little margin for deviation there), although I did enjoy looking at Nicholas Whyte's proposal (for Northern Ireland, not Cornwall) at http://nwhyte.livejournal.com/2622625.html .