The Boundary Commission released their revised recommendations this week for the new 17 Northern Ireland constituencies.
I will analyze the changes and how they will affect the Westminster and Assembly elections that are currently scheduled for 2022. First I wish to give some background on the Boundary Review. The current UK Boundary Review was begun in March 2016 and was based on the December 2015 Parliamentary electoral register. The number of seats in Westminster is to be reduced from 650 to 600 with Northern Ireland dropping from 18 to 17. The revised proposals have already been released for England, Scotland and Wales. As it currently stands this review is unlikely to pass in Westminster.
There have been several reports from the Conservative Party that the estimated 15 Conservative MP’s who would lose their seats will vote against the proposals. There are others who will have radical changes to their constituencies. It only will take 5 defections for the Review to fail. It appears there may be new legislation to redo the Review but with 650 seats. This will not affect Northern Ireland since the proposals released this week are likely to be very close to the final proposals. If it is redone with 650 seats Northern Ireland will still only have 17 seats. The reason for this is that a new review would be based on the 2018 electoral register. The Northern Ireland December 2015 register was 1,243,369 voters and the January 2018 register is 1,242,444 voters. That is a decline of 955 voters in 2 years.
The total UK register was 44,722,000 in December 2015 and increased to 46,800,000 at the time of the June 2017 Westminster election. It is now over 47,000,000. Since the Northern Ireland register has declined while the total UK register has increased by 2.5 million, Northern Ireland is currently entitled to 17.1 seats with a 650 seat Parliament. So Northern Ireland will have 17 seats if the current review passes and 17 seats if it is redone with a new review. One commentator noted in 2016 that if the current review had been based on the March 2016 register (when the Review actually began) Northern Ireland would have had only 16 seats. It barely qualified for 17 seats in the current Review.
I will analyze each constituency and project any changes for the 2017 Westminster and Assembly elections based on those changes. I will begin with the southern and western constituencies as these have minor changes.
South Down
There were only a few minor ward changes on the edge of the constituency.
Catholic Protestant Other None
Current 69.26% 26.85% 0.52% 3.36%
New 68.66% 27.53% 0.52% 3.29%
The Catholic population will be only 0.6% lower. The Westminster election would still be a SF MP and the Assembly would be 2 SF, 2 SDLP and 1 DUP.
Newry and Armagh
The heavily unionist wards of Laurelvale and Tandragee were transferred to Upper Bann.
Catholic Protestant Other None
Current 66.36% 30.59% 0.55% 2.55%
New 69.43% 27.69% 0.54% 2.35%
There would be a 3% increase in the nationalist vote with a SF MP and 3 SF, 1 SDLP and 1 DUP in the Assembly.
Upper Bann
Laurelvale and Tandragee wards were added to the constituency and the Banbridge town wards were transferred to the new Mid Down.
Catholic Protestant Other None
Current 44.00% 49.99% 0.88% 5.14%
New 43.72% 50.30% 0.92% 5.06%
Minimal demographic changes. The Banbridge wards that were removed have a UUP vote that was much higher than the DUP vote in 2014 council election. The SDLP vote is also slightly higher than the SF vote. The DUP will have an even larger plurality in the Westminster election. The Assembly would still be 2 DUP, 1 UUP, 1 SF and 1 SDLP. The SDLP will benefit from the large excess of available transfers from unionist parties.
Fermanagh South Tyrone
There were some minor ward boundary changes here that actually have a significant influence on a Westminster election. A net of 600 unionist voters (500 voting) were transferred to Upper Bann and a net of 1,200 nationalist voters (900 voting) were transferred inform nearby Dungannon wards.
Catholic Protestant Other None
Current 57.69% 39.10% 0.61% 2.60%
New 58.57% 38.27% 0.59% 2.57%
Although the ward boundary changes were minor they would result in 500 fewer unionist votes and 800 more SF votes in a Westminster election. Michelle Gildernew would have won by a margin of over 2,000 votes. The days of a unionist unity candidate winning here appear to be over. The Assembly would be 3 SF, 1 DUP and 1 UUP.
West Tyrone
The 3 wards of Banagher, Claudy and Feeny were added from East Derry. A section of Slievekirk was transferred to Foyle.
Catholic Protestant Other None
Current 67.98% 30.16% 0.40% 1.47%
New 69.34% 28.84% 0.39% 1.44%
The constituency is even more nationalist than previously. SF would still win Westminster with a larger margin and the Assembly would be 3 SF 1 SDLP and 1 DUP.
Foyle
A net of 800 unionist voters (600 voting) were transferred from the Slievekirk ward.
Catholic Protestant Other None
Current 75.12% 22.02% 0.79% 2.07%
New 74.31% 22.79% 0.79% 2.11%
Eamonn McCann of PBP lost this seat to the DUP by 660 votes with an undistributed SDLP surplus of 160 votes and over 800 votes from nationalist candidates that transferred to no one. If 2/3 had transferred to PBP he would have won. However, with these new boundaries adding 600 unionist voters the DUP would win under any scenario.
Mid Ulster
Small sections of wards were transferred to Fermanagh South Tyrone and 4 nationalist majority wards (Upper Glenshane, Dungiven, Garvagh and Kilrea) were transferred in.
Catholic Protestant Other None
Current 66.72% 30.78% 0.44% 2.06%
New 66.67% 30.84% 0.43% 2.06%
The demographics are unchanged here and so are the election results with a SF MP and 3 SF, 1 SDLP and 1 DUP in the Assembly.
Causeway
Causeway is a newly named constituency that is a merger of parts of East Derry and North Antrim. Most of the Catholic majority wards of East Derry were removed which significantly reduced the Catholic percentage of this new constituency. The wards added were from Moyle and the Ballymoney town and nearby wards.
Catholic Protestant Other None
Current (East Derry) 41.70% 53.27% 0.68% 4.35%
New 33.52% 60.83% 0.74% 4.91%
Gregory Campbell would win a Westminster election with well over 50% of the vote. It is likely there would be only one nationalist MLA (SF) since it appears that the SDLP candidate would be over 1,000 votes behind the 3rd DUP candidate on the final count. There would have been 3 DUP, 1 Independent Unionist and 1 SF elected in an Assembly election.
East Antrim
This constituency will have significant changes with the loss of 1 nationalist ward in Moyle and the addition of 7 heavily unionist wards in Newtownabbey (4 of the Ballyclare wards plus Hawthorne, Ballyduff and Mossley).
Catholic Protestant Other None
Current 20.39% 70.11% 0.97% 8.53%
New 16.63% 74.06% 0.86% 8.44%
Sammy Wilson will easily win this seat for the DUP. The Catholic population will be almost 4% less so there is no hope here for a nationalist Assembly seat. There would have been no change in the Assembly election with 2 DUP, 2 UUP and 1 Alliance.
Mid Antrim
This new constituency is mainly the Ballymena wards and some of the Ballymoney wards from the current North Antrim with the Dunsilly DEA wards added from South Antrim.
Catholic Protestant Other None
Current (North Antrim) 28.39% 66.03% 0.74% 4.84%
New 30.28% 64.15% 0.72% 4.85%
The Catholic population is 2% higher and those nationalist voters in Dunsilly vote at a higher rate than those removed from the Ballymoney wards. Even so, the SDLP would have been 1,500 votes short of a quota. The Assembly vote would have been 2 DUP, 1 UUP, 1 TUV and 1 SF. Ian Paisley would easily win the Westminster election.
South Antrim
The new South Antrim is a merger of half of the current South Antrim with half of the Lagan Valley constituency.
Catholic Protestant Other None
Current (South Antrim) 31.86% 59.80% 0.87% 7.46%
New 28.62% 61.86% 0.98% 8.53%
Paul Girvan of the DUP would easily win the Westminster election as the new boundaries are even more favourable to the DUP with the addition of the Lagan Valley wards. There would have been 2 DUP and 1 UUP in the Assembly election. The Alliance candidate would have been ahead of both the SF and SDLP candidates and would add to that margin with unionist transfers. SF appear to be 400 votes ahead of the SDLP but the SDLP would have won the 5th seat on unionist transfers.
Mid Down
Mid Down is a new constituency. The majority of the wards are from the current Strangford (minus the Ards Peninsula which was transferred to North Down). Other wards were added from Lagan Valley, South Down and Upper Bann.
Catholic Protestant Other None
Current (Strangford) 17.28% 73.13% 0.94% 8.65%
New 17.69% 73.86% 0.80% 7.57%
Both the Catholic and Protestant populations are slightly higher but basically no demographic change. It is likely that Jeffrey Donaldson will compete here since part of the Lagan Valley constituency is within this new one. He would easily win the Westminster election. There would be 3 DUP, 1 UUP and 1 Alliance elected in the Assembly election.
North Down
The entire Ards Peninsula DEA was added to North Down and 3 wards were transferred to East Belfast
Catholic Protestant Other None
Current 12.59% 74.44% 1.15% 11.83%
New 14.61% 73.47% 1.07% 10.86%
The changes here would have had profound consequences if these boundaries were in place for the 2017 Westminster election. The addition of the Ards Peninsula would have added over 5,000 votes to the DUP, 1,000 to the UUP and 1,000 to the Alliance party. There was no UUP candidate so most of those votes would have gone to Sylvia Hermon with perhaps a few tactical Alliance votes also. Sylvia Hermon only won by 1,200 votes but would have lost by over 3,000 votes. The wards that were transferred to East Belfast were also area where Sylvia Herman polled well. Jim Shannon will be the candidate here and should win easily. There is a 2% increase in the Catholic population but still far below a quota. The Assembly would return 2 DUP, 1 UUP, 1 Alliance and 1 Green.
North Belfast
The 90% unionist wards of Woodvale and Crumlin were transferred to West Belfast but the equally unionist wards of Monkstown, Carmoney and Burnthill were added in along with the mixed Mallusk ward so the demographics are unchanged.
Catholic Protestant Other None
Current 46.94% 45.67% 1.04% 6.36%
New 46.95% 45.15% 1.15% 6.75%
Even though the Catholic population is unchanged the demographics are slightly less favourable for SF since Catholics in Newtownabbey have a greater tendency to vote SDLP or Alliance compared to those in the Belfast wards. Nigel Dodds would have won with a slightly higher margin. The Assembly would still be 2 SF, 1 SDLP and 2 DUP.
West Belfast
Wet Belfast will experience dramatic demographic changes with the addition of the heavily unionist Woodvale, Crumlin, Seymour Hill and Lambeg wards. The mixed Derryaghy South wards was also added.
Catholic Protestant Other None
Current 80.09% 16.64% 0.58% 2.69%
New 69.70% 26.18% 0.67% 3.45%
The Catholic population has dropped over 10% due to the addition of heavily unionist wards. This will not affect the Westminster results. However, there will be more than enough unionist votes here for a DUP MLA at the expense of SF. The result would be 3 SF, 1 PBP and 1 DUP.
Belfast South
Similar to Belfast West 3 heavily unionist wards (Cregagh, Drumbo and Moneyreagh) were added to South Belfast.
Catholic Protestant Other None
Current 44.01% 43.65% 2.80% 9.54%
New 42.00% 45.82% 2.71% 9.48%
The Catholic population will decrease by 2% and the Protestant population will increase by over 2%. In 2017 the DUP won the Westminster election by 2,000 votes. If these new boundaries were in place last year the margin would have increased to 5,000. The Assembly results would also change. The second DUP candidate was only 58 votes behind the UUP when she was eliminated. Her surplus elected the other DUP candidate. There was an undistributed DUP surplus of 1,500 votes which were never distributed since the UUP candidate was 1,540 votes behind the Green candidate Clare Bailey. However, these new wards would have added over 2,000 votes to the 2nd DUP candidate and the UUP candidate would have been eliminated. I estimate that the Green candidate would have lost by over 1,000 votes. The Assembly vote would have resulted in 1 SF, 1 SDLP, 1 Alliance and 2 DUP.
Belfast East
Belfast East added 3 wards from North Down. Cregagh ward was removed and Hillfoot added.
Catholic Protestant Other None
Current 12.70% 75.40% 1.44% 10.47%
New 14.09% 73.83% 1.43% 10.65%
There is a slight increase in the Catholic population but these are Catholics from North Down who are voting Alliance or Green. The DUP would easily win the Westminster election. The Assembly would be the same with 2 DUP, 1 UUP and 2 Alliance.
The final Westminster results would be 10 DUP and 7 SF. This is in contrast to the initial Boundary Review proposals in which the results would have been 9 SF and 8 DUP. For the Assembly there would be 5 fewer MLA’s due to the loss of one constituency. If last year’s Assembly election had been with these boundaries the results would have been:
SF 25 (-2)
SDLP 11 (-1)
PBP 1
Alliance 7 (-1)
Green 2 (-1)
DUP 29 (+1)
UUP 9 (-1)
TUV 1
Unionist 1
The total number of unionist MLA’s would be unchanged at 40 and the 5 eliminated seats would have been 2 SF, 1 SDLP, 1 Alliance and 1 Green.
One does not need to be politically astute to see that these new proposals will obviously benefit only 1 party- the DUP, at the expense of nationalist and nonsectarian parties. That is the definition of gerrymandering. SF has already noted this publicly. You will note in my analysis that the southern and western constituencies do not have any net gain of electors since overall they are not short of the required minimum. Several heavily unionist constituencies in the Belfast region such as Strangford, East Belfast, North Down and East Antrim needed to add significant numbers of voters. If it were a truly random process one would expect that the added wards would result in nationalist representation in some of these 4 where none exists currently. Indeed the initial proposals in 2016 added enough nationalist voters to East Belfast and Strangford so there would be nationalist MLA’s elected. There would have been only 2 constituencies, East Antrim and North Down, without nationalist representation. However, these new proposals would result in no nationalist representation in 4 constituencies: Mid Down, East Belfast, East Antrim and North Down. Currently there is one constituency with no unionist representation, West Belfast. There is 2nd, Foyle, on the verge of no unionist representation. These new proposals added enough unionist voters to those 2 constituencies to elect 2 DUP MLA’s. Thus while unionists will be represented in all constituencies there will be no nationalist representation in 4 constituencies. That is how you define gerrymandering.
These proposals will only increase the disillusionment for the political system among nationalist and indeed nonsectarian voters. In 2016 the UK voted to Leave the EU yet 90% of Northern Ireland nationalist voters and 85% of nonsectarian voters voted Remain in Northern Ireland. There will be no Northern Ireland MEP’s after the May 2109 European Parliament election so Northern Ireland will have no representation in Europe. The new District Council boundaries were gerrymandered by the DUP with the result that 3 nationalist councils were transferred to unionist controlled councils while no unionist councils were transferred to nationalist control. Unfortunately, SF went along with that DUP gerrymander. SF cannot make that mistake again with these proposals. Along with the Irish Language act, the status of Northern Ireland outside of the EU and other important issues it is now imperative that SF include the Boundary Review in all negotiations with the DUP and Conservative Party. One possibility would be to have a separate Boundary Commission for the Assembly constituencies. The Chairman of the current Boundary Commission is the Speaker of the House of Commons who originated from the Conservative Party. There should be a representative from the Dail in the Republic of Ireland as a Co Chairman so the Commission would have representation from the nationalist side also
At the suggestion of Enda over at “endgame in Ulster” I’m including the below details from the Boundary Commission website on how to contact/ respond to the consultation – BD
How to respond
Complete our online consultation at www.bcni2018.uk(external link opens in a new window / tab)
Email your views to: review@boundarycommission.org.uk
Post your views to: Boundary Commission for Northern Ireland, The Bungalow, Stormont House, Stormont Estate, Belfast, BT4 3SH
"We in coming days may be" 
Great analysis Faha,
It was always going to be a stitch up now the DUP have a firm grip of the Tory’s ‘crown jewels’.
With the bare stats laid out coldy now, it is clear that is more of an outrageous fix than was evident at first sight.
No doubt the cabal of ‘Independently minded journalists’ over on Slugger are still bleating the DUP line that its all just a lucky bounce for unionists from an always fair, independent and beyond reproach or suspicion, British civil service. Anything else would be such an appalling vista, as to be inconceivable.
Some journalists !
LikeLike
As I mentioned the Chairman of the Boundary Commission is the Speaker of the House of Commons and was elected to Westminster as a Conservative MP. Since the Conservatives and DUP are in a coalition government governing the UK this is a major conflict of interest. Can you imagine the outrage of the unionist parties if the Chairman of the Boundary Commission was a SF TD, a Fine Gael TD or a SDLP councilor !
LikeLike
Beyond belief !
You’ve also dug up the crucial information that even if the ‘650 down to 600’ Bill is defeated, NI still gets cut to 17 seats and the DUP/Tory Gerrymander will still take effect.
Again, why have the investigative ‘journalists’ not disclosed this key point?
Meanwhile, in the leafy suburbs, the tree huggers, the self styled ‘non sectarian’ getalongerists, the unicorns and the refined civil servants in the chattering classes who are above it (us?) all, continue to parrot the line that Arlene wouldn’t have bothered instructing the Commission, because it won’t go through Westminster anyway.
The DUP and their pet apologists/enablers over on Slugger and throughout the media, smirk and then snigger up their sleeves while they wait for the reality to dawn on the mugs/mugged.
LikeLike
Explosive blog in my humble opinion
LikeLike
2 previous reviews have both recommended a Glenshane seat and a North/Mid Tyrone seat. Alongside a 3 seat Belfast twice now those proposals have been set at naught. County Derry by my count is to be divided into 4 seats.
The way to look at this review is to look at North Derry where constituents are in Causeway Coast and Glens with North Antrim for the councils some now would find themselves now in West Tyrone for Westminster and Assembly. Mention of the importance of local ties too in the report just not that important round those parts. That says it all.
LikeLike
There have been some recent comments from the new Conservative MP Northern Ireland Secretary that she may call a new Stormont election. However, there should be no election under the current boundaries as they were devised 12 years ago and are long overdue to be changed. Overall, the unionist constituencies are underpopulated and this a major bias against nationalist voters. In the 2017 Assembly election look at these anomalies.
Newry & Armagh: It required 27,526 votes to elect 3 SF MLA’s
Foyle: It required 30,882 votes to elect 4 nationalist MLA’s
South Down: It required 32,315 votes to elect 4 nationalist MLA’s
Strangford: It required only 24,862 votes to elect 4 unionist MLA’s
East Antrim: It required only 25,153 votes to elect 4 unionist MLA’s
East Belfast: It required 19,349 votes to elect 3 unionist MLA’s
North Down: It required 18,870 votes to elect 3 unionist MLA’s
So SF needs more votes to elect 3 MLA’s in Newry & Armagh than the unionists need to elect 4 MLA’s in Strangford and East Antrim. It requires 50% more SF votes to elect a MLA in Newry & Armagh than 3 unionist MLA’s in East Belfast and North Down. It requires many more votes to elect 4 nationalist MLA”s in Foyle and South Down that it does to elect 4 unionist MLA’s in Strangford and East Antrim.
All voters are created equal, but some voters (unionist) are created more equal than others.
SF and the SDLP should refuse to agree to a new election until the current gerrymandered constituencies are changed under an impartial Boundary Commission with equal representation from the nationalist and unionist communities. The Assembly constituencies should not be tied to a Westminster British Boundary Commission. With the proper legislation this could easily be accomplished within a year and a new Stormont election could be held in 2019 with constituencies of equal number of voters devised by an impartial Boundary Commission.
LikeLike
Faha, excellent analysis. Is the boundary commission required to take Nationalist and Unionist percentages into account when they are making their recommendation or do they just need to equalse the numbers overall?
LikeLike
They are only required to have the constituencies within +/- 5% of the Northern Ireland average of 17 constituencies divided by the total Parliamentary electorate.
LikeLike
So can they not claim they were ‘blind’ to considerations of constitutional preference Unionist or Nat? If it is not their ‘job’ to consider constitutional preference – then they can defend their position easily? It may be a case fro the equality commission to consider whether the boundary commission remit is fit for purpose?
LikeLike
The last proposals definitely benefited Sinn Féin the most – according to Nicholas Whyte – and was bad for all the other parties.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-politics-37280113
SF should see if we can get those proposals back.
LikeLike
Obviously yes, the pencil what drew the mad has a bad DUP nib. But, demographically it is accurate in terms of the seats it would produce. The electorate today by extrapolated count from 2011 is 50% protestant and 42% Catholic. Allowing for a scrape of a one or two points for alliance and greens. Theseat numbers tally in line with the demographic stats
LikeLike
I see what your saying Robin the problem is especially for Westminster is a lot of marginal seats such as South, North and East Belfast and future marginal seats such as Upper Bann have all amazingly been rejigged in favour of one party throw in the added bonus of making sure Hermon is toast next time then it really all does reek. My argument is if there is no gerrymandering or issues then why have the commission folded on the original plans after so much uproar from Unionists. If it wasnt being influenced/pressurised by others then surely any review would have just tinkered with the original plans. Put it like this if they came up with these proposals first and then SF had a fit so they then came up with the 2016 proposals as a response then it would look equally bad -That is the problem and their years of experience should have prevented them from making such a mess of it the whole process. My main gripe with SF is why the fook did they not propose anything themselves.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I thought that SF got the message that Nationalist have had enough of SF telling them to bite their lip and think of Ireland, while they bend us over and let the DUP have their way. It seems not.
Maybe when FF and the SDLP merge, SF should join them and they can all focus on social issues and making NI a nice comfortable place for SFFDLP politicians, and let someone who will stand up to the DUP represent Nationalists instead.
LikeLike
@Robin Keogh the last census figures of 2011 show the religious makeup as follows:
Roman Catholic : 45.14%
Protestant: 48.36%
Other Religions: 0.92%
None: 5.59%
Given the fact that in the 2004 Northern Ireland Life and Times (NILT) survey, 50% of respondents aged 18-24 were Catholic, on what evidence do you justify your extrapolation?
LikeLike
I looked at the the 2017 Assembly results for North Antrim and it appears that the DUP will also rid themselves of Jim Allister. The new Mid Antrim has the Ballymoney wards extending up to the Bushmill ward removed and the TUV polled over 20% in those wards. The Dunsilly DEA wards that will be added only had a 2% TUV vote. So the TUV vote would drop to 12% which is far less than a quota of 16.7% and with no source of transfers. Looks like this will be the end of the TUV. The DUP are brilliant.
LikeLike
Possibly been years since I last commented on this blog but I have some homework for the readers!
In the last review ( torpedoed by the lib dems and labour) I submitted a pretty detailed proposal to the boundary commision.
Those submissions along, with revised proposals, are all kept as a public record on this site :
http://webarchive.proni.gov.uk/20150220015732/http://www.boundarycommission.org.uk/index/publications.htm
I wrote a detailed submission that time (visible to Bangordub if he’s interested!) that took me a while to write on the then revised 16 constituency map.
At the time once the consultation period was over, the commisioners addressed he submissions and I got personally name-checked for providing a submission that “looked to redraw a entirely new set if proposals” as opposed to altering the suggested ones.
The implication being, its not for me to tamper majorly with the commission’s suggestions.
However the complete redraw has shown this is not the case. The commisioners can do an entire redraw if they want as they see fit.
Therefore here’s your homework:
To look on the website i provided a link for and find those comments on the submissions because I haven’t found them yet.
If you find it, I will write to the commisioners showing that, by their own standards, a complete redraw like is not a warranted without clear explanation.
If like me you can’t find it (even though i can find my submission) then ask the boundary commisioners to provide COMPLETE transparency and show the replies to the consultations as well.
Thanks in advance for your help
LikeLike
Click to access revised-proposals-oct12.pdf
Think there is mention of your proposals in the link above.
I also found this doozy of comment
“The DUP criticised the severing of linkages around Ballymena and Carrickfergus but maintained that extensive redrawing is not achievable within the limited consultation process and they rejected the significant reconfigurations proposed by other respondents.”
LikeLike
Thanks guarantor!
I highlighted the last line:
“Mr McGurk’s proposals for the boundary
between Belfast SW and Belfast SE are part of a significant redrawing of the constituencies
delineated in the Provisional Proposals with only one (North Down) remaining unchanged.”
“Only one remaining unchanged”, “significant redrawing”. This shows that there is reticence to making big changes and yet this is itself an even more significant redraw than I proposed.
LikeLike
From the same link I believe the section from Page 9 on Methodology is crucial. This was in response to another submission:
“There is an inherent difficulty with any approach which delineates constituencies other than in a contiguous manner. For example, the sequence of largest first takes one from Upper Bann and Newry and Mourne (which happen to be contiguous) to North Antrim and then to South Down followed by Fermanagh and South Tyrone. In delineating constituencies in this way, there is a risk
that the residual constituencies will not be viable or will have awkward boundaries.”
…. “did not demonstrate how his proposed approach would work out in practice over the region. However, the Commission tested it and found that the last and smallest constituencies were unsatisfactory in terms of the Rule 5 discretionary factors.”
I highlight “In delineating constituencies in this way, there is a risk
that the residual constituencies will not be viable or will have awkward boundaries.”
and “the Commission tested it and found that the last and smallest constituencies were unsatisfactory….”
In light of the revised proposals what does tell us about West Tyrone meandering over the Sperrins and through Dungiven or the creation of the Causeway seat?
Consistency is key.
LikeLike
An individual called J Auld seems to have really impressed the commission with his alternative revisions. There was a Rev J Auld who was a Unionist politician in the 1980ies.
http://www.ark.ac.uk/elections/73-81lgnorthdown.htm
North Down D
LikeLike
I don’t think this review changes the long term trajectory.
Even on these boundaries Unionists will have to face losing North and South Belfast in the next ten years.
Drumbo & Moneyreagh are changing as a result of their proximity to South Belfast – Country living within 10 minutes of the city; and I’m informed the tally has changed drastically as well.
LikeLike
Charlie,
Happy do do some digging for you,
Ryan,
The key difference now, regarding the gerrymandering, is that nationalists in the North are far less ghettoised than previously. The geographical spread is much greater and only changing in one direction.
LikeLike
Indeed, watch out for the 2019 locals. Unionists caught a lucky bounce off the back of the flags protest in 2014; which hit SF/SDLP/Alliance across the East. I would expect 2019 to see some change ushered in; not least if the DUP are still proping up the Tory government.
LikeLike
Surely the problem is here – that we all know it is a gerrymandered duck – it walks like one and it quacks like one – but we cant PROVE it a gerrymandered duck and because there is no mandatory requirement to take Unionist and Nationalist balance into account – any consultation can easily find ‘good’ reason for change.
I’m not suggesting it should not be called out for what it is and hopefully someone within the boundary commission might speak up – but short of that I can see anything being reversed by this boundary commission.
LikeLike
@Sammy McNally, if the proposals go ahead they can be challenged in court under Article 14 of the ECHR, since it is quite clear that a significant number of Catholics will be disenfranchised as a result of these boundary changes.
LikeLike
Longtime fan of this site B’D and plaudits for the always excellent analysis by Faha.
Faha seems inclined to these proposals closely matching the final outcome. However, I think the electorate differentials allows for some tweaking that maintains the integrity of these boundaries: meaning the slight changes I’m going to propose would be considered quite fair in any normal society.
With these revised boundaries there is a differences between the largest electorate and smallest of 7,972. My proposals would reduce this differential to 3733, the smallest electorate being in the vast rural constituency Fermanagh & South Tyrone where it takes over 2 hours to navigate its span from Garrison to Brocagh.
Lets start in County Armagh and work anti clockwise to make these proposals more representative.
Newry Armagh’s electorate is given as 75,635 and Upper Bann’s as 69,795.
Remove Richill Ward from the former and award it to U’Bann. There is a main road connnecting Richill to Portadown and most residents would prefer the likely MP who’ll represent U’Bann
New Electorate Newry Armagh 72,193
New Electorate Upper Bann 73,237
The proposed South Down and Mid Down both have large electorates above the average respectively given as 76,924 and 77,767. Reducing these opens up 6-7k voters that allow a number of constituecies to the north to be adjusted with the intent of enlarging the electorates of South and East Belfast which are all well below the average.
Dislodge Crossgar & Killyleagh Ward from South Down to Mid Down. I can’t see this creating any controversy.
New Electorate South Down 74,040.
Now remove Ballymacbrennan, Hillsborough and Ravenet wards (7,096) from Mid Down and award them to South Antrim. These wards all have a symbiotic connection to Lisburn so hardly controversial.
New Electorate Mid Down 73,555
Next remove Magheraglave and White Mountain from South Antrim and place them in West Belfast. The DUP would likely field some objection to such a move but the independent boundary commission has already proposed moving identitik wards such as Lambeg and Derriaghy to W’Bel so whats the difference.
New South Antrim now as a slightly larger electorate of 74,572.
In Belfast with these proposals we now remove Lambeg and Dunmurray from West to South and remove Woodstock from South to its natural home East Belfast. The DUP would probably field objections. But Lambeg has more in common with S’Bel than the Falls Road and Dunmurray is very similiar, sharing schools and all with Musgrave/Finaghy.
New Electorates
– West Belfast 73,463
– South Belfast 72,874
– East Belfast 73,151
North Belfast is 3000 above average and Mid Antrim is 3000 below. The DUP would be very vexed with this change but the fairest way to adjust to the norm is bring Mallusk 3,217 into East Antrim and relocate the two wards Lurgiethan, Carnlough and Glenarm (4,352) to Mid Antrim.
The latter 2 wards in the Glens of Antrim have a closer connection with Ballymena (education and shopping) than the large towns of East Antrim and are intwined with neighboring wards Loughguile and Glenravel. Ian Paisley Snr used to boast he had a great rapartee with catholic sheep farmers in the Glens: surely he influenced his son. Has Sammy Wilson ever even been to Cushendall. Mallusk has more in common with Ballyclare than most of North Belfast. Fair changes but the DUP would strongly object.
New Electorates
North Belfast 73,285
East Antrim 73,598
Mid Antrim 74, 761
Causeway is only slightly above average but it is a huge constituency and Greysteel has a much closer connection to Foyle/Derry City than Coleraine. On a more serious note Gregory Campbell MP in recent years has been criticising Greysteel residents for the lack of respect they accord the Orange Order and I wonder how did he respond to the massacre at the ‘Rising Sun’. Did he comfort the famlies, attend the funerals? I really cant see what objection he’d have to Greysteel Ward being relocated.
Slievekirk ward follows a different rhythm to the urban mass of Foyle and anyway half of it is in County Tyrone. Moving Greysteel (an urban community) to Foyle frees up SlieveKirk (a rural ward) to be moved to West Tyrone. This ward also has 4/5 link roads allowing the main body of the constituency Omagh/Strabane to seamlessly connect to isolated Claudy/Feeny/Park without taking mountain tracks. Sperrin should reallt be added to the title of this constituency.
New Electorates,
Causeway 71, 464
Foyle 71,814
West Tyrone 72,906
I propose no changes to either Fermanagh &South Tyrone Mid Ulster or North Down.
7 seats wouldbe safe nationalist, 8 safe Unionist and 2 cliffhangers to spice up what could otherwise be a predictable election.
LikeLike
Your proposals are excellent and rational. Unfortunately, the DUP will strongly oppose them because they will result in extra nationalist seats in Mid Down, Mid Antrim and Foyle. Since those extra nationalist seats would result in 3 lost seats for the DUP, the Conservative-DUP coalition will never agree to them.
LikeLike
The Mallusk estate might have a lot in common with Ballyclare but this is the Mallusk Ward thousands of people here are from north and west Belfast. Also what is fascinating about this review, it is based on the December 2015 electorate, the current Mallusk electorate is 6200. Also interestingly is the unionist wards in north Belfast are down by hundreds in the most up to date electorate while most nationalist wards are slightly up or around the same as 2015. I read that if the review was taken against the most recent electorate then the north would reduce to 16 seats not 17.
It would be interesting to review the ward discrepancies in other areas re unionist v nationalist but I am only familiar with north Belfast and newtownabbey.
I would hope to see Mallusk added to north Belfast in the final review for selfish reasons as I live here.
LikeLike
To add also the Mallusk Ward is in the Airport DEA , Sinn Fein topped the poll here in 2014 and the SDLP also got elected, with the continued increase in electorate here who seem to be mainly nationalist, the 2019 locals could see a third nationalist elected. Who could have predicted say 30 years or so ago that nationalists could be electing three councillors in a DEA that included Mallusk and Crumlin in planter south Antrim.
LikeLike
Ulster-Celt, I’m pretty certain that Mallusk used in the 2011 census was divided into 2 wards in the council revision of 2013. Mayfield is now in Hightown .i dont know the exact boundaries but Blackrock development may be in the new Mallusk.
LikeLike
Oh should just add I’m working off this link.
https://apps.spatialni.gov.uk/Other/BCNIApplicationRevised/index.html
also i’m living abroad so cant really offer more than this. I hope its useful.
LikeLike
The unionists may pull this off but if so it will prove to be a Pyrrhic victory. Concepts like ‘boundary commission’ and ‘gerrymandering’ will searingly resonate with the Northen nationalist race memory and electrify the base.
It may even cut enough slack for the SDLP to consider a NB/SB non-aggression pact.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Paul
Mayfield is in the Mallusk Ward. The right side of the Hightown road including blackrock mayfield manor etc
LikeLike
http://www.eoni.org.uk/getmedia/435db715-30bd-4ae7-a9c2-6b0a3a6290f2/February-2018-Electorate-by-Ward
Up to date Ward electorate
LikeLike
Its a rough estimation but from the link you provided I’m getting a current electorate of 80,000 for North Belfast if this proposed boundary from the commission sees the light of day. About 5000 voters being taken out of the constituency and 15000 newly included from the old South & East Antrim’s . My rough calculation is giving a CNR plurality with 39,000 to 36k PuL and 5k others. Such a margin is too risky for Dodds/DUP even with the ‘gerrymander’ and they’re influence is sure to bring some favourable fine-tuning to the final report rectifying this oversight.
South Down on these proposals is a real behemoth of a constituency with a current electorate of 84K in contrast to urban South and East Belfast with a stagnant 70k apiece. Wasn’t the whole point of this Westminster sponsored revision to eliminate such discrepancies between ancient overrepresented city constituencies (declining northern England cities versus the surging underrepresented Home Counties). I really don’t know despite only having to rearrange 17 constituencies how the Commision can stand over their flawed proposal.
LikeLike
I thought Hightown was enlarged but its down as only an electorate of 2000. The Boundary commissioners have Mallusk electorate as 3200 – how current is this – but the population must be 10000 at this stage. Have 3-4000 people failed to register on the electoral roll?
LikeLike
The boundary commission has used the local government figure from december 2015 for this review for all wards.mallusk is showing as 3300 approx . the same electoral stats released for December 2015 has Mallusk over 5000 for the parliamentary register. Crazy.
LikeLike
The Mallusk ward used in the Boundary Review is the new district council ward of Mallusk. The Mallusk ward (over 6,000 voters) on the February 2017 Parliamentary register is the old Mallusk ward of which sections were transferred to the Ballyhenry and Hightown wards.
LikeLike
The SDLP does have a good chance in a number of these constituencies. The Foyle constituency looks like a very good prospect for Mark Durkan at the next election. The South Down constituency looks good for Margaret Ritchie. And obviously Claire Hanna is in with a good chance in South Belfast. Then there are a number of other constituencies where the SDLP should be able to get seat off Sinn Féin at assembly level. So I think the redraw may be bad for Sinn Féin you should keep in mind that ONLY Sinn Féin benefited from the last redraw.
LikeLike
You must talking about Durkan, Ritchie and Hanna getting seats in the next Assembly Election. You couldn’t in your wildest fantasies/delusions,possibly imagine they would win Westminster seats !!
Is this just more of same SDLP nonsense offered up as cover for backing Unionism against a more successful Nationalist party?
Why don’t you just declare as soft unionist Party for Catholics and be honest about it ?
At least you could then regain some of your losses to Alliance. With all the Fealty and McIlroy types in North Down, you might even get elected yourself.
LikeLike
Thanks Paul. No I am definitely talking about Westminster. I would say those three constituencies look good for the SDLP. I should add that it may be that Alasdair McDonnell in fact is the candidate for South Belfast rather than Claire Hanna.
So as I say the previous iteration of the boundaries was not great for the SDLP and it was really only one party – SF – that they benefited.
LikeLike
I’d love to meet you for a chat SDLP Actv. I’m beginning to suspect you’re not actually in the SDLP if you think Alasdair would do better than Claire. I hope you’re not a plant or perhaps SDLP could come on and confirm that you’re speaking for them? I know Claire and she knows me so a simple message from her would suffice
LikeLike
I didn’t say Alasdair would do better than Claire, just that I don’t know who the candidate would be. I didn’t want to assume she would be the candidate as that has not been decided. They have both been hard working and effective politicians in South Belfast. Also I am not speaking for the SDLP, I am speaking in a personal capacity.
LikeLike
SDLP – ND
Something must have changed since the last election to fill you with such optimism.
I don’t see that the boundaries increase your chances from the last election and I can’t see any shift in opinion towards the SDLP or any major policy change which would warrant such optimism.
Maybe you know something we don’t ?
LikeLike
After years of the DUP welching on deals, they are now walking away from deals before they even sign them. At least they can’t pocket the gains first this time.
We cringed as we saw May dance like a puppet on Arlene’s string and now we see the strings working Arlene, stretch back to the Orange Order and the Backwoodsmen.
It now seems that Protestant unionist grassroots are incapable of allowing Nationalists even something as innocuous as the same language rights other UK minorities have in Britain.
I can’t help thinking that the intransigence of Unionist grassroots persists because they were never properly held to account at the end of the conflict. The mirror was never held up to them to show their central role causing and perpetuating the civil war/troubles. Political and media bias North and South has been so preoccupied with blaming Republicans in order to stymie their post conflict political gains, that the Protestant unionist population have been allowed to believe the myth that they were not the primary cause of the conflict and worse still that they were in fact the primary victims.
No wonder they don’t think they need to compromise with Nationalists.
Accommodation between the two sides has been sacrificed on the Altar of political expediency by the self serving, spin merchants in FF, FG and the Tories, as well as the political pygmies running the rump of the SDLP.
BBC, RTE, UTV and print media have all been too happy to take their instructions from Governments in pushing the establishment narrative. So much more convenient to shove your snout in the trough with the politicians and dump analysis and investigation in favour of whispers, leaks and inuendo in the Commons and Dail bars.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Great comment Paul,
With you all the way on that
LikeLike
Agreed. The main problem facing the Irish Catholic population, in my opinion, is its inability to function as a cohesive whole. It is really disconcerting that a significant number of Irish Catholics prefer to fight amongst themselves instead of standing together with a common aim which should be the betterment of all Irish Catholics. The DUP and indeed all flavours of unionism look on and laugh as they know that this disunity amongst Irish Catholics is self-defeating and ensures that Irish Catholics remain as second class citizens in this gerry-mandered entity.
LikeLike
Surely it’s about time to stop synonmising nationalists and Catholics?
LikeLike
This is a little strange – my test message works but another post I made did not appear.
LikeLike
Good to the SDLP are as focused on the major issues of the day, as ever !
LikeLike
Test message.
LikeLike
SDLP, before I delete this yet again, do you have a comment to make?
LikeLike
Query: is one of your moderators deleting my posts? I want to make a contribution to the discussion.
LikeLike
Yes I am. Please post your comment
LikeLike
Can you clarify what rule I broke when posting that it got picked up by your moderators?
LikeLike
https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2018/0227/944002-eu-customs-border/
LikeLike
Mary Lou has been doing a good job as SF leader. Great appearance on the Late Late. Expecting to see SF grow as a result of her leadership which (given that SF stand in the north too) will be good for people up there in the north as well as in Dublin.
LikeLike
Deborah, thanks for your comment,
I agree with your thoughts in a general sense but I have to be fair. Our friend from the SDLP in N Down above submitted a comment which was just an attack on SF. You’ve submitted one which is supportive of SF. I’m happy to approve comments with your opinions if supported by facts. The reason you’rs is good to go is because you’ve supported your argument with a link to a real piece of news. I hope our SDLP rep in N Down gets that and engages
LikeLike
http://www.sinnfein.ie/contents/48652
Click to access Sinn_Féin_Boundary_Submission.pdf
Sinn Fein proposals.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Exellent well-thought-through proposals from Sinn Féin. Mary Lou McDonald has shown good leadership and here is doing the right thing by engaging proactively with the boundary commission to obtain better outcomes for all voters.
LikeLiked by 1 person
http://www.irishnews.com/opinion/columnists/2018/03/21/brian-feeney-bizarre-boundary-commission-proposals-can-t-be-allowed-to-stand-1283747/?ref=sh
http://www.judecollins.com/2018/03/now-bad-news-revised-electoral-boundaries/
Midnight tonight is the deadline.
LikeLiked by 1 person