Thursday, March 13, 2008
Deal on council numbers?
Despite the recent reduction in the “love in” the DUP and SF may have reached a deal on the number of councils. According to the BBC, a deal is imminent on reducing the number to 11. SF had wanted 7, some of the other parties 15. We do not have finalised information on what the exact boundaries will be though I see the Impartial Reporter is reporting that Omagh and Fermanagh will merge. The final decision on the boundaries will come under Arlene Foster’s remit at Enviroment.
Turgon @ 10:32 AM
Willowfield/Sammy,
One suspects (hopes) that the boundary commissioner will take an axe to the boundaries and make them look a little more elegant.
Posted by on Mar 14, 2008 @ 11:25 AMMichael
He won’t be able to.
He will be restricted in his terms of reference only to do a bit of tinkering around the edges. He will not be able to make significant changes.
Posted by on Mar 14, 2008 @ 11:36 AMpacman
you really are a classic MOPEr aren’t you?
The Unionist councillors always bum on about keeping the rates down- Punt in particular
The nationalist councillors seem to consider it a profitable exercise of their powers to remove symbols of “themmuns”I don’t have much time for either posture ( though the former is arguably more relevant, given it actually costs us money to employ town managers, community relation officers etc who we managed without perfectly well beforehand). I’ve never heard a nationalist councillor worrying about rates burdens on local businesses nor a Unionist councillor gurning about -say Irish language signs on council offices. Perhaps they do. I merely observe they are all equally poor at meeting the needs of all.
Limavady wans
Do you really want to be a suburb of our Whine City Central? I almost feel sorry for Strabane! Coleraine’s depressingly dull councillors won’t be able to dominate if Ballymoney Limavady and Moyle have thebrains to gang up on them. The Mid Ulster councils can enjoy their own wee snakepit. Ballymena can pretend to be the city of seven towers, even though it’s..er, not a city and hasn’t seven towers. Omagh and Fermanagh have their own time zone anyway. The northern/western regions seems to have been sorted fairly well. Not so sure about the rest, but not my area.Posted by on Mar 14, 2008 @ 12:36 PMSo pointing out that traditional unionism’s view of their world is feckless nationalists versus hardworking unionists is mopery?
There you go - I obviously stand corrected.
Posted by on Mar 14, 2008 @ 02:05 PMCouncil Uni Nat Oth total
Derr / Straban 11 34 1 46 N
Ferm / Omagh 15 27 2 44 N
BCLM 37 25 6 68 U
Ards / ND 33 1 12 46 U
Aem/Ban/C’von 38 25 2 65 U
Belfast 21 22 7 50 ?
Castlr / Lisb 37 9 7 53 U
Antrim/Newton 29 8 7 44 U
Down, N&M; 12 37 4 53 N
CBL 40 6 10 56 U
CDM 21 33 0 54 NLast times results added up (I know there will be ward size effects but indicative I suggest)
Posted by on Mar 14, 2008 @ 03:48 PMWillowfield,
I’d imagine the Terms of Reference for the Boundary Commissioner would be similar to that which was proposed under the 7 Council model. He/she will not be able to move the entire area of one of the current 26 Councils between one of the proposed new ones but could move anything up to about half.Frankly in my opinion that still leaves a significant opportunity for movement.
Of course Fred Cobain would have Ballyclare as part of Belfast City Council under his “bring all of Newtownabbey into Belfast” idea. There are obvious parts of Castlereagh which any reasonable person would/should bring in under a Boundary Commission. The Belvoir estate is Belfast in anyone’s definition and I don’t see why areas like that wouldn’t move into Belfast quite easily. That would only be one ward of Castlereagh but would correct one area fairly simply.
Posted by on Mar 14, 2008 @ 08:40 PMPresumably the Assembly has to legislate for the approximate boundaries or groupings before a Commissioner draws the exact lines. Isn’t there supposed to be consultation on the specific model put forward?
The proposed 11 are a mix of the sensible (N Down/Ards, Lim/Cole/Bmoney/Moyle), the slightly out (why not amend to Ant/Bmena and N’abbey/Carrick/Larne?) and the totally irrational (Newry/Down). Belfast boundaries will be a dogfight: Dunmurry and much of Castlereagh should logically be in, but the M2 makes a clear boundary to the north. Lisburn/Castlereagh is as stupid (all the suburbs from northwest to east) as the old ‘inner east’ (going from north to south east).
Shouldn’t Fermanagh be on its own, same as London/derry City, with Omagh and Strabane having more in common together?
Posted by on Mar 15, 2008 @ 12:22 AMso we go from an equal split to 6 - 4 unionist victory and belfast, as before, even stephens.
sinn fein playing a blinder.... people of armagh and moyle now coming under unionist jackboot. and no regions large enough to really make a difference to east/west split in north…
plsn b never looked more attractive....
Posted by on Mar 15, 2008 @ 10:10 AMPlan B was Direct Rule.
Posted by on Mar 15, 2008 @ 10:32 AMyes and we would have 1: ila 2: 7 supercouncils and therefore real power in nationalists hands 3: nationalists would not be ruled by unionists and 4: developing east west links over the heads of the unionists.
sounds like a good deal to me....
Posted by on Mar 15, 2008 @ 11:03 AMWhen I arrived at this party, I made three predictions (see post 24 on page 2):
1. we would have endless argy-bargy about precise delineations of Council areas;
2. then those Councils would expend time and energy on deciding what to be named; but
3. such distraction therapy would make sure nobody outside the corridors of power bothered about the powers and responsibilities (i.e. the real democratic clout) the Councils could gain for themselves.From most of what’s said here so far, I see no reason to change my assumptions.
Believe me, there’s nothing to wind up central Government, anywhere, better than an effective local democratic presence. A further corollary to that is all local councils, despite political persuasions, have a common interest in combining against the Centre: that’s why associations of councillors and other collaborations are significant.
Posted by on Mar 15, 2008 @ 11:13 AM“yes and we would have 1: ila 2: 7 supercouncils and therefore real power in nationalists hands 3: nationalists would not be ruled by unionists and 4: developing east west links over the heads of the unionists.
sounds like a good deal to me....”
and there we have the problem in a nutshell
It’s not about providing better housing and recycling for some nationalists, but a way to dissolve the border.Here’s a wee problem for you: all councils have lots of Unionists and lots of nationalists in their boundaries. Most have generally worked fairly well at accommodating minorities- the recent attempts by the Dungiven mafia to rub Limavady Unionist noses in it by flexing their muscles is a classic case of self-defeatism in an area which up to then had decades of better than average cross-community relations throughout the dark years. So shorts all round in the Kevin Lynch hurling club and slap it up the Huns.That’s the way to unite Ireland!
The size and shape of the new councils allows for such substantial minorities that it will be a very foolish party that embarks on that type of exercise. Nobody’s “ruled by” anyone in councils-they don’t control the police and army; they control the binmen
Posted by on Mar 15, 2008 @ 11:54 AMdarth,
will you and your mates be erecting the ‘Limavady Says No’ banner above Limavady library/council building again, now that your lot are back in charge of the fenians (mafia!) in Limavady/Dungiven.
That’ll really encourage greater community relations.
The new council boundaries worry some nationalists because most people realize that when 50%+1 comes, unionists will revert to form and demand repartion (democracy not being their strong point). The council boundaries could well be used for such purposes.
Posted by on Mar 16, 2008 @ 09:30 PMThe new council boundaries worry some nationalists because most people realize that when 50%+1 comes, unionists will revert to form and demand repartition (democracy not being their strong point). The council boundaries could well be used for such purposes.
More or less inevitable, isn’t it? Once NI is revealed to be majority Nationalist, Unionists will suddenly realise that there is no such place. Looking at the local government areas, they will see that the Nationalist majority resides solely in Fermanagh, Tyrone, Derry City, and Newry/Down.
SF have badly slipped up here.
Posted by on Mar 16, 2008 @ 10:58 PMThe councils could have a bearing in the outworkings of a “2021 scenario”.
The 2021 scenario, the secnarion in which the era of nationalist demographic increase is seen to come to an end short of the critical mass needed for a UI, could lead to repartition. As nationalists in the six counties think again about the idea of a fair repartition.
Posted by on Mar 16, 2008 @ 11:18 PMThat Down-Newry one is a bit odd to say the least.
Best to place eastern Banbridge in with Downpatrick and Newry City, and west Mourne in with Craigavon/Armagh.
Then you could call one ‘Armagh’ and the other ‘South Down’.
While we’re at it, we could merge Strabane, Cookstown, Omagh and Dungannon and call that ‘Tyrone’, merge Ballymena, Ballymoney and Moyle and call that ‘North Antrim’… you get where I’m going with this, don’t you...?
Posted by on Mar 16, 2008 @ 11:38 PMNiall
Spot on. Excellent job.
Posted by on Mar 16, 2008 @ 11:39 PMThe 2021 scenario, the secnarion (?) in which the era of nationalist demographic increase is seen to come to an end short of the critical mass needed for a UI
Another disaster caused by this cock-up is the reappearance of Declan’s single transferable post. Well, Declan, since last you posted we have made some advance on the question. Your assumption that the nationalist demographic increase is slowing down is, I think, almost certainly based on the religious figures in the census. You assume, probably correctly but technically without proof, that Catholic = Nationalist and Protestant = Unionist, such exceptions as there are on each side cancelling each other out. Now it is true that Catholics are not reproducing as fast as they used to:-
[Google NISRA s306 and choose the HTML option]
However, if you look more closely you will find that Protestants are dying off a lot faster than Catholics are, because there are a lot more elderly Protestants than there are elderly Catholics. Indeed, for the next 50 years the Protestant electorate will be decreasing by a significant number- 15,000 to 20,000 per decade- more than Catholics, due to the loss of its elderly members. So the idea that the Catholic percentage of the electorate will stop increasing in 2021 is false, because the Protestant percentage will continue to decrease.
Looking at the matter from a party point of view, rather than a religious one, I note that there are 18 constituencies and in my lifetime the number of these held by Nationalists has increased from 1 to 2 to 3 to 4 to 5 to 6 to 7 to 8. The next numbers in this series are, in my opinion, 9 and 10, by which time Unionist MPs will be in a minority.
Equally, I cannot for the life of me see how Unionists can expect to win 2 seats out of 3 in the 2014 European Parliament elections, so worrying about 2021 is unnecessary.
Posted by on Mar 17, 2008 @ 12:22 AMAny truth to the rumours that the Derry / Strabane proposal will also incorporate parts of eastern Donegal as a pilot for future east-west co-operation ?? :o)
Posted by on Mar 17, 2008 @ 08:22 AMWhat a mess - what have Ballymena, Larne and Carrick got in common - no decent road connections, two are coastal Ballymena is inland, Carrick has always gravitated towards Newtownabbey and Ballymena to Antrim or Ballymoney where they all have good connections.
Councillors will have to travel long distances over inferior roads when they already have too little time, they should be able to concentrate on their electorates - who will want the job in this case.
Posted by on Mar 17, 2008 @ 09:15 AMGerrymandering is legal in New York! Many they should bring it back for here .... *ducks*
Posted by on Mar 17, 2008 @ 09:43 AM‘What a mess - what have Ballymena, Larne and Carrick got in common ‘
Answer - Sectarian cesspits and dodgy accents.
Posted by on Mar 17, 2008 @ 10:39 AM“what have Ballymena, Larne and Carrick got in common”
Tha hamely tangue a’ tha Ulster Scoots leid, a’ll be luckin foyered till hearin gud spakins in tha leid whin this thang gits gaen.
Posted by on Mar 17, 2008 @ 11:50 AMWhat a mess - what have Ballymena, Larne and Carrick got in common
Absolutely nothing.
Carrick and Newtownabbey are suburbs of Belfast as is Castlereagh and much of N Down. The natural boundary to Belfast are the hills around Belfast Lough, but that would be like identifying a unit that should be coordinated. In all this nonsense we forget that what really matters is that the councils function efficiently and deliver good services. We also need to consider that the council areas should to be able to plan and coordinate to promote investment. We continue the carve up of Belfast at our peril.
Someone remind me why we are reorganising the councils, what the purpose is and what real powers they are going to get? Is it really about Nationalist and Unionists head counts? Gerrymandering condoned by Unionists, Republicans and Nationalists?
Posted by on Mar 17, 2008 @ 12:12 PM
