Originally Posted by Tealeaf (Post 933469)

That is something of an understatement. It's going to be a disaster - especially for Church & Ossy. We are going to be the smallest element of a multi-borough constituency whose MP will no doubt have to pander to the Darwen or Rossendale pressure. We'll be sidelined from the start.

Originally Posted by BERNADETTE (Post 933449)

Oi missus, I was brought up over yon:p Careful how you diss the area:alright:

Originally Posted by Eric (Post 933590)

And which category do you belong in, hon: bears, moose, or assorted wild life:confused:;):D

Originally Posted by Bee (Post 933605)

Arr.............We'd hate to be in B'burn.

Originally Posted by JCB (Post 933654)

At least we in Spring Hill will raise the tone of Darwen and Haslingden .

Originally Posted by DaveinGermany (Post 933593)

It's got to be the Bear option surely. :)

Originally Posted by jaysay (Post 933657)

Ya could at least have used some big smileys after that JCB:D:D

Originally Posted by jaysay (Post 914168)

My Daughter brought me a copy of the Obs this morning and I was interested in the article regarding proposed Parliamentary Boundary Changes. I appears that they want to bung Rishton, Clayton and Great Harwood, in with Blackburn:rolleyes: and the Rest of Hyndburn in with Rossendale. Well to my way of thinking if they are going to do all this messing about again and the confusion it brings to the electorate(and it does) why on earth don't they go the whole hog and sort the situation out once and for all.

I remember back in the 90s the was a huge debate about whether to keep a two tier system local and county or go for Unitary Authorities, in the end we stuck with the two tier system while the likes of Blackburn and Blackpool went Unitary, to me that was a big mistake.

So if we are going to tinker about again why not sort it out properly and be done with it, there is already so many stupid boundary changes, like two Haslingden Wards being in the Hyndburn Constituency for General elections but Rossendale for Local and County and of Course Darwen are with Rossendale for Parliamentary and Blackburn for council its a nonsense, even in Hyndburn a section of Immanuel ward is in spring hill for country but reverts to Hyndburn for council its barmy.

If we have Parliamentary constituencies which mirror Unitary councils and no county council, the general public would be aware with whats happening and it sure as hell would me that every penny of council tax payers money raised in the borough/constituency would be guaranteed to be spent in that areas, whereas only 19 pence in every pound is guaranteed at the moment

Originally Posted by duggie (Post 933720)

Looks like Clayton will be part of Dingle land, oh no, I ill need to grow another finger

Originally Posted by cashman (Post 933723)

I'm considering topping meself, owt bar a Dingle.:eek::eek:

Originally Posted by garinda (Post 933665)

I think Accrington will come off worse, under the proposed boundary changes.

A town divided.

It'll be like Berlin, after the Wall went up.

People will be jumping out of back bedroom windows, trying to make it to the 'otherside'.

Originally Posted by JCB (Post 933664)

Graham Jones says that Spring Hill is an historic part of Accrington , but is a completely different make-up to the rest of the constituency . :eek::confused::D

Originally Posted by JCB (Post 933664)

Graham Jones says that Spring Hill is an historic part of Accrington , but is a completely different make-up to the rest of the constituency . :eek::confused::D

Originally Posted by duggie (Post 933720)

Looks like Clayton will be part of Dingle land, oh no, I ill need to grow another finger

Originally Posted by jaysay (Post 933769)

Well he's certainly right there, its quite out of context with the rest of Hyndburn, more like Outer Mongolia:D:D:D

Originally Posted by JCB (Post 933781)

True . Spring Hill was founded by Genghis Khan ;)

Originally Posted by JCB (Post 933664)

Graham Jones says that Spring Hill is an historic part of Accrington , but is a completely different make-up to the rest of the constituency . :eek::confused::D

Originally Posted by JCB (Post 933781)

True . Spring Hill was founded by Genghis Khan ;)

Originally Posted by DaveinGermany (Post 933844)

That some kind of Curry house ??? :D

Originally Posted by g jones (Post 933818)

I have been misquoted. I said Spring Hill is a historic part of Accrington and has no connection with significant parts of the constituency and places like Tockholes.

Originally Posted by JCB (Post 933857)

I was just quoting the Lancashire Telegraph , one of reliable local rags .:rolleyes:

Originally Posted by JCB (Post 933856)

And this is a high class one at the top of our street . Yes it's really in Spring Hill . It's a banqueting hall called Al-Hamza . :D

Originally Posted by Eric (Post 933877)

Looks like a high class whorehouse:rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Gordon Booth (Post 933883)

You must frequent some interesting whorehouses, Eric.It looks more like an old chapel to me but perhaps I've led too sheltered a life! Must get out more.
Whichever it is, John Wesley must be turning in his grave.

Originally Posted by JCB (Post 933892)

Yes it was once Spring Hill Methodist Chapel .

The new chapel which they built next door to it is now a mosque .

Originally Posted by JCB (Post 933892)

Yes it was once Spring Hill Methodist Chapel .

The new chapel which they built next door to it is now a mosque .

Originally Posted by cashman (Post 933894)

think the friday night spring hill dance was yon also, yeh went in a side entrance? :)

Originally Posted by JCB (Post 933909)

Yes they had dances there in the 60s .

Originally Posted by cashman (Post 933894)

think the friday night spring hill dance was yon also, yeh went in a side entrance? :)

Originally Posted by cashman (Post 933912)

cheers JCB, happy days.:);)

Originally Posted by garinda (Post 934802)

Bye-bye Hyndburn.

Farewell Burnley South and Accrington.

We in Arrod want to be off to the Ribble Valley.

Great Harwood petition bid over new boundaries (From Lancashire Telegraph)

They could end up in Blackburn, if they cause too much of a fuss.

:rolleyes:

Originally Posted by jaysay (Post 934804)

To be honest the more I read about this the more like a dogs breakfast it becomes, its a flaming joke, conceived by people sitting in an office in London without a clue about the areas and people they are messing about, people want encouraging to take an interest in politics, it want help if they don't know whether they're on their arse or their elbow:mad::mad:

Originally Posted by garinda (Post 934806)

I agree.

We should all be up in arms.

We need a M.P. who basically covers the same political area as the local council borough we live in.

If we don't, we'll have less clout, and will lose out.

Originally Posted by jaysay (Post 934814)

Its always worked before so why change it, it was bad enough when two wards from Haslingden were tacked on to Hyndburn, especially for those living in Hassy, to me there's no rhyme nor reason for it, its just keeping some divvies in London in a well paid job

Originally Posted by cashman (Post 934840)

have just signed up, this should never be allowed to happen.:(

Originally Posted by jaysay (Post 934924)

I have signed up, it might be nice if all political sides in Hyndburn Labour Tory and independent showed a united front for once on this issue, because it will affect all sides if these clowns are allowed to ride rough shod over our wishes, so come for once stop the infighting and stand as one against this stupidity

Originally Posted by garinda (Post 934927)

Thanks Jaysay.

People across the political spectrum have joined the campaign group.

For once there's unity on this issue.

With everyone knowing we'll suffer as an area without our own M.P.

Originally Posted by jaysay (Post 934931)

I think it could also be a good idea if people like Graham and Peter and other councillors be seen to be together on this, I'm sure the Obs would be only too please to have a front page spread one Friday With a group photo to back up the story

Originally Posted by jaysay (Post 934931)

I think it could also be a good idea if people like Graham and Peter and other councillors be seen to be together on this, I'm sure the Obs would be only too please to have a front page spread one Friday With a group photo to back up the story

Originally Posted by garinda (Post 934817)

I know some people think that they don't always do much good, but just checked and saw there wasn't a Facebook campaign for Hyndburn to remain a political constituency, so have just started one.

If you feel we should have a M.P. whose area more or less covers that of out borough council, and that our political power will diminish if we disappear, split between Burnley and Darwen/Haslingden, please support this campaign by 'liking' it.

It's certainly something the press will quote, if enough of us are against it.

This is nothing at all to do with political allegiance.

It's about our area not being seen as important, and the lack of power the proposed change would bring.

If you want to be represented by a M.P. for Hyndburn, please support the campaign that we remain a constituency down in Westminster.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/250832224959203/

Originally Posted by garinda (Post 934938)

Just emailed the Observer.

Informing them of the Facebook campaign group, which has now nearly 150 members, and has united people across the political spectrum in their opposition to the proposal.

Originally Posted by jaysay (Post 934944)

Young Andrew has just telephoned me regarding this, he made a very valid point, its no good opposing the Commission's proposals if a viable alternative is in place

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington (Post 934942)

I hate this burgeoning trend of everyone using facebook.......advertisers do it for their competitions(I have complained to the companies about this, it excludes those who are not registered with facebook).......and it is frequently used for petitions now.
I can't access an oportunity to sign this petition as I am not a member of facebook....and do not wish to join just to sign petitions.
I know there are other options to register my disapproval, but surely having signatures in different places dilutes the impact of such means to get attention for the cause.

Originally Posted by garinda (Post 934953)

I know what you're saying, but that's just how it is.

You could,if you wish, just join to add your voice to petition groups.

You needn't do anything else.

No need to have friends/share photos/or tell us what you're having for tea.

:D

I know people who detest Facebook, but who have done this.

You were wary of Firefox, until you tried it.

;):D

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington (Post 934947)

so what you are saying John is, that it really doesn't matter if we share our opinion of the Boundary Comissions findings, they will do as they please anyway?
The consultation is just a way to bambozzle people into thinking they have some influence....no change there then!

Originally Posted by garinda (Post 934951)

The viable alternative is to keep a M.P. for Hyndburn, or at least fight to keep one.

Let other areas get split up, and tagged on to neighbouring constituencies.

I don't personally care what happens elsewhere.

I do care if we are deemed not important enough an area to warrant our own M.P.

Our historical and unique identity will be harmed, as well as the power and political leverage having a M.P. who covers the same area as the borough council, affords us.

Originally Posted by jaysay (Post 934961)

The thing is Rindi constituencies have to be around 75000 electors in size with a 5% leeway, just keeping Hyndburn as it is certainly won't happen, that's the reason to actually come up with alternatives, which of course means affecting other areas, for instance bringing Padiham in with Hyndburn, because we have a natural boundary, but that just one suggestion

Originally Posted by jaysay (Post 934960)

That's what we found last time Margaret, I think as Jen pointed out, whether it will this time only time will tell, but I ain't holding my breath

Originally Posted by jaysay (Post 934961)

The thing is Rindi constituencies have to be around 75000 electors in size with a 5% leeway, just keeping Hyndburn as it is certainly won't happen, that's the reason to actually come up with alternatives, which of course means affecting other areas, for instance bringing Padiham in with Hyndburn, because we have a natural boundary, but that just one suggestion

Originally Posted by garinda (Post 934964)

All you can do is at least fight the proposal, because that's all it is at this stage.

If we do lose a M.P. for Hyndburn, at least you'll know you did what you could to try and prevent this happening.

The Boundary Commission asks for public feedback.

If there's enough of a fuss kicked up in a particular area it 'might' make a difference.

We'll never know if people don't at least try to halt this plan.

Originally Posted by jaysay (Post 934967)

Oh I totally agree Rindi, but with my experience public feed back isn't worth a light if nobody listens and they certainly didn't in 1995

Originally Posted by garinda (Post 934969)

This isn't just the normal tweaking of boundaries, that goes on because of shifting population patterns.

This shake up is one of the biggest changes to happen in parliament for a hundred years, with the number of M.P.'s being reduced from 650 to 600.

It's important we at least fight to retain this area as a constitueny in it's own right.

We'll suffer as an area if our power is divided.

Originally Posted by Retlaw (Post 934982)

Why do we even need 600, most of the decisions are made in Brussels anyway, so we only need 1 to kiss arse & agree.
Retlaw.

Originally Posted by Gayle (Post 934993)

One crazy thing.

The population of Hyndburn is 81,500 ish.
The target for each constituency is 75,000 minus or plus 5% i.e. between 71,250 to 78,500.
If they simply took the two wards of Haslingden off and gave them back to Rossendale, surely we'd be the perfect constituency without much need for change.

Originally Posted by garinda (Post 934953)

I know what you're saying, but that's just how it is.

You could,if you wish, just join to add your voice to petition groups.

You needn't do anything else.

No need to have friends/share photos/or tell us what you're having for tea.

:D

I know people who detest Facebook, but who have done this.

You were wary of Firefox, until you tried it.

;):D

Originally Posted by garinda (Post 934959)

Facebook's no different from Accy Web, just bigger.

It's there to be used, if you want to.

Some just read it.

Some like certain things, history, photo galleries, political stuff, film and TV etc.

Some like debating in various groups, others don't.

It's a fact that it has become the most popular internet media.

It seems odd not to use it, if there's something you do want to add your support to.

Many have joined up using a pseudonym, a well as deciding that they don't want to use it to share any personal information.

Joining need not be any different from signing on to add your supporrt to other online petitions.

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington (Post 935026)

Yes, G I was...but there is a difference.......you need a web browser...no-one actually needs facebook....and I cannot countenance joining a site that I am very wary of(because of the way it is run and some security issues).
I will voice my views on the government site....but it does somewhat dilute the message when all the dissent to a change is in different places.

Originally Posted by garinda (Post 935031)

That's fair enough.

I'm not trying to groom you, and entice you to do something against your will.

:D

For me it just serves a purpose. That being just another and easy way to communicate.

Originally Posted by garinda (Post 935031)

I'm not trying to groom you, and entice you to do something against your will.

:D

Originally Posted by garinda (Post 934969)

This isn't just the normal tweaking of boundaries, that goes on because of shifting population patterns.

This shake up is one of the biggest changes to happen in parliament for a hundred years, with the number of M.P.'s being reduced from 650 to 600.

It's important we at least fight to retain this area as a constitueny in it's own right.

We'll suffer as an area if our power is divided.

Originally Posted by Gordon Booth (Post 935037)

Be careful, Margaret! He would say that,wouldn't he? Before you know it---?
Look at that smile!

Originally Posted by jaysay (Post 935039)

I'm quite aware of that Rindi, but with it each constituency has to have 75000 electorate with a 5% leeway, which means of us to retain the name Hyndburn there has to be additions, what they are proposing is using Hyndburn as the sacrificial lamb and carving it up to add to neighbouring constituencies, we have at all cost got to change that think by putting forward our ideas on how we can retain Hyndburn by adding to the constituency instead of the one being sacrificed

Originally Posted by garinda (Post 935045)

There's all sorts ot tweaking that could be done, which would leave Hyndburn as it's own consituency.

Add Padiham, lose Haslingden.

Anything other than split the area and be tagged on to Burnley, and Darwen.

All I know is that we'll suffer as an area without a dedicated consituency.

Originally Posted by jaysay (Post 935051)

Hurray isn't that what I've been saying, but these proposals have to be put forward with reasons behind them

Originally Posted by garinda (Post 934951)

The viable alternative is to keep a M.P. for Hyndburn, or at least fight to keep one.

Let other areas get split up, and tagged on to neighbouring constituencies.

I don't personally care what happens elsewhere.

I do care if we are deemed not important enough an area to warrant our own M.P.

Our historical and unique identity will be harmed, as well as the power and political leverage having a M.P. who covers the same area as the borough council, affords us.

Originally Posted by andrewb (Post 935069)

We need to go further than telling the Boundary Commission that we have a distinct community which should remain apart of one constituency.

We can suggest which wards we want to add to Hyndburn to make it within 5% of 75,000 electors. By doing that though we have to take in wards from other proposed constituencies which has a knock on effect across the region.

I think we need to go even further and draw up alternative plans for not just our area but the surrounding areas so that it all fits numbers wise. I do think we stand a better chance if we do this rather than just telling the Commission what we want and then leaving it up to them to redistribute everything, as obviously people from other areas may then object to the way they do it.

I think it's important to not start getting political about it either. The Commission are independent; the re-drawing happens every so often to make things fairer and this time it's also partly a result of the expenses scandal.

In my opinion it's crucial that the local parties work together on this, along with their colleagues from elsewhere in the region. If we can get all parties to push in the same direction it will be a far more powerful argument.

Originally Posted by andrewb (Post 935069)

In my opinion it's crucial that the local parties work together on this, along with their colleagues from elsewhere in the region. If we can get all parties to push in the same direction it will be a far more powerful argument.

Originally Posted by Gayle (Post 934993)

One crazy thing.

The population of Hyndburn is 81,500 ish.
The target for each constituency is 75,000 minus or plus 5% i.e. between 71,250 to 78,500.
If they simply took the two wards of Haslingden off and gave them back to Rossendale, surely we'd be the perfect constituency without much need for change.

Originally Posted by garinda (Post 935077)

The only people who seem not to be pulling together, are councillors in Great Harwood.

They seem to have accepted Hyndburn as a consituency will disappear, and are trying to push themselves off to the Ribble Valley.

Great Harwood petition bid over new boundaries (From Lancashire Telegraph)

Other than that, across the political spectrum, most people are against the plan to split us, and tag us on to neighboring constituencies.

Originally Posted by Retlaw (Post 935084)

It may well be 81,000 ish, but they only count the voters, not the whole.
Retlaw.

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington (Post 935032)

Oh G...that is funny. I don't think anyone would get me to do something against my will(and I am pretty sure you know I am strong willed and have a mind of my own).......I'm a monkey...not a sheep:D

Originally Posted by Retlaw (Post 935162)

Margaret, there are events that can be created, where even your strong will could be overcome.
Retlaw.

Originally Posted by shillelagh (Post 935167)

what you need to do is to plan it out ... exactly what you want ... you cant go into the consultations and say we want hyndburn to stay as it is .. you have to be able to say why hyndburn should stay as it is .. and this is what should happen ... and plan out all the other constituencies .. with all the numbers etc .. i found that out when i went ... oh and they will question you .. why you think such and such a ward should go there .. be prepared ...

when i went last time they had 3 'judges' from the boundary commission, solicitors from all over the place who asked questions as well ... so be prepared .. for any questions that will be fired at you ....

Originally Posted by shillelagh (Post 935313)

jaysay ... last time when i went .. we had hyndburn labour party on one side and haslingden labour party on the other .... bernard still has nightmares i think from the arguments we had ....:p:p:p

Originally Posted by Ken Moss (Post 935752)

Poor Belthorn already has three MPs, perhaps we should ask for their views? Even those who have little interest in politics can see that it is Conservative gerrymandering to give them a political advantage and that the Liberal Democrats are rather foolishly going along with it.

My opinion hasn't changed, it's a ghastly idea which I feel pretty certain will be pushed through regardless of any protests but I haven't spoken to one single person who is in favour.

Mind you, I haven't spoken to Cllr Britcliffe on this subject yet and we never seem to agree.....

Originally Posted by andrewb (Post 935753)

Please don't start the point scoring. Redrawing by the independent Boundary Commission happens every now and then to account for population changes. It's not gerrymandering, and saying it is does not help Hyndburn.

Originally Posted by Ken Moss (Post 935754)

Conservative gerrymandering and a textbook exercise in how to completely confuse the electorate.

Originally Posted by Gayle (Post 935755)

By continually calling it that you are actually informing half of the population that it is a good thing because they will benefit from it. I doubt that is your intention.

There are 101 reasons why this should not go ahead which are regardless of party politics. But, but constantly pointing out that Conservatives will benefit, you are actually giving them a reason to stay quiet.

To stop it going through you need the whole electorate on your side. Concentrate on the real reasons then we can get some solidarity on this one.

Originally Posted by Ken Moss (Post 935757)

You know the real reason as well as I do Gayle and it's deplorable. I'm sure it has gone on it the past under various colours for much the same reason but it doesn't make it any better.

Each borough is proud of its own identity and is keen to retain that but creating new arbitrary boundaries under the pretence of 'fairness' is pathetic and does no favours whatsoever to the public.

As an example, it doesn't help me to be a better councillor when the good working relationship I have built up with Graham Jones will become worthless and I have to liaise with the Darwen MP instead, someone who is unlikely to have the first clue about Rishton.

I now have to face a salvo of question from residents who seem convinced that we are going to become part of Blackburn, despite the fact that we will fall under the Darwen with Haslingden banner but still be under the wing of Hyndburn Borough Council.

It makes no sense whatsoever, I am vehemently against the idea.

Originally Posted by Ken Moss (Post 935752)

Poor Belthorn already has three MPs, perhaps we should ask for their views? Even those who have little interest in politics can see that it is Conservative gerrymandering to give them a political advantage and that the Liberal Democrats are rather foolishly going along with it.

My opinion hasn't changed, it's a ghastly idea which I feel pretty certain will be pushed through regardless of any protests but I haven't spoken to one single person who is in favour.

Mind you, I haven't spoken to Cllr Britcliffe on this subject yet and we never seem to agree.....

Originally Posted by Gayle (Post 935755)

By continually calling it that you are actually informing half of the population that it is a good thing because they will benefit from it. I doubt that is your intention.

There are 101 reasons why this should not go ahead which are regardless of party politics. But, but constantly pointing out that Conservatives will benefit, you are actually giving them a reason to stay quiet.

To stop it going through you need the whole electorate on your side. Concentrate on the real reasons then we can get some solidarity on this one.

Originally Posted by Gayle (Post 935755)

By continually calling it that you are actually informing half of the population that it is a good thing because they will benefit from it. I doubt that is your intention.

There are 101 reasons why this should not go ahead which are regardless of party politics. But, but constantly pointing out that Conservatives will benefit, you are actually giving them a reason to stay quiet.

To stop it going through you need the whole electorate on your side. Concentrate on the real reasons then we can get some solidarity on this one.