Many thanks for this. We'll be looking at the impact for individual seats later in the day
-
-
If
@NUL_Labour had agreed to a 45 member council rather than 44 we wouldn't have this problem.2 replies . 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mioborgy @PoliticalNUL and
Libs wanted 15 triple member wards which would have obliterated local community connections to create horrid artificial wards.
2 replies . 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @gareth_snell @PoliticalNUL and
And
@NUL_Labour wanted to gerrymander a whole array of single member wards in their favour. (1)2 replies . 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mioborgy @PoliticalNUL and
Of course, Labour were the only party to propose keeping Keele as a discrete ward. Libs and Tories wanted to abolish it.
1 reply . 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @gareth_snell @PoliticalNUL and
Re-read the final ld proposal. We supported a single mbr ward in Keele under condition that electoral nmbrs could be met, which they were.
2 replies . 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mioborgy @PoliticalNUL and
Sorry James - your party clearly recommended Thistleberry and Keele.pic.twitter.com/liOozJ3mfU
1 reply . 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @gareth_snell @PoliticalNUL and
The final submission had notes on Keele, which included conditions for Keele to be single member.
1 reply . 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mioborgy @PoliticalNUL and
I'm sorry James - but that isn't what your party submitted to the LGBCE
1 reply . 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @gareth_snell @PoliticalNUL and
See attached, we supported single member ward for Keele, under conditions. Hope you read parliamentary documents in more detail!pic.twitter.com/ZYMqD5wy6K
1 reply . 0 retweets 0 likes
That's not a submission James. It's a single sentance footnote. Nice try though...
-
-
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.