Did parts of Kilkenny really have to come into Tipp? Social media reacts to controversial call!

Political analyst Adrian Kavanagh has asked on social media: Could the Kilkenny county boundary breach have been avoided in the Electoral Commission Boundary Report published on Tuesday? 

He said: "Let's look at the evidence/statistics involved.

Proposed constituency boundary changes in Kilkenny are 'bizarre and illogical'

These boundary changes are solely proposed for elections to the Dáil

"Did Tipperary need the extra territory from Kilkenny to allow for the creation of two three-seat constituencies? I don't think so.

"Six seats being allocated to Tipperary would have resulted in a population per TD level that would have been just 5.4% below the state average

"Carlow-Kilkenny was too large to remain as a 5-seat constituency (population per TD level 12.3% above state average), but the allocation of an extra seat would have left an average population per TD level that would have been 6.4% below the state average. Not wildly out of sync.

"Now...As we can't have six-seat constituencies...yet (need new legislation to allow for this)...Carlow-Kilkenny would have needed to be split into two 3-seat constituencies and parts of Kilkenny would have naturally been in different constituencies.

"My suspicion is, however, that this scenario would have been preferred by folk in Johnstown, Tullaroan and Urlingford, as contrasted to the proposed boundaries, which leaves their areas as an "add on" enclave, just bringing up the numbers for Tipperary North.

"'Ha!' I hear you cry. 'That would require one extra seat being allocated to Tipperary, Carlow and Kilkenny. Where would you source this!' Er. Kildare. Population in county was actually closer to than for eight seats than the nine seats that the county ultimately was allocated"

All make sense?