The non-PTE stations which are the first stations outside the PTE boundary and are purple stations are Adlington (Labour), Entwistle (Labour), Upholland (Labour), Ashley (Conservative) and Poynton (Conservative) so I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.
Firstly to clarify on the statement you have made above: To the best of my knowledge Entwistle falls in the Conservative held Rossendale & Darwen Constituency. I accept that Adlington and Upholland lie in Labour held constituencies though neither has a particularly large majority.
If we look at Northern England as a whole I can count 167 constituencies (107 held by Labour, 11 LibDem, 48 Conservative and 1 [George Galloway] Other) {See note below}
Within the five Metropolitan areas (Merseyside, Greater Manchester, South Yorkshire, West Yorkshire and Tyne & Wear) there are 90 seats (72 held by Labour, 7 LibDem, 10 Conservative and 1 Other).
In non-Metropolitan Northern England there are 77 seats (35 held by Labour, 4 LibDem and 38 Conservative).
The application of the changes to off-peak ticket restrictions from September has been applied to the Metropolitan areas (with a little fuzziness around the edges) and not to the non-Metropolitan areas. No compelling reason has been found for this. Surely if it is to raise revenue then applying it across the board, throughout the North, would either enable the pain to be spread wider and thinner, or for more money to be raised overall. You have suggested that it is because (some) Metropolitan areas subsidise fares, but surely that is the wrong way round: if you give a TOC a subsidy you don't expect to be singled out for extra restrictions!
What I am pointing out is that the extra restrictions apply to areas of the North where the Conservative Party has 11% of the seats and not to those areas where it has 49%. From a Labour perspective that is extra restrictions where it has 80% of the seats and no extra restrictions where it has but 45%. You may wish to make your own deductions I merely point out what appear to be facts.
For what it may matter I am not a supporter of any particular party. I have family connections in Poynton, but cannot believe that the residents of that place are inherently worthy of side-stepping these changes, whilst those visible over the fields in Bramhall or Hazel Grove are deserving victims.
I'd really like to find a logic behind what I can only see as a crude, ill-considered measure. We pay a lot, in general, for good administration of our country and our railways - this feels like an amateur decision that will impact on ordinary people - it will do nothing for the future of our railways or the future of the great cities they serve. That I can smell political partisanship worries me; politicians should apply tests to avoid any such construction and not allow decisions to be made that can be interpreted as I've suggested.
Politics and public administration, should be undertaken for the public good and not for the good of political parties and managerial self-interest. Am I being too idealistic for this glorious modern world?
Note on where the North is:
I've included all constituencies in the following counties: Cheshire, Cleveland, County Durham, Cumbria, Greater Manchester, Humberside, Lancashire, Merseyside, North Yorkshire, Northumberland, South Yorkshire, Tyne & Wear, West Yorkshire. In addition I have included parts of the following counties: Derbyshire (Amber Valley, Bolsover, Chesterfield, Derbyshire Dales, High Peak and NE Derbyshire constituencies), Lincolnshire (Gainsborough and Lincoln constituencies) and Nottinghamshire (Bassetlaw constituency). This reasonably matches the operating area of the Northern TOC.
