|
|
Post by justin124 on Sept 8, 2021 19:15:48 GMT
If you insist on calling the town and/or constituency “Llanelly” over “Llanelli” you’ll untie Welsh and English speakers alike in thinking you’re a little bit special. 😛 Why so? When I travelled in that area in the mid-1970s , the station name was 'Llanelly' . That is also how it appeared on road maps. |
|
|
|
Post by islington on Sept 8, 2021 19:16:45 GMT
I'm not at all a North Wales person so this post may be total nonsense, but would the map below meet any of the concerns that have been expressed in this area? If nothing else, it's certainly more respectful of LA boundaries than the BCW scheme.
The starting-point is the realization that the former counties of Merioneth and Montgomery, taken together, and with a few adjustments at the margins to fit current boundaries, are the right size for a seat. But there may be some very good reason why these two areas should never, ever, not until hell freezes over and probably not even then, be yoked together; I would not go nearly so far but there would certainly be representations that do! Yes, but why? What is it about these two former counties, which look fairly similar when seen from Islington, that makes them so utterly incompatible that no one ever suggests this particular pairing?
(I'm asking this in all humility, acknowledging that I'm an under-informed Englishman and I'm blundering into areas whereof I wot not.)
|
|
|
|
Post by islington on Sept 8, 2021 19:20:04 GMT
If you insist on calling the town and/or constituency “Llanelly” over “Llanelli” you’ll untie Welsh and English speakers alike in thinking you’re a little bit special. 😛 Why so? When I travelled in that area in the mid-1970s , the station name was 'Llanelly' . That is also how it appeared on road maps. Presumably also Portmadoc, Nevin, Carnarvon, Conway, Dolgelly, Cardigan and probably various others I can't call to mind at the moment. |
|
|
|
Post by justin124 on Sept 8, 2021 19:22:22 GMT
Why so? When I travelled in that area in the mid-1970s , the station name was 'Llanelly' . That is also how it appeared on road maps. Presumably also Portmadoc, Nevin, Carnarvon, Conway, Dolgelly, Cardigan and probably various others I can't call to mind at the moment. Indeed so - I am not a sheep and refuse to change the name because others choose to do so. I also still refer to Peking - rather than Beijing. |
|
|
|
Post by islington on Sept 8, 2021 19:25:16 GMT
Presumably also Portmadoc, Nevin, Carnarvon, Conway, Dolgelly, Cardigan and probably various others I can't call to mind at the moment. Indeed so - I am not a sheep and refuse to change the name because others choose to do so. I also still refer to Peking - rather than Beijing. Why stop there? It was Pekin before that.
We're wandering off-topic here (which of course is unprecedented on this site). |
|
Georg Ebner
Non-Aligned
Roman romantic reactionary Catholic
Posts: 9,846 
|
Post by Georg Ebner on Sept 8, 2021 19:31:56 GMT
My only real objection to the Aberconwy seat is the inclusion of Rhos-on-Sea and Mochdre, not that I'm opposed to having them in the seat per se, but as others have said those two divisions really would be better off going wherever Colwyn Bay goes. Additionally, I feel that Pentir division would probably be better off being kept with Bangor, in whatever seat that settlement winds up in. I'm not at all a North Wales person so this post may be total nonsense, but would the map below meet any of the concerns that have been expressed in this area? If nothing else, it's certainly more respectful of LA boundaries than the BCW scheme.
The starting-point is the realization that the former counties of Merioneth and Montgomery, taken together, and with a few adjustments at the margins to fit current boundaries, are the right size for a seat. But there may be some very good reason why these two areas should never, ever, not until hell freezes over and probably not even then, be yoked together; in which case the whole thing falls to the ground.
But it must be said that with the M&M seat in place, everything else seemed to fit together quite well.
 Caernarvon - 76022. Conwy - 74719. Denbigh - 74078. North Flintshire - 71112. South Flintshire - 73450.
Merioneth and Montgomery - 76128. (Maybe some kind person would help me with the Welsh.) Wrexham - 70919.
Your map looks convincing. But its hidden problem is, that You too must expand B&R (or Llanelli) into Glamorgan. |
|
|
|
Post by LDCaerdydd on Sept 8, 2021 19:33:01 GMT
Presumably you’ve only just stopped paying the milkman in pounds shillings and pence 😉 The vast vast majority of people won’t recognise the word today. No one is asking you to change overnight but it’s been almost half a century now. |
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Sept 8, 2021 19:46:02 GMT
Indeed so - I am not a sheep and refuse to change the name because others choose to do so. I also still refer to Peking - rather than Beijing. Why stop there? It was Pekin before that.
We're wandering off-topic here (which of course is unprecedented on this site). Ji. The oldest attested form is Ji. |
|
|
|
Post by hullenedge on Sept 8, 2021 19:49:59 GMT
Harry's quick overall totals:-
He's also recalculated assuming the Brexit vote is redistributed.
|
|
|
|
Post by islington on Sept 8, 2021 19:52:39 GMT
I'm not at all a North Wales person so this post may be total nonsense, but would the map below meet any of the concerns that have been expressed in this area? If nothing else, it's certainly more respectful of LA boundaries than the BCW scheme.
The starting-point is the realization that the former counties of Merioneth and Montgomery, taken together, and with a few adjustments at the margins to fit current boundaries, are the right size for a seat. But there may be some very good reason why these two areas should never, ever, not until hell freezes over and probably not even then, be yoked together; in which case the whole thing falls to the ground.
But it must be said that with the M&M seat in place, everything else seemed to fit together quite well.
Caernarvon - 76022. Conwy - 74719. Denbigh - 74078. North Flintshire - 71112. South Flintshire - 73450.
Merioneth and Montgomery - 76128. (Maybe some kind person would help me with the Welsh.) Wrexham - 70919.
Your map looks convincing. But its hidden problem is, that You too must expand B&R (or Llanelli) into Glamorgan. I'd reluctantly go along with the BCW's version of B&R, including the Swansea Valley area. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2021 19:54:12 GMT
I'm going to call it "Rheol Gwlad", the law that says any thread with tangential connections to Wales will always descend into a debate about the legitimacy of the language.
|
|
Harry Hayfield
Green
Cavalier Gentleman (as in 17th century Cavalier)
Posts: 2,922
|
Post by Harry Hayfield on Sept 8, 2021 19:55:07 GMT
Harry's quick overall totals:- He's also recalculated assuming the Brexit vote is redistributed. Ah, I was going to post a constituency summary here, but would still do so if you wanted? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2021 19:56:48 GMT
Harry's quick overall totals:- He's also recalculated assuming the Brexit vote is redistributed. Ah, I was going to post a constituency summary here, but would still do so if you wanted? Please. |
|
|
|
Post by justin124 on Sept 8, 2021 19:57:33 GMT
Presumably you’ve only just stopped paying the milkman in pounds shillings and pence 😉 The vast vast majority of people won’t recognise the word today. No one is asking you to change overnight but it’s been almost half a century now. I have relatives in the area and have never encountered problems when I address mail using Llanelly. |
|
|
|
Post by gwynthegriff on Sept 8, 2021 20:08:59 GMT
Presumably also Portmadoc, Nevin, Carnarvon, Conway, Dolgelly, Cardigan and probably various others I can't call to mind at the moment. Indeed so - I am not a sheep and refuse to change the name because others choose to do so. I also still refer to Peking - rather than Beijing. I rather thought you might . . . |
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Sept 8, 2021 20:09:42 GMT
Indeed so - I am not a sheep and refuse to change the name because others choose to do so. I also still refer to Peking - rather than Beijing. I rather thought you might . . . Is Peking forming part of the Welsh boundary review? |
|
|
|
Post by gwynthegriff on Sept 8, 2021 20:12:45 GMT
I'm going to call it "Rheol Gwlad", the law that says any thread with tangential connections to Wales will always descend into a debate about the legitimacy of the language. There was somebody on the railuk forum claiming that Conwy is a request stop because people can't find Conway on the National Rail website (because it's been Conwy for over 40 years) and therefore choose to go elsewhere. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2021 20:16:03 GMT
I'm going to call it "Rheol Gwlad", the law that says any thread with tangential connections to Wales will always descend into a debate about the legitimacy of the language. There was somebody on the railuk forum claiming that Conwy is a request stop because people can't find Conway on the National Rail website (because it's been Conwy for over 40 years) and therefore choose to go elsewhere. |
|
|
|
Post by hullenedge on Sept 8, 2021 20:19:54 GMT
Harry's quick overall totals:- He's also recalculated assuming the Brexit vote is redistributed. Ah, I was going to post a constituency summary here, but would still do so if you wanted? Yes please. Always grateful for notionals. I now understand your point re Ceredigion. There will be other seats in England that flip if the Brexit vote is redistributed. |
|
|
|
Post by AdminSTB on Sept 8, 2021 20:43:35 GMT
My only real objection to the Aberconwy seat is the inclusion of Rhos-on-Sea and Mochdre, not that I'm opposed to having them in the seat per se, but as others have said those two divisions really would be better off going wherever Colwyn Bay goes. Additionally, I feel that Pentir division would probably be better off being kept with Bangor, in whatever seat that settlement winds up in. I'm not at all a North Wales person so this post may be total nonsense, but would the map below meet any of the concerns that have been expressed in this area? If nothing else, it's certainly more respectful of LA boundaries than the BCW scheme. The starting-point is the realization that the former counties of Merioneth and Montgomery, taken together, and with a few adjustments at the margins to fit current boundaries, are the right size for a seat. But there may be some very good reason why these two areas should never, ever, not until hell freezes over and probably not even then, be yoked together; in which case the whole thing falls to the ground. But it must be said that with the M&M seat in place, everything else seemed to fit together quite well. First, as a general remark I think allowing a few "out-of-quota" seats (and expanding the quota from 5% to 10%, assuming it that's not the case already) in exchange for sensible boundaries would be ok, provided it's not taking the piss of course (so no revival of Meirionnydd Nant Conwy, but letting the likes of Ceredigion, Brecon & Radnor, and Montgomery remain as they are would be kosher). Having such an easement in place might help get around some of the issues facing the more really rural areas. As for your North Wales proposals, I won't comment on the Meirionnydd-Montgomery seat, but otherwise I don't see much too much issue with the boundaries. The only prominent critique that comes to mind for me right now would be that the divisions of Caerhun and Llansanffraid, despite their positions in the Conwy valley, would probably be better off in the coastal Conwy seat; the latter is definitely in the orbit of Conwy/Llandudno/Colwyn Bay, and I'd argue the former is very much in Conwy's orbit too. |
|
