|
|
Post by π΄ββ οΈ Neath West π΄ββ οΈ on Sept 12, 2021 14:55:11 GMT
The only not wholly unreasonable solution for 5 constituencies in the former Mid-Glamorgan+Afan-Borough I can see that respects the east-west nature of Llanharan's communication links involves a double boundary crossing with Bridgend:  1 Merthyr Tydfil and Aberdare 74805 Yes 2 Pontypridd 76224 Yes 3 Rhondda 73557 Yes 4 Bridgend 71964 Yes 5 Aberavon and Maesteg 69941 Yes Probably a bit too radical, although it makes good sense on the ground. Really the issue is that Llanharan should be in Bridgend CB.
The main issues I have with this are that the remainder of Neath Port Talbot would be undersized and have knock-on consequences, and there are unnecessary LA crossings.
(I also absolutely fucking detest the fact that Rhondda ward isn't in the Rhondda seat, but that's true on the current boundaries too. A total nonsense.)
This is my plan for that area - with some flexibility for ward swapping between the Bridgend South and Bridgend North and Port Talbot seats.
I suppose Glyncorrwg has excellent connections to the Vale of Neath by mountain bike if you're younger and fitter than me! |
|
Georg Ebner
Non-Aligned
Roman romantic reactionary Catholic
Posts: 9,854 
|
Post by Georg Ebner on Sept 12, 2021 16:11:01 GMT
what leaves Cardiff 3.44 plus VoG 1.36 = 4.80. Taking away ~0.20 from Bridgend (admittingly no easy task) and SwanseaValley's 0.25 from NPT (for B&R) would result in 4.95 for the west of Glamorgan - perfect! Coychurch and Pencoed would look a little odd, but not actually be too silly. But then you'd probably end up with Cardiff South and Penarth needing to take a Barry ward. Yes, that's true - Barry (or Neath) could not be handled gloriously:  |
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Sept 12, 2021 18:08:49 GMT
The main issues I have with this are that the remainder of Neath Port Talbot would be undersized and have knock-on consequences, and there are unnecessary LA crossings.
(I also absolutely fucking detest the fact that Rhondda ward isn't in the Rhondda seat, but that's true on the current boundaries too. A total nonsense.)
This is my plan for that area - with some flexibility for ward swapping between the Bridgend South and Bridgend North and Port Talbot seats.
I suppose Glyncorrwg has excellent connections to the Vale of Neath by mountain bike if you're younger and fitter than me! i probably am but there's no gears on my racing bicycle so... |
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Sept 12, 2021 20:34:26 GMT
Coychurch and Pencoed would look a little odd, but not actually be too silly. But then you'd probably end up with Cardiff South and Penarth needing to take a Barry ward. Yes, that's true - Barry (or Neath) could not be handled gloriously: "Newham" |
|
|
|
Post by islington on Sept 13, 2021 10:03:45 GMT
The current Aberavon seat (less the Coedffranc wards), plus the whole of Bridgend UA, sums to 151180. This is good on the numbers for two seats (as in the BCW plan) and this arrangement also helps with dividing the areas east and west into more sensible seats than those proposed by the BCW. But there seems to be no wholly satisfactory way of dividing the area into two. The BCW scheme, with Aberavon extending along the coast to include Porthcawl, looks good at first sight; but on closer examination, it splits the town of Bridgend. A few ward swaps can mitigate this, but the effect is only to lessen the severity of the split: you still end up with the Bryntirion area of Bridgend in the wrong seat. The alternative is to keep Porthcawl in a seat with the whole of Bridgend town, but then the problem is that the valleys in the north of Bridgend UA are in a seat with Aberavon, from which they are relatively isolated.
So I'm looking at this as a 'least worst' compromise arrangement, with Ogmore Vale in the Bridgend seat but the other two valleys in Aberavon together with, crucially, the Tondu/Brynmenyn area which appears to be a local transit hub for both road and rail. To balance the numbers this means separating Pyle from Cornelly, which I agree is not ideal.
Aberavon - 74906; Bridgend - 76274.
Thoughts?
 |
|
|
|
Post by π΄ββ οΈ Neath West π΄ββ οΈ on Sept 13, 2021 16:16:15 GMT
The current Aberavon seat (less the Coedffranc wards), plus the whole of Bridgend UA, sums to 151180. This is good on the numbers for two seats (as in the BCW plan) and this arrangement also helps with dividing the areas east and west into more sensible seats than those proposed by the BCW. But there seems to be no wholly satisfactory way of dividing the area into two. The BCW scheme, with Aberavon extending along the coast to include Porthcawl, looks good at first sight; but on closer examination, it splits the town of Bridgend. A few ward swaps can mitigate this, but the effect is only to lessen the severity of the split: you still end up with the Bryntirion area of Bridgend in the wrong seat. The alternative is to keep Porthcawl in a seat with the whole of Bridgend town, but then the problem is that the valleys in the north of Bridgend UA are in a seat with Aberavon, from which they are relatively isolated. So I'm looking at this as a 'least worst' compromise arrangement, with Ogmore Vale in the Bridgend seat but the other two valleys in Aberavon together with, crucially, the Tondu/Brynmenyn area which appears to be a local transit hub for both road and rail. To balance the numbers this means separating Pyle from Cornelly, which I agree is not ideal. Aberavon - 74906; Bridgend - 76274.
Thoughts?
You're not going to get anything nice in Bridgend if you include Briton Ferry in the mix. Put Briton Ferry back into Neath, and it all becomes straightforward (so long as you're happy to have a Rhondda constituency that crosses a mountain range over a farm track).  1 Bridgend 71074 Yes 2 Aberavon and Ogmore 75925 Yes |
|
|
|
Post by π΄ββ οΈ Neath West π΄ββ οΈ on Sept 13, 2021 20:19:48 GMT
Does anyone have the separate electorate figures for the communities of Pontprennau and Old St Mellon's? If Old St Mellon's is at least 2541, I think I've found a solution I really like. I've managed to get hold of this data (I asked the Commission for it, and they got it from the Council): - Pontprennau 5248
- Old St Mellon's 2799
And here's the solution I was alluding to:  1 Cardiff South and Penarth 72809 Yes 2 Cardiff West 70179 Yes 3 Cardiff North 72833 Yes 4 Cardiff East 69982 Yes Edit: And zoomed out to give all of South Glamorgan and Gwent:  1 Cardiff South and Penarth 72809 Yes 2 Cardiff West 70179 Yes 3 Cardiff North 72833 Yes 4 Cardiff East 69982 Yes 5 Vale of Glamorgan 70426 Yes 6 Newport East 76159 Yes 7 Newport West and Caerphilly 72736 Yes 8 Islwyn 71059 Yes 9 Blaenau Gwent 71079 Yes 10 Torfaen 70591 Yes 11 Monmouth 72681 Yes |
|
sirbenjamin
IFP
True fame is reading your name written in graffiti, but without the words 'is a wanker' after it.
Posts: 4,979
|
Post by sirbenjamin on Sept 13, 2021 20:41:03 GMT
The more I think about it, the more I'm against trying to group NPT, Bridgend, RCT and Merthyr.
The problem is that it cuts off Swansea, which cannot accommodate a whole number of seats, and consequently fucks up Carmarthenshire which could (and should) divide neatly into two seats.
Thus, I really prefer to pair Swansea with NPT, and have a 'Swansea South and Port Talbot' or 'Swansea East and Neath' seat.
|
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Sept 13, 2021 21:58:32 GMT
There is realistically no option but to pair Swansea with Neath Port Talbot for constituency purposes. Swansea East & Neath is much better than Swansea South & Port Talbot.
|
|
|
|
Post by π΄ββ οΈ Neath West π΄ββ οΈ on Sept 14, 2021 7:56:00 GMT
That's the basic playing it straight idea β it's not silly at all putting the two mid-north gΓ¦Μth fΓ¦Μch wrth y tΓ¦Μn counties together at all: they have a lot in common, although Montgomeryshire is clearly the better of the two in every way β it's the county that's enjoying the Eisteddfod sinking shots with the Ffermwyr Ifainc whilst Meirionnydd's at the Oedfa doing its best expression from a Kate Roberts novel. It's a long-running failing of the Welsh Commission that they have treated Meirionnydd anomalously favourably compared to that other grossly undersized county, Radnorshire. There are details of this plan here and there that I'd do differently, but that's the configuration one gets if one is not trying to rig it to save Dwyfor Meirionnydd, which at the last successful review was of course an abomination that put people who lived in bustling metropolises like Tudweiliog and Aberdaron into "a constituency centred on Dolgellau". What I'd change is: - Ensure that all of the Porthmadog wards are in Caernarfon β let's not split a town unnecessarily
- Put the four Llanfairfechan and Penmaenmawr wards into Caernarfon to allow the Conwy constituency to come farther inland
- Buckley and Ewloe into the artist formerly known as Delyn, rather than Connah's Quay and Shotton (this makes Sealand look less odd, if that is possible)
- Coedpoeth and Minera into the artist formerly known as Alyn and Deeside, rather than Gresford and Rossett (this is completely on the level of prejudice)
- Call the constituencies Montgomeryshire and Meirionnydd, Caernarfon, Conwy (or Clwyd West), Denbigh (or Vale of Clwyd), West Flintshire (or Delyn), East Flintshire (or Alyn and Deeside), and Wrexham
I agree with this map and with your comments on the switch around of wards. Llanfairfechan definitely looks more towards Bangor than it does towards Llandudno and Colwyn Bay. And as you recommend, I would also include Caerhun, Llansanffraid and Betws yn Rhos wards in the Conwy Coastal seat (Caerhun's shape is odd but most of it is uninhabited mountains, the north east corner is the most inhabited and it's the suburbs of Conwy). Despite the Denbighshire seat being just based on the county, i would add Llansannan and Uwchaled wards to that seat too, just to ease things up slightly. Talking about odd shapes, the shape of the Caernarfon constituency this sort of approach leaves makes one glad that we don't put West at the top of maps! All sensible on the ground though!  25 Montgomeryshire and Meirionnydd 73621 Yes 26 Caernarfon 73634 Yes 27 Conwy 76980 Yes 28 Denbigh 76712 Yes 29 West Flintshire 71616 Yes 30 East Flintshire 71494 Yes 31 Wrexham 72371 Yes |
|
|
|
Post by islington on Sept 14, 2021 8:06:23 GMT
The current Aberavon seat (less the Coedffranc wards), plus the whole of Bridgend UA, sums to 151180. This is good on the numbers for two seats (as in the BCW plan) and this arrangement also helps with dividing the areas east and west into more sensible seats than those proposed by the BCW. But there seems to be no wholly satisfactory way of dividing the area into two. The BCW scheme, with Aberavon extending along the coast to include Porthcawl, looks good at first sight; but on closer examination, it splits the town of Bridgend. A few ward swaps can mitigate this, but the effect is only to lessen the severity of the split: you still end up with the Bryntirion area of Bridgend in the wrong seat. The alternative is to keep Porthcawl in a seat with the whole of Bridgend town, but then the problem is that the valleys in the north of Bridgend UA are in a seat with Aberavon, from which they are relatively isolated. So I'm looking at this as a 'least worst' compromise arrangement, with Ogmore Vale in the Bridgend seat but the other two valleys in Aberavon together with, crucially, the Tondu/Brynmenyn area which appears to be a local transit hub for both road and rail. To balance the numbers this means separating Pyle from Cornelly, which I agree is not ideal. Aberavon - 74906; Bridgend - 76274.
Thoughts?
You're not going to get anything nice in Bridgend if you include Briton Ferry in the mix. Put Briton Ferry back into Neath, and it all becomes straightforward (so long as you're happy to have a Rhondda constituency that crosses a mountain range over a farm track). 1 Bridgend 71074 Yes 2 Aberavon and Ogmore 75925 Yes I hate to argue the point with someone going by the label π΄ββ οΈ Neath West π΄ββ οΈ but regarding Briton Ferry I have to point out (i) that it is currently in the Aberavon seat, not in Neath, and (ii) that omitting it from the Aberavon seat loads too many electors into the Swansea/Neath area and forces some very awkward adjustment to the north or west, such as putting Clydach in with B&R or Pontarddulais with Llanelli. So it is compelling on the numbers to retain Briton Ferry in Aberavon. So I agree with sirbenjamin about the groupings in this area; but the arrangement doesn't necessitate the three way division of Swansea town that the BCW proposes. You can go for a single seat for Swansea itself, omitting some of the wards on the edge of the town, which then allows seats of Neath and Gower to either side - see my post at the top of page 15. |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Sept 14, 2021 10:50:43 GMT
Does anyone have the separate electorate figures for the communities of Pontprennau and Old St Mellon's? If Old St Mellon's is at least 2541, I think I've found a solution I really like. I've managed to get hold of this data (I asked the Commission for it, and they got it from the Council): - Pontprennau 5248
- Old St Mellon's 2799
And here's the solution I was alluding to: 1 Cardiff South and Penarth 72809 Yes 2 Cardiff West 70179 Yes 3 Cardiff North 72833 Yes 4 Cardiff East 69982 Yes Edit: And zoomed out to give all of South Glamorgan and Gwent: 1 Cardiff South and Penarth 72809 Yes 2 Cardiff West 70179 Yes 3 Cardiff North 72833 Yes 4 Cardiff East 69982 Yes 5 Vale of Glamorgan 70426 Yes 6 Newport East 76159 Yes 7 Newport West and Caerphilly 72736 Yes 8 Islwyn 71059 Yes 9 Blaenau Gwent 71079 Yes 10 Torfaen 70591 Yes 11 Monmouth 72681 Yes This is clever, but rather than splitting a ward you could just give all of Pontprennau/Old St Mellons to East and keep Taffs Wells in north. If you want to keep Llanbraddach with Caerphilly (and I agree that's desirable) then why not just swap it with Aber Valley? That ward is more separate from Caerphilly and has decent links to Nelson. |
|
|
|
Post by π΄ββ οΈ Neath West π΄ββ οΈ on Sept 14, 2021 13:27:58 GMT
I've managed to get hold of this data (I asked the Commission for it, and they got it from the Council): - Pontprennau 5248
- Old St Mellon's 2799
And here's the solution I was alluding to: 1 Cardiff South and Penarth 72809 Yes 2 Cardiff West 70179 Yes 3 Cardiff North 72833 Yes 4 Cardiff East 69982 Yes Edit: And zoomed out to give all of South Glamorgan and Gwent: 1 Cardiff South and Penarth 72809 Yes 2 Cardiff West 70179 Yes 3 Cardiff North 72833 Yes 4 Cardiff East 69982 Yes 5 Vale of Glamorgan 70426 Yes 6 Newport East 76159 Yes 7 Newport West and Caerphilly 72736 Yes 8 Islwyn 71059 Yes 9 Blaenau Gwent 71079 Yes 10 Torfaen 70591 Yes 11 Monmouth 72681 Yes This is clever, but rather than splitting a ward you could just give all of Pontprennau/Old St Mellons to East and keep Taffs Wells in north. If you want to keep Llanbraddach with Caerphilly (and I agree that's desirable) then why not just swap it with Aber Valley? That ward is more separate from Caerphilly and has decent links to Nelson. The point was not disrupting the Pontypridd constituency unnecessarily. The Pontyclun/Taff's Well, Aberaman, Nelson, Llanbradach chain of dominos is super-ugly. As minimum change in Cardiff leaves three boundary crossings and a constituency with a penexclave, I went for a version that does not involve crossing the Mid Glamorgan boundary on the east and south sides and instead crosses over straight from South Glamorgan into Gwent. Marshfield is a really obvious ward to take, consisting as it does of the countryside between the two cities. There are really ugly unsplit ways of doing this, but the split is really quite elegant. |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Sept 14, 2021 13:57:14 GMT
This is clever, but rather than splitting a ward you could just give all of Pontprennau/Old St Mellons to East and keep Taffs Wells in north. If you want to keep Llanbraddach with Caerphilly (and I agree that's desirable) then why not just swap it with Aber Valley? That ward is more separate from Caerphilly and has decent links to Nelson. The point was not disrupting the Pontypridd constituency unnecessarily. The Pontyclun/Taff's Well, Aberaman, Nelson, Llanbradach chain of dominos is super-ugly. As minimum change in Cardiff leaves three boundary crossings and a constituency with a penexclave, I went for a version that does not involve crossing the Mid Glamorgan boundary on the east and south sides and instead crosses over straight from South Glamorgan into Gwent. Marshfield is a really obvious ward to take, consisting as it does of the countryside between the two cities. There are really ugly unsplit ways of doing this, but the split is really quite elegant. I agree with getting rid of the BCW's movements of Pontyclun, Aberaman, Nelson and Llanbradach (not least because my way of doing the last requires also doing the penultimate.) I just think that Taff's Well is a fairly good choice, because it's a compact ward with good road and rail links to Cardiff. Marshfield also seems fine (although the boundary with Tredegar Park looks a little fuzzy these days) but that requires the ward split. And I agree it's an elegant split and that it's a dumb ward, but it just feels like it's more effort than it's worth to sell the BCW on this when you can just keep one (not that bad) element of their plan and use that to let you reverse their bad decisions. |
|
ian48
Non-Aligned
Posts: 58
|
Post by ian48 on Sept 15, 2021 9:17:23 GMT
I agree with this map and with your comments on the switch around of wards. Llanfairfechan definitely looks more towards Bangor than it does towards Llandudno and Colwyn Bay. And as you recommend, I would also include Caerhun, Llansanffraid and Betws yn Rhos wards in the Conwy Coastal seat (Caerhun's shape is odd but most of it is uninhabited mountains, the north east corner is the most inhabited and it's the suburbs of Conwy). Despite the Denbighshire seat being just based on the county, i would add Llansannan and Uwchaled wards to that seat too, just to ease things up slightly. Talking about odd shapes, the shape of the Caernarfon constituency this sort of approach leaves makes one glad that we don't put West at the top of maps! All sensible on the ground though! 25 Montgomeryshire and Meirionnydd 73621 Yes 26 Caernarfon 73634 Yes 27 Conwy 76980 Yes 28 Denbigh 76712 Yes 29 West Flintshire 71616 Yes 30 East Flintshire 71494 Yes 31 Wrexham 72371 Yes I think this is a lot closer to what most people in North Wales would regard as 'natural fit' constituencies than the 'Saville-mander' proposed by the Commission, where it appears Dwyfor Meirionydd must be kept at all cost. That Caernarfon/Bangor/Conwy Valley seat would still be safe Plaid though anyway. |
|
nyx
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,043
|
Post by nyx on Sept 17, 2021 20:14:34 GMT
Does anyone know if thereβs going to be a redraw of the Senedd boundaries any time soon to coincide with the parliamentary boundary review? There seems to be enough population imbalance (especially in North Wales) that such a thing might be needed.
If they do do such a thing, it might make sense to increase the number of constituency Senedd seats to 45 or 50, so that the North Wales constituencies donβt lose out there too.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2021 20:47:36 GMT
Does anyone know if thereβs going to be a redraw of the Senedd boundaries any time soon to coincide with the parliamentary boundary review? There seems to be enough population imbalance (especially in North Wales) that such a thing might be needed. If they do do such a thing, it might make sense to increase the number of constituency Senedd seats to 45 or 50, so that the North Wales constituencies donβt lose out there too. I sort of assumed that the Senedd constituencies would be realigned to the new parliamentary boundaries |
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Sept 17, 2021 20:53:30 GMT
Iirc nothing has been decided except that there is going to be some kind of Senedd reform.
|
|
piperdave
SNP
Dalkeith; Midlothian/North & Musselburgh
Posts: 911
|
Post by piperdave on Sept 18, 2021 7:46:35 GMT
Does anyone know if thereβs going to be a redraw of the Senedd boundaries any time soon to coincide with the parliamentary boundary review? There seems to be enough population imbalance (especially in North Wales) that such a thing might be needed. If they do do such a thing, it might make sense to increase the number of constituency Senedd seats to 45 or 50, so that the North Wales constituencies donβt lose out there too. As far as I can see, the Government of Wales Act 2006 designates the constituencies as those in the 2006 Order (as modified). So they aren't intrinsically linked to Westminster constituencies; you could leave the 40 as they are. But I can't see any provision that sets out how Senedd constituencies and regions are to be reviewed at all. I also presume it would be done by the BCW, but again, I can't find anything saying that, and the Commission's website doesn't mention it either. |
|
|
|
Post by LDCaerdydd on Sept 18, 2021 8:45:32 GMT
Senedd and Westminster constituencies have now been uncoupled.
The Senedd now also has power of its own elections, so thereβs every chance come 2026 (or 2025 as some members want four year terms to return) thereβll be new boundaries snd more members.
This week Labour and Plaid have agreed to work together on a range of issues, this hasnβt been specifically mentioned but Iβm sure itβll be on the cards.
Labour and Plaid (along with the LD) have 44 seats to the Conservatives 16 and a two-thirds majority is needed to change the electoral system.
|
|
