|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jan 13, 2022 9:14:36 GMT
Curious about the contribution from Burnham on Sea.... I haven't got the foggiest idea what you're talking about
|
|
|
Post by π΄ββ οΈ Neath West π΄ββ οΈ on Jan 13, 2022 10:45:57 GMT
Okay, so let's start with the shortest items on that reading list, those where the next contribution starts six pages later. I'll take these in reverse order: 10043. This is Ruth Jones MP's counter-proposal for Newport West that I've already mentioned. This is actually what prompted me to use this sort of length as a sensible sort of threshold for having enough content to probably be interesting. 9870. This is the Neath Constituency Labour Party's attempt to buy off their members from Cwm Tawe with a counterproposal that doesn't work, rather than bothering to design a serious counterproposal that would look rather too much like a less messy version of Plaid Cymru's inept counterproposal β awkward. Maybe they're applying some conversion factor, so Jeremy Miles' lesser-known cousin, Jeremy Kilometres, can take the one with the electorate that's seemingly over the limit. 9865. Caerphilly Constituency Labour Party unsurprisingly present the same counterproposal as Wayne David MP for Caerphilly/Newport West/Islwyn, but with significantly uglier maps. 9647. Hi, aberdarian ! This is the first submission (of hopefully several) that tidies up the knots the Commission are tying themselves in by taking too much of Rhondda Cynon Taf to prop up the four Cardiff constituencies. His approach eliminates the Commission's orphaning of Nelson, and avoids splitting Aberaman from Aberdare town and Pontyclun from Llantrisant town. This is very clearly an improvement in Rhondda Cynon Taf and Caerphilly CB and I hope the Commission accept something very much like this. To make Cardiff work, he still moves Taff's Well into it, but then reconfigures the constituencies NW, NE, SE, and SW and Penarth. It's a nice non-split solution that avoids the Commission's detached part in Trowbridge, but it's far from minimum change. 30 years ago, this would have been a fairly effective Torymander β North West and North East would both have been winnable back then β not a chance these days though. As there's only one seven. I'll take this now: 9768. This is what happens when one takes respect for the mighty River Usk, rather than for local government boundaries, to its logical conclusions. I applaud this person for trying β after all, Ruth Jones MP didn't β but quite frankly I think the result is one for the outtakes reel. They drew it with the local government boundaries turned off, so I've redrawn it here with them turned on, just to highlight the ouchiness of this all: 1 Newport West 73885 Yes 2 Newport East 73586 Yes 3 Islwyn and Torfaen 72169 Yes 4 Caerphilly 71422 Yes 5 Monmouth 73498 Yes
|
|
|
Post by π΄ββ οΈ Neath West π΄ββ οΈ on Jan 13, 2022 11:07:54 GMT
I think I might be responsible for the 2 contributions from ABERDARE (not sure where the all capital letters come from). My user name probably gives it away. I think my proposals are reasonably sensible for South East Wales but it all goes a bit tits up after that. I knew I was in trouble when I ended up putting Ogmore Vale in with the Rhondda. Doubt that will be popular. Probably not as daft as putting wards close to Bridgend town centre in Aberafan-Porthcawl mind. That's not too bad on the ground, given the way that Gilfach Goch straddles the Rhondda Cynon Taf/Bridgend boundary and that aligning constituency boundaries with county boundaries there inevitably is really bad from a local ties perspective. I actually submitted two counterproposals in that area β one that's broadly the same as the Conservative Party's one (with a pair of wards migrating Bridgend β Aberavon and Ogmore β Neath and Kilvey β Brecon and Radnor β Carmarthen; got to try to get Briton Ferry back!); and another that points out that the Commission's Rhondda is seriously pants on the ground and rotates the former Ogmore and Garw UD, Pyle, and Llanharan around.
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Jan 13, 2022 12:03:47 GMT
Finally looked at that handwritten submission. Should be adopted wholesale, complete with spelling errors and odd constituency names, just to reward the anonymous person's effort. I skim read it. I got the impression that in many ways it was rather good, though I may have missed something. Yeah. There are bits I probably should reconstruct in boundary assistant before judging, but it could be worse.
|
|
|
Post by π΄ββ οΈ Neath West π΄ββ οΈ on Jan 13, 2022 13:09:38 GMT
Continuing with the eight-pager: 9793. Cynon Valley Constituency Labour Party predictably does not like the Cynon Valley constituency being abolished. Rather than advancing a counterproposal, they instead ramble on for page after page about coal mines that closed decades ago and the unique higher death rate of the Cynon Valley. Cheerful stuff. And the nine-pagers. Again, I'll take them in reverse order. 9921. Jayne Bryant MS (Newport West) predictably appeals to the mighty River Usk, coming up with exactly the same counterproposal as Ruth Jones MP (funny that). The extra pages contain a lengthy comparison of Allt-yr-yn and Marshfield (which she doesn't mention are two of the Tories' best wards in Newport) with the Aber Valley (no mention of mining disasters either). 9572. This is from a member of the public from Treuddyn, Flintshire. He objects to adding the Wrexham wards of Brymbo and Minera to Alyn and Deeside and presents a counterproposal. He adds Northop and Northop Hall wards to Alyn and Deeside instead (Delyn would still be within the electoral range). Then he comes up with an awkward-looking swap of Pant, Johnstown, and all of Ponciau for Ruabon and the Ruabon South part of Penycae and Ruabon South between Wrexham and Montgomeryshire and Glyndwr. Disappointingly, he does not have any figures to back up whether this ward split works or not. There are distinct commonalities between this counterproposal and the Conservative Party's one, but the Conservative one is probably the tidier of the two in Wrexham CB. 9551. Oh good, it's the Association of British Counties. They want various constituency names to refer to the 1536-1974 counties, namely: - East Monmouthshire
- Brecon and Radnorshire
- Cardiganshire and North Pembrokeshire / Ceredigion a Gogledd Sir Benfro (rather than Ceredigion Preseli)
Pretty maps, mind.
|
|
|
Post by π΄ββ οΈ Neath West π΄ββ οΈ on Jan 13, 2022 14:27:24 GMT
And onto the ten-pagers. 9002. This is from a member of the public from Altrincham, Cheshire. He objects to the Commission's proposals in North Wales on the basis of the poor connectivity of the Montgomeryshire and Glyndwr constituency. He presents a counterproposal as text and tables β as he doesn't provide a map, here it is: 1 Aberconwy 76277 Yes 2 Alyn 73721 Yes 3 Delyn and Deeside 72032 Yes 4 Dwyfor Arfon 70850 Yes 5 Montgomeryshire and Meirionnydd 71795 Yes 6 Vale of Clwyd 75993 Yes 7 Wrexham 75760 Yes There are some issues that jump out to me here: - His selection of Alyn wards seem to have been governed by getting as much of the eponymous river into the same constituency. This has the effect of repartitioning Flintshire with Holywell and Mold in different constituencies β pitchfork bait alert.
- Penrhyndeudraeth is in his Arfon Dwyfor. More pitchforks. But fixing Penrhyndeudraeth definitely being in Meirionnydd actually would tidy this up substantially: it means that Arfon Dwyfor needs more Conwy wards, which in turn means that Vale of Clwyd needs less and can take in all of Denbighshire.
- Montgomeryshire and Meirionnydd would annoy the Plaidis, but I think he's right that a Berwyn-crossing constituency is far worse.
All in all, probably a bit radical, but a good try. 9991. Again a counterproposal relating just to North Wales from a member of the public from some place called Unknown, but who mentions in their text that they live in "the area". This is set out in an extremely difficult to understand way as tables (not all of which seem to add up correctly) and a baffling series of bad overlay maps with no supporting argumentation. I've redrawn it in Boundary Assistant just to help make sense of it: 1 Clwyd North 72212 Yes 2 Clwyd West 75313 Yes 3 Alyn and Deeside 74182 Yes 4 Wrexham 76498 Yes 5 Montgomery 76352 Yes (map trimmed here β he includes all of Montgomeryshire in this one) Basically this is an incredibly clumsy attempt to improve on the initial proposals: - The way this buzzes Colwyn Bay derives from the initial proposals, not this individual's ineptitude.
- This appears to be an attempt to get Rhyl, Rhuddlan, St Asaph, and Denbigh into the same constituency as Prestatyn β absolutely sensible idea, but very poorly executed.
- Bodelwyddan is stranded. Sod the doctors.
- To create room for the Denbighshire towns, Flint and (bizarrely) half of Bagillt get bumped into Alyn and Deeside (this again would be perfectly reasonable if it were all of Bagillt),
- Mold also gets bumped out, as does Caergwrle from Alyn and Deeside, extending the already rather odd Clwyd West into an epic banana.
- There's another version of getting Minera and Brymbo back into Wrexham and bumping Pant and Johnstown out β again similar to the Conservative Party's counterproposal in this aspect.
An honest attempt, with ideas of variable quality, but sadly let down by the lack of argument.
|
|
|
Post by π΄ββ οΈ Neath West π΄ββ οΈ on Jan 13, 2022 16:56:02 GMT
Continuing with the eleven-pager: 9952. This person is a member of the public from Preston, Lancashire, who claims to be affiliated to the Labour Party. I will quote their argumentation in full, as all that then follows is page after page of tables exported from Boundary Assistant, with not even the map: "No wards need to be split." That stunningly trivial observation is it. There are probably thousands of potential plans that share this virtue of not splitting wards, and this person gives no indication of why they think this particular configuration is superior to the others. Despite my overwhelming prejudice that this guy needs to be dunked repeatedly in the River Ribble, I will continue being more than fair to these attempts at representations. Here's it mapped out: As that's a little zoomed out, I'll embiggen various parts in the order he's numbered the constituencies: 1 Monmouth 72681 Yes 2 Torfaen 70591 Yes 3 Blaenau Gwent and Rhymney 71079 Yes 4 Islwyn 74298 Yes 5 Newport West and Caerphilly 74394 Yes 6 Newport East 76159 Yes Gwent starts out perfectly competently. His only change from the Commission's initial proposals is deorphaning Nelson, which is clearly an improvement. At this stage I was beginning to think I'd been unfair to this individual, things quickly begin to go wrong: 7 Cardiff West 73878 Yes 8 Cardiff North 72133 Yes 9 Cardiff Central 70033 Yes 10 Cardiff South and Penarth 72106 Yes 11 Vale of Glamorgan 72838 Yes He supplements South Glamorgan with wards from Rhondda Cynon Taf, taking Llanharry, Llanharan, and Brynna instead of Pontyclun and Taff's Well β not too silly. Putting Llandaff North into Cardiff West makes sense (it's better than taking Pontyclun). Uniting all of Cardiff east of the Rhymney River is an interesting idea, but moving the Heath ward out of North as a result is eyecatching. But splitting Cadoc ward off Barry town into Cardiff South and Penarth is just really bad. 12 Pontypridd 73003 Yes 13 Rhondda and Ogmore 73557 Yes 14 Merthyr Tydfil and Aberdare 74805 Yes 15 Aberavon and Porthcawl 76278 Yes 16 Neath 74786 Yes 17 Bridgend 75706 Yes 18 Swansea East 74486 Yes 19 Gower and Swansea West 74146 Yes Mid and West Glamorgan again starts well, but then deteriorates rapidly. The Merthyr and Aberdare constituency is amended exactly in line with Aberdarian's excellent counterproposal. The Pontypridd and Rhondda and Ogmore constituencies are fine β the latter at least keeps the village of Gilfach Goch in one constituency; not as odd as it may look at first. But then, oh dear. Just as the Commission ended up cutting through the built-up area of Bridgend town, our Prestonian friend has done the same, splitting Newton off Porthcawl. At the other end of his Aberavon and Porthcawl constituency, he does the same to Neath and puts Cimla into Aberavon and Porthcawl. Ouch. That Swansea East looks nice, but at what cost? Just look at Gorseinon, with the town centre and Penllergaer in Neath, Kingsbridge in Swansea West and Gower, and Penyrheol and Loughor in Llanelli. If there weren't people from Barry, Porthcawl, and Neath already marching on Preston with pitchforks already, just imagine the reception he'll get from Gorseinon. 20 Llanelli 76139 Yes 21 Carmarthen 75001 Yes 22 Ceredigion and North Pembrokeshire 75584 Yes 23 Mid and South Pembrokeshire 75299 Yes Dyfed becomes one of the better bits of this. I'm not sure what the justification is for swapping Solva and Letterston for Maenclochog, but that would be an interesting argument to hear. And he's taken advantage of having Llanelli cross the Loughor to leave both Llangunnor and St Ishmael in a Carmarthen constituency. 24 Dwyfor Meirionnydd 69803 Yes 25 Bangor and Conwy 72068 Yes We then go shooting up to Gwynedd, where the only change from the Commission's initial proposals besides renaming Aberconwy to Bangor and Conwy is moving the Pentir ward to stay with Bangor β this is obviously a sensible idea. But have you noticed how this is about to go horribly, horribly wrong? Oh yes... 26 Brecon and Radnor 70914 Yes Here we go needlessly splitting Montgomeryshire immediately north of Newtown. I wonder quite how far north the other constituency's going to go with Montgomeryshire's largest town taken out... 27 Denbigh and Montgomery 70569 Yes 28 Rhyl and Colwyn 74132 Yes 29 Delyn 71616 Yes 30 Alyn and Deeside 70757 Yes 31 Wrexham 71423 Yes Whoosh! Betws-in-Rhos and St Asaph! And the corollary is a very squishy coastal constituency, where the pitchfork owners of Prestatyn will love the name. After that, Flintshire and Wrexham become competently done once more. It's really hard to work out what our Prestonian friend was thinking in all of this. He has succeeded in not splitting wards, but he has split multiple towns and made a complete horlicks of Montgomeryshire. It would have been interesting to find out why he thinks this is better than the Commission's initial proposals, but I expect we'll never know.
|
|
|
Post by gwynthegriff on Jan 13, 2022 17:29:50 GMT
Continuing with the eleven-pager: 9952. This person is a member of the public from Preston, Lancashire, who claims to be affiliated to the Labour Party. I will quote their argumentation in full, as all that then follows is page after page of tables exported from Boundary Assistant, with not even the map: "No wards need to be split." That stunningly trivial observation is it. There are probably thousands of potential plans that share this virtue of not splitting wards, and this person gives no indication of why they think this particular configuration is superior to the others. Despite my overwhelming prejudice that this guy needs to be dunked repeatedly in the River Ribble, I will continue being more than fair to these attempts at representations. Here's it mapped out: As that's a little zoomed out, I'll embiggen various parts in the order he's numbered the constituencies: 1 Monmouth 72681 Yes 2 Torfaen 70591 Yes 3 Blaenau Gwent and Rhymney 71079 Yes 4 Islwyn 74298 Yes 5 Newport West and Caerphilly 74394 Yes 6 Newport East 76159 Yes Gwent starts out perfectly competently. His only change from the Commission's initial proposals is deorphaning Nelson, which is clearly an improvement. At this stage I was beginning to think I'd been unfair to this individual, things quickly begin to go wrong: 7 Cardiff West 73878 Yes 8 Cardiff North 72133 Yes 9 Cardiff Central 70033 Yes 10 Cardiff South and Penarth 72106 Yes 11 Vale of Glamorgan 72838 Yes He supplements South Glamorgan with wards from Rhondda Cynon Taf, taking Llanharry, Llanharan, and Brynna instead of Pontyclun and Taff's Well β not too silly. Putting Llandaff North into Cardiff West makes sense (it's better than taking Pontyclun). Uniting all of Cardiff east of the Rhymney River is an interesting idea, but moving the Heath ward out of North as a result is eyecatching. But splitting Cadoc ward off Barry town into Cardiff South and Penarth is just really bad. 12 Pontypridd 73003 Yes 13 Rhondda and Ogmore 73557 Yes 14 Merthyr Tydfil and Aberdare 74805 Yes 15 Aberavon and Porthcawl 76278 Yes 16 Neath 74786 Yes 17 Bridgend 75706 Yes 18 Swansea East 74486 Yes 19 Gower and Swansea West 74146 Yes Mid and West Glamorgan again starts well, but then deteriorates rapidly. The Merthyr and Aberdare constituency is amended exactly in line with Aberdarian's excellent counterproposal. The Pontypridd and Rhondda and Ogmore constituencies are fine β the latter at least keeps the village of Gilfach Goch in one constituency; not as odd as it may look at first. But then, oh dear. Just as the Commission ended up cutting through the built-up area of Bridgend town, our Prestonian friend has done the same, splitting Newton off Porthcawl. At the other end of his Aberavon and Porthcawl constituency, he does the same to Neath and puts Cimla into Aberavon and Porthcawl. Ouch. That Swansea East looks nice, but at what cost? Just look at Gorseinon, with the town centre and Penllergaer in Neath, Kingsbridge in Swansea West and Gower, and Penyrheol and Loughor in Llanelli. If there weren't people from Barry, Porthcawl, and Neath already marching on Preston with pitchforks already, just imagine the reception he'll get from Gorseinon. 20 Llanelli 76139 Yes 21 Carmarthen 75001 Yes 22 Ceredigion and North Pembrokeshire 75584 Yes 23 Mid and South Pembrokeshire 75299 Yes Dyfed becomes one of the better bits of this. I'm not sure what the justification is for swapping Solva and Letterston for Maenclochog, but that would be an interesting argument to hear. And he's taken advantage of having Llanelli cross the Loughor to leave both Llangunnor and St Ishmael in a Carmarthen constituency. 24 Dwyfor Meirionnydd 69803 Yes 25 Bangor and Conwy 72068 Yes We then go shooting up to Gwynedd, where the only change from the Commission's initial proposals besides renaming Aberconwy to Bangor and Conwy is moving the Pentir ward to stay with Bangor β this is obviously a sensible idea. But have you noticed how this is about to go horribly, horribly wrong? Oh yes... 26 Brecon and Radnor 70914 Yes Here we go needlessly splitting Montgomeryshire immediately north of Newtown. I wonder quite how far north the other constituency's going to go with Montgomeryshire's largest town taken out... 27 Denbigh and Montgomery 70569 Yes 28 Rhyl and Colwyn 74132 Yes 29 Delyn 71616 Yes 30 Alyn and Deeside 70757 Yes 31 Wrexham 71423 Yes Whoosh! Betws-in-Rhos and St Asaph! And the corollary is a very squishy coastal constituency, where the pitchfork owners of Prestatyn will love the name. After that, Flintshire and Wrexham become competently done once more. It's really hard to work out what our Prestonian friend was thinking in all of this. He has succeeded in not splitting wards, but he has split multiple towns and made a complete horlicks of Montgomeryshire. It would have been interesting to find out why he thinks this is better than the Commission's initial proposals, but I expect we'll never know. If only we could think of a Preston resident with an interest in boundaries allied with some wacky ideas. Nope. Can't think of anyone.
|
|
|
Post by gwynthegriff on Jan 13, 2022 17:31:24 GMT
What is that supposed to mean? "I don't want to have a large division, the rules must be bent to suit me." I was thinking of some past rugby union encounters between Neath and Swansea which weren't noted for their chumminess. (Yes, yes I'm aware of the Ospreys.)
|
|
|
Post by π΄ββ οΈ Neath West π΄ββ οΈ on Jan 14, 2022 11:09:46 GMT
Moving on with the reading list, the next is a sixteen pager: 9792. This couldn't be more of a contrast to the last submission. This one is from an individual from Llangyfelach, who discloses that he is a member of the Labour and Co-operative Parties, but does not write in an official capacity. Whereas the last one covered all of Wales, this one is a detailed counterproposal for just two constituencies. And whereas the last one rejoiced in the observation that "No wards need to be split", this one splits no fewer than three wards in his quest to get places he considers to have strong ties to central Swansea (including part of Llangyfelach, naturally) into a reworked Swansea Central. As his map is not the clearest, I have redrawn this in Boundary Assistant: 1 Neath and Swansea East 75256 Yes 2 Swansea Central 76584 Yes This is an ingenious proposal, but it's probably a bit on the radical side. And although this would make a certain contingent in Llangyfelach happy, I doubt one could say the same for similar people in Bonymaen. And to be quite honest, seeing as Llangyfelach is currently in the Gower constituency, its ties to central Swansea are probably a little over-hyped here (if we're getting into split wards galore, then surely people at the Gendros end of Cockett ward have a much better claim β that ward boundary runs along the middle of residential streets, rather than along the edge of Morriston Crem). But the biggest issue with this to me is that the blatant leftovers constituency this leaves is a bit of a shocker to be quite honest.
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Jan 22, 2022 1:13:01 GMT
The Welsh Commission has taken the decision 'because of the public health challenges' to 'delay the start of the 2nd consultation' and will advise on new dates in the near future. I suppose that gives us more time to trawl the initial representations for gems. Has anyone spotted anything good in there? I suppose that depends on yr definition of good...reading through vol.1. There's someone very happy to finally be placed in a coastal towns constituency, away from Valleys influence... they're writing from Porthcawl. I suppose that's deadpan, but it's hard to tell. There's the shortest contribution I've found so far, which simply reads "Why?" Or this gem: "It no longer makes any sense for Wales to have Members of Parliament at Westminster. Westminster constituencies in Wales should be abolished and the House of Lords replaced with an elected upper chamber to decide on British-level issues such as taxation, defence, and international affairs." If (big if) England ever gets devolution that's probably going to be the way.
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Jan 22, 2022 15:16:17 GMT
Also beautiful: the juxtaposition between the people from Dinas Powys and even Penarth who think they're totally not Cardiff and should be in a Vale seat and the person from Cowbridge who thinks Barry is basically Cardiff and should not be in a Vale seat.
The two people I've found who have anything nice to say about B&R's expansion into the Swansea Valley. One says being drawn into a Swansea seat would have been better but anything is preferrable to being paired with Neath. The other is from Neath and is basically green with envy. If Neath is to lose its own seat it should be paired with somewhere nice and respectable like B&R and not with the most down and out (their words) parts of Swansea, even more full of Labour-voting criminals than Neath itself.
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Jan 22, 2022 22:01:38 GMT
I'm not sure about the quality of the data in the index spreadsheet either. Similarly, I've found a submission by a sitting councillor whose name is incorrectly reducted as if he were a member of the public. (Given the wealth of biographical data included in his 2 page protest against Caerphilly being paired with Newport - 45 years a councillor, contested the seat at the last 9 general elections, former Senedd member - he's easily identified as Plaid Cymru's Lyndsey Whittle. Though he actually sat out one of those general elections. He doesn't even mention he's contested every Senedd election as well!)
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Jan 23, 2022 10:59:53 GMT
Okay, let's use a bit of Excel-fu to identify the contributions where the next contribution starts at least 6 pages later. This pulls out a nice subset of 21 of the fullest contributions, including all four main parties and the obvious nutters from the Association of British Counties: Just posting this as a reading list for now, in case anyone else wants to look at these. Edit 1: I'm aware that this will chop off the last submission in each volume as a negative number. Those should be checked for inclusion on the reading list manually. 9499 qualifies. Mostly because the apparently quite senior citizen* included his maps and ward lists multiple times. His North Wales counterproposal is certainly something else (he does not provide usable constituency names) -Wrexham (reasonably drawn) -Montgomery & Rhos, now without Denbighshire wards -as much of Flintshire as could be crammed into one seat -a narrow coastal strip from Colwyn Bay to just east of Prestatyn - another narrow coastal strip, immediately adjoining, from Llandudno to Caernarfon, also including Bethesda-Dwyfor Meirionydd Nant Conwy - a landlocked rural Clwyd seat, also including Mold*while a redacted member of the public, as a retired senior council officer and former member of the local government commission for Wales who lives in Y Felinheli, should be identifiable.
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Jan 24, 2022 8:53:01 GMT
Is Ynys MΓ΄n the least dysfunctional council on Anglesey or what?
"The Democratic Services Committee has welcomed the proposals in respect of Ynys MΓ΄n and recommended this to the County Council. This proposal was not supported by the Council at its meeting on 25 October. Sincerely Redacted Head of Democratic Services"
|
|
|
Post by greatkingrat on Jan 24, 2022 10:05:26 GMT
From the minutes of the council meeting -
Councillor Dafydd Roberts said that he welcomed the proposal that the constituency of Ynys MΓ΄n is to be retained but proposed an amendment that the Authority should respond to the consultation process that 40 constituencies in Wales needs to be retained. Councillor Ieuan Williams seconded the proposal.
The Chair, having received legal advice, rejected the amendment on the basis that it was beyond the scope (insufficient direct connection to the Council/the Council area). Accordingly, th e Chair took a vote on the substantive motion put forward by the Chair of the Democratic Services Committee and seconded by Councillor Bryan Owen. 6 members voted in favour of the resolution, 8 members voted against the resolution and 12 members abstained on the resolution. It was RESOLVED that: The motion was not carried
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Jan 26, 2022 21:23:52 GMT
Reading through all this (i was quarantined at home for a week with coronaviruses in my throat but no symptoms to speak of, in case you're wondering) has made me finally able to formulate a plan of my own. Now to draw it in boundary assistant (so far it consists of two pages of word document, mostly numbers) and type it up so that it looks like comment on initial submissions.
Obsessive readers of this thread will be surprised to hear I've reluctantly come around to accept Maldwyn Meirionydd.
|
|
|
Post by π΄ββ οΈ Neath West π΄ββ οΈ on Jan 27, 2022 13:02:36 GMT
9499 qualifies. Mostly because the apparently quite senior citizen* included his maps and ward lists multiple times. His North Wales counterproposal is certainly something else (he does not provide usable constituency names) -Wrexham (reasonably drawn) -Montgomery & Rhos, now without Denbighshire wards -as much of Flintshire as could be crammed into one seat -a narrow coastal strip from Colwyn Bay to just east of Prestatyn - another narrow coastal strip, immediately adjoining, from Llandudno to Caernarfon, also including Bethesda-Dwyfor Meirionydd Nant Conwy - a landlocked rural Clwyd seat, also including Mold*while a redacted member of the public, as a retired senior council officer and former member of the local government commission for Wales who lives in Y Felinheli, should be identifiable. Thanks for pointing that one out. I've now redrawn it in Boundary Assistant: 1 Maldwyn and GlyndΕ΅r 70320 Yes 2 Wrexham 76498 Yes 3 Industrial North-East Wales 75692 Yes 4 Rural North-East Wales 72066 Yes 5 Coastal North-East Wales 76863 Yes 6 Coastal North-West Wales 74256 Yes 7 Rural North West Wales 70733 Yes Maldwyn and GlyndΕ΅r and Wrexham differ little from the Conservative counter-proposal β the only differences are that the Conservatives sensibly split the awful Ponciau ward and take in Llangollen from Denbighshire. The common theme is opposing moving Minera and Brymbo into Alyn and Deeside. Our member of the public from Port Dinorwic Y Felinheli claims to be attempting to follow the final proposals from the Second Zombie Review. But he diverges from them in a strange repartition of Flintshire. Not sure people in Holywell will much like being told they're Industrial! And Hawarden looks very odd indeed. But escaping the Commission's drawing a boundary straight up the middle of the Vale of Clwyd has to be an improvement. His two coastal constituencies seem very tightly drawn to me. Bontnewydd in a separate constituency from Caernarfon. Caerhun and Glan Conwy in a different constituency from Conwy town. Betws-in-Rhos in a different constituency from Colwyn Bay and Abergele. Looks like an outtake to me. There is some commonality here with Plaid Cymru's approach. To be honest, he's done a tidier job than the Plaidis, so it's a decent two cheers on this one.
|
|
|
Post by π΄ββ οΈ Neath West π΄ββ οΈ on Jan 27, 2022 15:03:18 GMT
I have now waded through 42 pages of 9622's handwriting. It's an interesting selection of ideas, some of which work, some of which don't. As I can't number Anglesey 1 in Boundary Assistant, all the numbers below are one lower than the submission. Starting in the land of Gog and Magog: 1 Arfon Dwyfor 70850 Yes 2 North Coast 79738 2676 3 GlyndΕ΅r 77265 203 4 Delyn 61912 -7812 5 Alyn and Deeside 75754 Yes 6 Wrexham 74628 Yes 7 Maldwyn Meirionydd [sic] 69357 -367 This is basically an untidy version of the scheme that keeps Arfon instead of Dwyfor Meirionnydd. He has comprehensively tied himself in knots in the detail though. The obvious mess is in the North East, where he tries to follow the pre-1974 Denbighshire/Flintshire border, and therefore basically the Conservative counterproposal in Wrexham, with the exception of lacking the split ward in Ponciau and doing something very odd with Minera. Unfortunately, this has been met with failure at arithmetic. The Arfon Dwyfor constituency pitchforkily takes in Penrhyndraeth [sic], the first of many ouchy spellings (he goes on to further annoy people from Meirionnydd by missing the double n, but the Commission got there first on that one), and he's ended up crossing the southern border of Montgomeryshire in a desperate attempt to keep the amount of Carmarthenshire he's moving into Brecon and Radnor down. The Costa Geriatrica constituency, whilst a fine idea, is another example of maths fail. On to Mid and West Wales: 8 Aberhonddu Maesyfed Dinefwr 70579 Yes 9 Ceredigion Preseli 73254 Yes 10 Pembrokeshire 75353 Yes 11 Caerfyrddin 77441 379 12 Llanelli Llwchwr 74020 Yes There is a delicious bit of conflicting pedantry in operation here. He underlines Preseli in capital letters on his hand-drawn map: yes, he insists that a constituency called Ceredigion Preseli should actually cross the Preseli Mountains and the boundary should immediately buzz Fishguard instead. I do not find this argument convincing. But just look at his Aberhonddu Maesyfed Dinefwr β this is basically an attempt not to cross directly between Ystradgynlais and Ystalyfera, and mediate it through Carmarthenshire with a Loughor-crossing constituency (which really just goes to show the virtues of the Commission's approach) β but if one looks at a map, this does not actually include Dinefwr! It's in Llandeilo ward (which would incidentally sort his maths problem). One all on the pedantry there. Putting Lampeter Velfrey and Amroth into Caerfyrddin is interesting and completely unforced. I'm not sure quite why he wants to separate Scleddau from Fishguard town so much. Western Glamorgan: 13 Swansea Gower 76232 Yes 14 Swansea Port Tennant 74715 Yes 15 Neath and Upper Swansea 69668 -56 16 Port Talbot and Maesteg 71626 Yes 17 Bridgend 68579 -1145 I think it's safe to say that he's started with drawing two nice constituencies in Swansea (with a dreadful name for the eastern one), but has ended up with leftover bits that don't quite add up. I don't know what's more special: the weird appendage to Neath via Mawr or the Cornelly desperation. One of the few good points he makes about names is that Port Talbot should be called Port Talbot. Southern Glamorgan and Newport: 18 Ogmore and Rhoose 75437 Yes 19 Barri Phenarth [sic] 70735 Yes 20 Cardiff Castle 71106 Yes 21 Cardiff Landaff [sic] 73878 Yes 22 Cardiff Heath 73507 Yes 23 Newport St Woolos and Cardiff St Mellons 74015 Yes 24 Newport Maindee 76159 Yes We start with a brilliant piece of pitchfork bait here: Ogmore and Rhoose. Even the name would be really pitchforky. But wow. Just wow. We then get a random scattering of inaccurate Welsh mutations on a pattern of constituencies that is an interesting idea, but is surely already damned by what it does to the rural Vale. His Cardiff West (let's call a spade a spade) is very nice, as is his Cardiff North. His Newport Maindee is identical to the Commission's Newport East, apart from the pointless name change. Rest of Gwent and Glamorgan: 25 Usk 72681 Yes 26 L(l)wyd 70591 Yes 27 Ebbw 73367 Yes 28 Sirhowy and Rhymni 76349 Yes 29 Merthyr and Aber 74538 Yes 30 Cynon Taf 75720 Yes 31 Rhondda Trelai 71208 Yes The first two constituencies are identical the Commission's proposals, apart from the names, with an ABC-style objection to calling Monmouthshire Monmouthshire, and a weird bit of pedantry about how the river that Torfaen is named after is actually called the Afon Lwyd (here he gets the mutation right and then gets conflicted about it β llwyd is an adjective meaning "grey", and adjectives lenite after feminine nouns such as "afon"). He then splits Blaenau Gwent to get constituencies that run north-south along valleys. Probably a bit radical for the Commission there. His "Sirhowy and Rhymni" name really irritates me: why spell Sirhywi the English way and Rhymney the Welsh one? I get it that English names that are just non-standard transliterations of Welsh are not a good thing, but at least be consistent... Merthyr and Aber is eye-raising. Aber here is not Aberdare as you might expect, but the Aber Valley (over a mountain road from Nelson). I suppose at least he didn't go for Senghennydd after the famous mining disaster. Not sure what was wrong with Caerphilly, but there you go. I think what's driving this oddness is more 1536-1974 counties stuff: putting Caerphilly into Glamorgan and the entire east bank of the Rhymney into Monmouthshire (looking back, including in Cardiff). Cynon Taf is roughly what I would have expected the Cynon Valley Constituency Labour Party to have proposed, had they not been so thoroughly inept. The split of both Pontypridd town and Llantwit Fardre community is very ouchy though. (Easily fixed too, if only he'd go for Rhondda and Ogmore in one constituency and Llantrisant and the Vale in another.) As a final giggle at the names, Rhondda Trelai is an absolute howler. Trelai does mean Ely, but in the sense of the Ely area of Cardiff ("tre(f)" meaning town should really be a clue). The river is Elai. Not sure what was wrong with Llantrisant either... One positive is that as we've reached the south east, the maths has improved. Perhaps it is unsurprising, seeing as this individual is from Chepstow. All in all, the good ideas in this representation have been far better done by other submissions.
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Jan 27, 2022 20:03:26 GMT
On to Mid and West Wales: 8 Aberhonddu Maesyfed Dinefwr 70579 Yes 9 Ceredigion Preseli 73254 Yes 10 Pembrokeshire 75353 Yes 11 Caerfyrddin 77441 379 12 Llanelli Llwchwr 74020 Yes There is a delicious bit of conflicting pedantry in operation here. He underlines Preseli in capital letters on his hand-drawn map: yes, he insists that a constituency called Ceredigion Preseli should actually cross the Preseli Mountains and the boundary should immediately buzz Fishguard instead. I do not find this argument convincing. Many submissions notice that Maenclochog is a but of a glaring omission in Ceredigion Preseli and an infinitely better fit than St Davids - though it straddles the Preselis. There's even a proposition to split the ward somewhere. It's the one next door to the west that he's quite alone in transferring. This too includes some hillcountry but the populated bits are all to the south. Thw best thing that transfer has going for it is that it allows you to take two other wards out... but as one of these is giving Fishguard a haircut I'll pass. zombie commissions have drawn that seat, and I do not get the feeling that Ystradynlais is going to fly. This may well be on the menu. So I noticed. But I've since noticed that the version in my cryptic notes has a math problem of its own, and I need yet another ward, and then another Llanelli ward for Caeefyrddin. It works without crossing into Montgomery, but only just. Several Swansea submissions are similar and then basically give a shrug on what to do around it. not optimal, but I really dislike removing random bits of core cities and putting them into other cities. The problem - which I only noticed when I put it into boundaryassistant earlier today - is that it's below quota! And suddenly I realized why nobody else hit on the idea... You can fix it, kind of, by adding another leftover valley from Aberavon (or splitting Coedffranc) but it's not exactly an improvement.Caused by a math problem in Bridgend where two wards are completely missing, in the list and in the numbers (I suppose they've been annexed to England?). Easily fixed. Probably didn't realize Sirhowy is English. I hadn't either. He also spells Arfon "Afon" and has heard of Powys Fadog and Powys Wenwynwyn but is under very false impressions on where they were. I thought about trying to redraw his Valleys constituencies in boundaryassistant, just to understand what they entailed exactly, but eventually figured why bother. I'm not going to second them anyways and they're not going to happen either. I'd noticed the Blaenau Gwent issue.
|
|