|
|
Post by Penddu on Feb 10, 2024 6:11:10 GMT
The arrangements for the next Senedd elections will be in place for one election only following which they will be replaced. The final arrangements are at very early stages of discussion, but looks like there will be 16 x 6 member seats, which will be redrawn from scratch with a permitted variation of +/-10%.
I would love to play with this on Boundary Assistant, but cant because it excludes Ynys Môn which is unlikely in the new system.
Does anyone have any suggestions ??
|
|
|
|
Post by LDCaerdydd on Feb 10, 2024 8:33:41 GMT
Does anyone have any suggestions ?? Start from the south and work up and leave a chuck of North West Wales that will be attached at Ynys Môn at a later date? |
|
Harry Hayfield
Green
Cavalier Gentleman (as in 17th century Cavalier)
Posts: 2,922 
|
Post by Harry Hayfield on Feb 11, 2024 13:12:17 GMT
Ynys Mon is 52,438 (by taking the number of electors you can use from the Welsh figure published in March 2020), therefore for your Ynys Mon based megaconstituency you can have 75,264 plus Ynys Mon
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Feb 11, 2024 14:47:17 GMT
The quota would be 145,169 - max 159,686, min 130,652. So you'd need to add a minimum of 78,214 to Yns Mon or a maxumum of 107,248. For an average sized seat add 92,731. The electorate of Gwynedd is 87,241
|
|
|
|
Post by Penddu on Feb 11, 2024 16:34:03 GMT
Yes - I did that in the end - it just meant I couldnt use the automated features of Boundary Assistant and kept hand written notes. I then drew some regional boundaries to keep options within manageable limits:
North (Gwynedd, Clwyd & Montgomery) = 4 seats
West (Dyfed & West Glam) = 4 seats
Central (South Glam, Mid Glam inc former district of Rhymney Valley) = 5 seats
South East (Gwent & south Powys) = 3 seats
There doesnt seem another pratcical option for splitting Powys, and after that things become relatively easy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Feb 11, 2024 17:12:37 GMT
Yes - I did that in the end - it just meant I couldnt use the automated features of Boundary Assistant and kept hand written notes. I then drew some regional boundaries to keep options within manageable limits: North (Gwynedd, Clwyd & Montgomery) = 4 seats West (Dyfed & West Glam) = 4 seats Central (South Glam, Mid Glam inc former district of Rhymney Valley) = 5 seats South East (Gwent & south Powys) = 3 seats There doesnt seem another pratcical option for splitting Powys, and after that things become relatively easy. Cardiff was actually the most awkward in my experience. Both Dyfed and West Glamorgan can be considered alone with Carmarthenshire forming a single seat and Pembs/Cardigan another while Neath & Port Talbot takes the northern tier of wards from Swansea (more or less the old Lliw Valley district. I had Gwynedd and Anglesy as one, Conwy/Denbigh (less Prestatyn), Flintshire (plus Prestatyn), Wrexham and Montgomergyshire Monmouthshire and Brecon & Radnor is undersized so needs to take some wards from the fringe of Torfaen (Blaenavon and or New Inn) Newport then had to take wards from the East of Cardiff (Trowbridge, Pontprennau / Old St. Mellons) leaving everything else East of the Taff as a Cardiff East seat and everything West of the Taff combining with Penarth and Barry (rest of the Vale with Bridgend) |
|
nyx
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,035
|
Post by nyx on Feb 11, 2024 17:17:26 GMT
An initial attempt, prioritizing minimizing local authority splits:   I'm happy enough with North Wales here, but my focus on avoiding authority splits in this map led to a few seats in South Wales that are very much unsatisfactory. |
|
|
|
Post by Penddu on Feb 13, 2024 4:21:49 GMT
I dont think putting Merthyr & Blaenau Gwent in the same seat as Brecon is very viable.....
Putting Brecon with Monmouthshire seems the best option - a 'Vale of Usk' seat centred on Abergavenny.
This makes the South fairly easy to resolve - except around Cardiff which is always going to be a problem. I had Cardiff Central, North & East in one seat, with Cardiff West & Barry in another.
I will try and publish my maps later.
|
|
nyx
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,035
|
Post by nyx on Feb 13, 2024 4:58:43 GMT
I dont think putting Merthyr & Blaenau Gwent in the same seat as Brecon is very viable..... Putting Brecon with Monmouthshire seems the best option - a 'Vale of Usk' seat centred on Abergavenny. This makes the South fairly easy to resolve - except around Cardiff which is always going to be a problem. I had Cardiff Central, North & East in one seat, with Cardiff West & Barry in another. I will try and publish my maps later. Yeah, it's unfortunate because a Monmouthshire+Torfaen seat and a Caerphilly seat both work perfectly but the implication on the leftovers is not good. Maybe it was a mistake to be restricted to 6 member seats. If there was the option of 4, 5, 6, or 7 member seats (perhaps even a 2-member special for Anglesey)– with the total allowed to go slightly above or below 96 in total– then you could get much better boundaries. |
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Feb 13, 2024 7:39:14 GMT
I dont think putting Merthyr & Blaenau Gwent in the same seat as Brecon is very viable..... Putting Brecon with Monmouthshire seems the best option - a 'Vale of Usk' seat centred on Abergavenny. This makes the South fairly easy to resolve - except around Cardiff which is always going to be a problem. I had Cardiff Central, North & East in one seat, with Cardiff West & Barry in another. I will try and publish my maps later. Yeah, it's unfortunate because a Monmouthshire+Torfaen seat and a Caerphilly seat both work perfectly but the implication on the leftovers is not good. Maybe it was a mistake to be restricted to 6 member seats. If there was the option of 4, 5, 6, or 7 member seats (perhaps even a 2-member special for Anglesey)– with the total allowed to go slightly above or below 96 in total– then you could get much better boundaries. It was, but 4/5 seat PR constituencies are not proportional in practice -look at Portuguese elections to see why for example. 6 is the absolute minimum for a PR seat to be at least somewhat proportional, but using the 5 regions, or even the former 8 counties of 1974-96 would be better to ensure true proportionality for the Senedd (20 seats for South Wales Central, 19 for the other 4 regions) whilst ensuring that the de facto threshold would not be too low. |
|
nyx
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,035
|
Post by nyx on Feb 13, 2024 8:06:55 GMT
On the question of what to do with Brecon– one option is to extend the recent commission's decision to extend it southwest. The local authorities of Swansea, Neath Port Talbot, and Bridgend, plus Brecon and Radnorshire, make three seats. So you could have a seat made up of Brecon and Radnorshire, all of pre-2024 Neath constituency, and everything between the rivers Tawe and Neath. Thereby leaving natural Swansea seat on one side and Bridgend on the other side.
"Brecon and Neath" is a bit incoherent but any of the options would be.
|
|
|
|
Post by Penddu on Feb 13, 2024 18:09:40 GMT
On the question of what to do with Brecon– one option is to extend the recent commission's decision to extend it southwest. The local authorities of Swansea, Neath Port Talbot, and Bridgend, plus Brecon and Radnorshire, make three seats. So you could have a seat made up of Brecon and Radnorshire, all of pre-2024 Neath constituency, and everything between the rivers Tawe and Neath. Thereby leaving natural Swansea seat on one side and Bridgend on the other side. "Brecon and Neath" is a bit incoherent but any of the options would be. But with the new rules there is no requirement - or point - in perpetuating the current boundaries. If there is a wish to follow county boundaries as far as practical, this is one of the first cross boundary seats to be reversed. Swansea & NPT combined make up exactly two seats so why cross a border with Powys. |
|
nyx
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,035
|
Post by nyx on Feb 13, 2024 18:33:15 GMT
On the question of what to do with Brecon– one option is to extend the recent commission's decision to extend it southwest. The local authorities of Swansea, Neath Port Talbot, and Bridgend, plus Brecon and Radnorshire, make three seats. So you could have a seat made up of Brecon and Radnorshire, all of pre-2024 Neath constituency, and everything between the rivers Tawe and Neath. Thereby leaving natural Swansea seat on one side and Bridgend on the other side. "Brecon and Neath" is a bit incoherent but any of the options would be. But with the new rules there is no requirement - or point - in perpetuating the current boundaries. If there is a wish to follow county boundaries as far as practical, this is one of the first cross boundary seats to be reversed. Swansea & NPT combined make up exactly two seats so why cross a border with Powys. Because literally every possible border crossing for Brecon messes up something. Montgomeryshire– messes up northern Wales and needs more adding anyway Ceredigion or Carmarthen– both mess up the natural seats there of Ceredigion+Pembrokeshire and Carmarthenshire thereby ensuring also Swansea+NPT get divided anyway Monmouthshire– Is possible but requires something else adding too like part of Blaenau Gwent and also messes up the natural Monmouthshire+Torfaen pairing One of the valleys- extremely poor connections |
|
|
|
Post by Penddu on Feb 13, 2024 19:21:45 GMT
The few villages from Torfaen around New Inn fit naturally with Monmouthshire so bring a Brecon & Monmouthshire pairing up to quota.
Most of Torfaen (exc New Inn area) plus most of Newport exc Marshfield, Tredegar Park etc then makes another seat (Central Gwent)
The small part of West Newport plus Islwyn plus Blaenau Gwent then make a West Gwent seat.
It works very easily.
|
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Feb 13, 2024 20:13:23 GMT
I'm not convinced that pairing Brecon with Merthyr is that bad - it's not *good* but the A470 is at least the major north-south trunk route. Blaenau Gwent is a worse fit, but Brynmawr is at least historically part of Brecknockshire. If it wasn't for the fact that Caerphilly is already right at the lower limit I'd be tempted to add the top of the Rhymney Valley too so that you had a link along the Heads of the Valleys road.
|
|
|
|
Post by 🏴☠️ Neath West 🏴☠️ on Feb 13, 2024 21:32:21 GMT
On the question of what to do with Brecon– one option is to extend the recent commission's decision to extend it southwest. The local authorities of Swansea, Neath Port Talbot, and Bridgend, plus Brecon and Radnorshire, make three seats. So you could have a seat made up of Brecon and Radnorshire, all of pre-2024 Neath constituency, and everything between the rivers Tawe and Neath. Thereby leaving natural Swansea seat on one side and Bridgend on the other side. "Brecon and Neath" is a bit incoherent but any of the options would be. But with the new rules there is no requirement - or point - in perpetuating the current boundaries. If there is a wish to follow county boundaries as far as practical, this is one of the first cross boundary seats to be reversed. Swansea & NPT combined make up exactly two seats so why cross a border with Powys. Because NPT is an amorphous blob and Neath goes much better with Ystradgynlais and Brecon than with Port Talbot. |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Feb 13, 2024 22:08:51 GMT
But with the new rules there is no requirement - or point - in perpetuating the current boundaries. If there is a wish to follow county boundaries as far as practical, this is one of the first cross boundary seats to be reversed. Swansea & NPT combined make up exactly two seats so why cross a border with Powys. Because NPT is an amorphous blob and Neath goes much better with Ystradgynlais and Brecon than with Port Talbot. It takes 45-60 minutes to drive from Neath to Brecon. It takes 10 minutes to drive from Neath to Port Talbot. Your argument would appear on the face of it to be absurd. |
|
|
|
Post by Penddu on Feb 16, 2024 5:51:12 GMT
There is a valid argument that the Ystradgynlais area should be transferred from Powys into NPT. And this then considered in the new boundaries.
But there is zero reason to add Neath to Brecon in the new arrangements. Uneccesary & unjustified.
|
|
|
|
Post by Penddu on Feb 16, 2024 5:51:53 GMT
In building up new seats, i thought it would be better to use general names instead of detailed names - for example
Neath, Port Talbot, Swansea Valley => West Glamorgan
Bridgend & Western Vale of Glam => Central Glamorgan
Rhondda, Pontypridd & Ely Valley => Mid Glamorgan
Merthyr, Cynon Valley & Rhymney Valley => North Glamorgan
Cardiff West & Barry => South Glamorgan
Just spotted one flaw.... Central and Mid both translate to Canol...tine to get my dictionary out...
|
|
|
|
Post by Wisconsin on Feb 16, 2024 7:37:46 GMT
But with the new rules there is no requirement - or point - in perpetuating the current boundaries. If there is a wish to follow county boundaries as far as practical, this is one of the first cross boundary seats to be reversed. Swansea & NPT combined make up exactly two seats so why cross a border with Powys. Do you have a copy of the new rules? It seems like the obvious starting point would be to determine the statutory criteria (and any written non-statutory criteria) that the Commission will apply. Are the statutory criteria are those in section 49C to be added to the 2023 Act by page 21 of this bill: senedd.wales/media/iaifuxyj/pri-ld16037-e.pdfIt doesn’t refer to archaic counties, but rather local government boundaries. Unless I’ve misunderstood, the requirement to seek to minimise changes from existing Senedd constituencies suggests that the one-off pairing arrangements will continue to influence the pattern afterwards. It will not be “from scratch”. |
|
