Harry Hayfield
Green
Cavalier Gentleman (as in 17th century Cavalier)
Posts: 2,922 
|
Post by Harry Hayfield on Oct 17, 2016 7:44:47 GMT
The final day of the inquiry was filled with one refrain over and over again (including from the Plaid Cymru councillor for the ward) "What the flip is Cenarth doing in Ceredigion and Pembroke North? It's CARMARTHENSHIRE for crying out loud!" These complaints, though irritating, can at least be resolved just by changing the name of the seat. Something with Teifi in it perhaps? How about calling the seat "Cardigan Bay"? Would that wash? p.s. Don't tell the residents, but the Ordnance Survey says Cenarth is in Ceredigion... The Plaid county councillor for the ward was most insistent that it be placed in Carmarthenshire (presumably working on the assumption that Cenarth elected her to Carmarthenshire council, not Ceredigion) |
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,841
Member is Online
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Oct 17, 2016 7:55:14 GMT
These complaints, though irritating, can at least be resolved just by changing the name of the seat. Something with Teifi in it perhaps? How about calling the seat "Cardigan Bay"? Would that wash? p.s. Don't tell the residents, but the Ordnance Survey says Cenarth is in Ceredigion... The Plaid county councillor for the ward was most insistent that it be placed in Carmarthenshire (presumably working on the assumption that Cenarth elected her to Carmarthenshire council, not Ceredigion) Is that the Cenarth that is on the north bank of a river that forms the southern boundary of Ceredigion? |
|
|
|
Post by Penddu on Oct 17, 2016 11:04:46 GMT
I would suggest Ceredigion, Preseli & Teifi.
No translation required.
|
|
|
|
Post by Penddu on Feb 2, 2017 1:42:51 GMT
Does anyone know when BCW will publish their comments? Due in early 2017..but...
|
|
|
|
Post by Penddu on Feb 26, 2017 6:22:52 GMT
The BCW have now posted that comments and feedback will be published on 28/02. And in an inexplicable display of independent thinking they have chosen to do this on the same day as BCE & BCS....
Cant wait to see what they make of Harrys proposals..
|
|
Harry Hayfield
Green
Cavalier Gentleman (as in 17th century Cavalier)
Posts: 2,922
|
Post by Harry Hayfield on Feb 26, 2017 7:51:48 GMT
The BCW have now posted that comments and feedback will be published on 28/02. And in an inexplicable display of independent thinking they have chosen to do this on the same day as BCE & BCS.... Cant wait to see what they make of Harrys proposals.. The way that I am reading it, they won't think anything. All they are doing are publishing all the submissions they had had and asking the general public what they think of them. |
|
|
|
Post by Penddu on Feb 26, 2017 9:46:14 GMT
I hope that in 3 months they have done more than just cut and paste comments onto their website....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2017 10:39:42 GMT
This coming stage is just for reading and reacting to submissions. It's not revised recommendations.
|
|
|
|
Post by Penddu on Feb 28, 2017 9:51:10 GMT
It seems you are right - they did just spend 3 months cutting & pasting.
Still it makes interesting and amusing reading....
|
|
ian48
Non-Aligned
Posts: 58
|
Post by ian48 on Feb 28, 2017 11:20:38 GMT
The Conservatives have done a very good counter-proposal that is very professionally put together. It contains enough 'sensible' changes not to be partisan while also benefiting them.
Lots of seats are left exactly as proposed which I guess looks good from a Commission perspective.
Traditionally Labour were far better at getting alternative proposals together but they haven't really done that this time. Wonder if the Commission will take note of the Tory proposals!?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 28, 2017 12:11:05 GMT
The Conservatives have done a very good counter-proposal that is very professionally put together. It contains enough 'sensible' changes not to be partisan while also benefiting them. Lots of seats are left exactly as proposed which I guess looks good from a Commission perspective. Traditionally Labour were far better at getting alternative proposals together but they haven't really done that this time. Wonder if the Commission will take note of the Tory proposals!? Have to say the same is true in the NW. |
|
Harry Hayfield
Green
Cavalier Gentleman (as in 17th century Cavalier)
Posts: 2,922
|
Post by Harry Hayfield on Feb 28, 2017 12:11:15 GMT
The reaction to the Ceredigion and Pembrokeshire North suggestion can be placed into three classes. You have the "We refuse to recognise that Ceredigion needs to be changed" whose main advocates appear to be the Welsh language societies and campaign groups and Plaid Cymru, then you have the "Blaen Hafren? What in the (bleep) were you on?" which comes from the county council mainly and the third class is "Have you pondered the idea of Machynlleth?" which seems to come from the south of the county (suggesting they want to keep Pembrokeshire as intact as possible).
|
|
iain
Lib Dem
Posts: 11,453
|
Post by iain on Feb 28, 2017 12:19:18 GMT
The Conservatives have done a very good counter-proposal that is very professionally put together. It contains enough 'sensible' changes not to be partisan while also benefiting them. Lots of seats are left exactly as proposed which I guess looks good from a Commission perspective. Traditionally Labour were far better at getting alternative proposals together but they haven't really done that this time. Wonder if the Commission will take note of the Tory proposals!? Have to say the same is true in the NW. Having had look around, it seems that the same seems true in most places (bar Scotland, where they have proposed some clear gerrymanders such as 'Kinross and Milngavie') |
|
ian48
Non-Aligned
Posts: 58
|
Post by ian48 on Feb 28, 2017 12:26:06 GMT
The Tory counter-proposals in North Wales are far superior than those proposed by the Commission, to the extent that you wonder why they couldn't have come up with that in the first place.
|
|
|
|
Post by Penddu on Mar 2, 2017 12:44:15 GMT
The best comment I have seen yet was the person who justified the retention of Montgomeryshire because it was where they invented the sleeping bag.
Seriously....search the BCW comments for 'sleeping'
You couldnt make this up!
|
|
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 Mar 3, 2017 21:51:16 GMT
If anybody is remotely interested, I've been working on a Wales that aims to honour Local Authority boundaries and minimise breakup as far as possible. This is what I've come up with:
Seats containing wards from one LA: 15
two LAs: 13
three LAs: 1
four or more LAs: NONE
LAs coterminous with a single seat: 1 (Denbighshire)
LAs contained wholly within a single seat: 6 (Anglesey, Torfaen, Ceredigion, Merthyr Tydfil, Blaneau Gwent, Monmouthshire)
LAs split between two seats: 9 (Flintshire, Wrexham, Conwy, Gwynedd, NPT, Pembrokeshire, Vale of Glamorgan, Bridgend,
three seats: 6 (Cardiff, Rhondda, Caerphilly, Powys, Newport, Swansea, Carmarthenshire)
four or more seats: NONE
Cardiff fits exactly three seats. No single orphan wards. No split wards.
Seat description and Electorate:
(These are not proposed as actual seat names - rather they describe them solely in terms of LAs)
1 Anglesey and Gwynedd NE 71808 Yes
2 Gwynedd Most and Conwy West 72911 Yes
3 Conwy East 73520 Yes
4 Denbighshire 74069 Yes
5 Flintshire North 71118 Yes
6 Flintshire South and Wrexham East 74884 Yes
7 Wrexham West and Powys North 76752 Yes
8 Powys Most 76384 Yes
9 Ceredigion and Carmarthenshire East 71535 Yes
10 Pembrokeshire Most 77936 Yes
11 Carmarthenshire West and Pembrokeshire North 71243 Yes
12 Swansea East 73295 Yes
13 Carmarthenshire South and Swansea North 71938 Yes
14 Swansea West 72256 Yes
15 Caerphilly South and Newport West 77656 Yes
16 NPT West 77289 Yes
17 Newport Most 77251 Yes
18 Monmouthshire and Powys SE 77209 Yes
19 Torfaen and Newport North 77367 Yes
20 Bridgend North, NPT East and Rhondda West 77916 Yes
21 Blaenau Gwent and Caerphilly East 76304 Yes
22 Merthyr Tydfil and Caerphilly North 75797 Yes
23 Bridgend South and Vale of Glamorgan West 76890 Yes
24 Vale of Glamorgan East 76984 Yes
25 Rhondda South 76329 Yes
26 Cardiff West 73647 Yes
27 Cardiff East 76251 Yes
28 Cardiff Central 77980 Yes
29 Rhondda North 77322 Yes
|
|
|
|
Post by Penddu on Mar 7, 2017 7:29:53 GMT
I have now gone through most of the comments, and ignoring the usual idiots and dinosaurs, the main specific issues seem to be:
1. Widespread objection to including St Asaph area in a Gwynedd seat, while excluding Bala area. Good alternative proposals made and it is difficult to see BCW original proposal standing.
2. Widespread objection to including Llanidloes area in Ceredigion. Again alternative proposals made which make a lot more sense and I dont think this proposal will survive
3. Lots of complaints about splitting Port Talbot but no obvious alternatives. I cant see much change here
4. Lots of support for retaining existing Cardiff South and Penarth, but no alternative proposals made for surrounding seats. I think BCW proposal for Cardiff will stand with some minor changes.
|
|
|
|
Post by Penddu on Mar 7, 2017 7:33:33 GMT
It is also amazing how many people seem to think that the parliamentary boundary changes equate to changing councils...some people should not be allowed to vote!
|
|
Harry Hayfield
Green
Cavalier Gentleman (as in 17th century Cavalier)
Posts: 2,922
|
Post by Harry Hayfield on Mar 7, 2017 9:19:44 GMT
It is also amazing how many people seem to think that the parliamentary boundary changes equate to changing councils...some people should not be allowed to vote! I know, even at the meeting I attended in Carmarthen several people came to the microphone and announced very clearly "I am a resident of Carmarthenshire, I am not a resident of Ceredigion and I never want to be a resident of Ceredigion!" |
|
|
|
Post by lennon on Mar 7, 2017 10:51:14 GMT
I have now gone through most of the comments, and ignoring the usual idiots and dinosaurs, the main specific issues seem to be: 1. Widespread objection to including St Asaph area in a Gwynedd seat, while excluding Bala area. Good alternative proposals made and it is difficult to see BCW original proposal standing. 2. Widespread objection to including Llanidloes area in Ceredigion. Again alternative proposals made which make a lot more sense and I dont think this proposal will survive 3. Lots of complaints about splitting Port Talbot but no obvious alternatives. I cant see much change here 4. Lots of support for retaining existing Cardiff South and Penarth, but no alternative proposals made for surrounding seats. I think BCW proposal for Cardiff will stand with some minor changes. 4 is interesting as I suspect that loads of people didn't bother proposing anything other than Cardiff = 3 seats but if there is genuine local support for Cardiff Sth + Penarth then you can also keep VoG unchanged as well. I might well take a look at this possibility to see if there is anything sensible that works. |
|
