Comment DBCC-7001
I think the DBCC has produced as good a combination of constituencies as possible on the terms that it was commissioned to do so. And, of course, given that these are likely to be single-use ‘super constituencies’ my personal view is that there isn’t enough flexibility to make wide debate worthwhile.
However, where I think there is conversation to be had is in the nomenclature and wider strategy with regard to future Welsh elections (which is beyond DBCC scope technically but I think merits debate).
These are the first electoral boundaries created in Wales for Wales. That’s quite historic in my opinion. As a result we have to think not only about what this means for the present but also for the future of Wales, irrespective of the UK/GB context. We are considering how *we* refer to *ourselves* and *our* future. On this front, I would like to propose two concepts to discuss in the context of nomenclature:
Firstly, I think ‘constituencies’ is not an applicable term for these areas. The longstanding British conception of constituency is a relatively small area with a single ‘constituency MP/AM/MS’. These are large areas with multiple MSs, for which we already have precedent and they are clearly referred to in the current Senedd voting system as ‘regions’ and I think that it a better term for them.
Secondly, I think there is a current and future-facing aspect to naming these regions. If we are breaking the link entirely with UK Parliament constituencies - rightly in my view for clarity, understanding, and differentiation - then it is essential that the regional population *recognises* the new name. Little-known, obscure, or entirely new regional names will be unfamiliar to the wide population who lives there. This is bad for comprehension, campaigning, and a sense of belonging on behalf of the electorate. So what is the optimal solution? From my perspective, the logic is to tap into regional cultural memory as you have done with the suggestion of ‘Clwyd’. The post-1974 local government settlement can offer a lot here because it is both 1) regional 2) persistant (through Policing such as Dyfed-Powys, Preserved counties, Glamorgan cricket etc) and 3) familiar to much of the population (though less so of course with the post-1996 generation). So I would suggest that DBCC consider leaning into this extant population knowledge to make the transition as relatable and coherent as possible to a population that *also* has to grapple with an entirely new voting system for national elections at the same time.
As an additional bonus, there is also an opportunity to set a foundation for future considerations by the boundary commissions when it comes to trying to achieve as much coterminosity with local government in Wales, especially if it - as looks likely - regionalises at some point.
I attach a map with suggested alternative names based on this logic. It doesn’t quite fit your desired requirements for simplicity but I think the familiarity bonus frankly outweighs that requirement.
Best of luck to you all with such a tricky task!
Supporting documents
Respondent type
Member of public
This comment refers to
The entire area under review.