Comment DBCC-7824

Democracy and Boundary Commission Cymru Cathays Park
Cardiff CF10 3NQ

18 September 2024 Dear Sir/Madam
2026 REVIEW OF SENEDD CONSTITUENCIES – BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR WALES’ INITIAL PROPOSALS
I am writing to present the formal response of Elected Members to your proposals in respect of the 2026 Review of Senedd Constituencies – Boundary Commission for Wales’ Initial Proposals. This response was considered and adopted by the Council’s cross-party Overview and Scrutiny Committee at its meeting on the 18 September 2024, with an open invitation to all Elected Members. These responses also represent the Council’s formal response.

Principally, Members considered the Commission’s proposals which will impact RCT county constituencies as follows:

1. Aberafan Maesteg, Rhondda and Ogmore (Aberafan Maesteg, Rhondda ac Ogwr) The Commission proposes that a county constituency be created from: The Aberafan Maesteg UK Parliamentary constituency, and: The Rhondda and Ogmore UK Parliamentary constituency.

2. Merthyr Tydfil, Aberdare and Pontypridd (Merthyr Tudful, Aberdâr a Phontypridd) which will be created from: The Merthyr Tydfil and Aberdare UK Parliamentary constituency, and: The Pontypridd UK Parliamentary constituency

3. Cardiff East and North (Dwyrain a Gogledd Caerdydd) The Commission proposes that a county constituency be created from: The Cardiff East UK Parliamentary constituency, and: The Cardiff North UK Parliamentary constituency.

Member’s comments and concerns with the proposals are summarised below:

• Members expressed concerns with the principles of aligning with UK Parliamentary Constituencies and queried why the proposal is for 16 constituencies. Members considered that the current proposals will make it

extremely difficult for MS’s to work across several different Health Boards and observed that they would be better aligned with the current Local Health Board or the Local Authority footprints.
• Members felt that the wide remit of the Constituency MS’s role will be so broad that they will be disconnected geographically.
• Members disagreed with the statement from the Commissioner that there are very good road links between the proposed Aberafan Maesteg, Rhondda and Ogmore constituency and voiced serious concerns regarding road access especially if the Rhigos or Maerdy mountains are closed.
• Members felt that there are no shared characteristics exist with the Rhondda (Pont Y Cymmer/Maesteg/Ogmore) and feel like it has been added on with no justification and did not reflect the geographical make- up of the Rhondda
• Members objected to the current proposals and note the consultation asks for alternative options to be proposed, therefore, RCT Members formally proposed the constituency of Rhondda Cynon Taf, or if this is not deemed possible then Merthyr/Cynon and Rhondda/Pontypridd be considered as it was discussed that these areas have similar demographic and cultural connections
• Majority of Members agreed that the Senedd does need more MS’s (although added that this won’t necessarily be popular with the public)
• The current proposals will mean a loss of local connection and make it difficult for the public to know/understand their MS’s and it could potentially drive more casework to the local members and MP’s. Members believed that the current proposals will not deliver the service that the people of Wales deserve

We would like the responses contained within the letter to be considered as part of the initial consultation process. In addition to our formal reply, I am aware that individual members will also make representations on behalf of their electoral wards and likewise the political parties represented on the Council.


Yours faithfully,

[REDACTED] on behalf of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

Respondent type

On behalf of a local authority

Organisation name

Rhondda Cynon Taf County Borough Council

This comment refers to

The entire area under review.