Comment DBCC-8081

Sirs,

I write in response to the Revised Recommendations published in December 2024.

Whilst no expert in these matters, I have contributed to local and national boundary reviews over many years as an enthusiastic amateur. Some of my suggestions for Lancashire County Council electoral divisions are still in use. Looking at reviews in the context they are set is something I try to do every time I respond.

Your Revised Recommendations change very few boundaries, and I think this is the correct response. As you point out, the rules underpinning this review asks for combined constituencies which are geographic neighbours, have good transport links, and make coherent sense on the ground. You achieve that across Wales.

My concern is with the naming of the constituencies you have created. As I set out in my original submission, names should reflect the contents of the communities within the proposed boundaries, and should assist both voters and electoral administrators with identifying where they live at each election.

In some cases the Revised Recommendations appear to side step ease of identification in favour of using convoluted or complex naming, and although I don't have any problem with the use of Welsh, or any scheme to promote, encourage, and teach Welsh, there are some examples where the use of Welsh seems to have outweighed any consideration for an easily identifiable constituency name.

My submission today asks you to reconsider names where I feel that the choices made by the Revised Recommendations are not acceptable when considered in the context of a national review, particularly in parts of Wales where the language is not as commonly used as in other areas, and where much more identifiable names are available.

In cases I don't mention I have no alternatives to suggest.

"Fflint Wrecsam"

I acknowledge paragraph 7, which reads "the Commission will give particular consideration to any relevant names or words which are commonly used in both Welsh and English." Nonetheless, the Commission must be aware that in north-east Wales, use of the language is lower than in other parts. In the context of a national review, any combined constituency name should reflect and represent the communities within the boundary, and in this instance, the English language is more widely spoken and understood than Welsh.

Under the principle of "never let perfect be the enemy of good", I urge the Commission to reconsider using Welsh for a combined constituency in which English is the prominent language. My suggested alternative for this constituency is "Flintshire East and Wrexham"

"Ceredigion Penfro"

In paragraph 5.7 the Commission uses the word "likely" when discussing the identification of the Welsh language names for this constituency. In the context of a national review, it is telling that the justification for using the Welsh language in this combined constituency is not more certain or definite.

I suggest the alternative for this constituency should be "Ceredigion-Pembrokeshire "

"Gorllewin Abertawe Gŵyr (Swansea West Gower)"

The Commission says in paragraph 7.5 that it has proposed a name in English which is an acceptable alternative to the Welsh name. I suggest that this is not strictly true. The name "Swansea West Gower ", as written, is a string of geographic terms. In the Initial Proposals, the Commission rejected certain names because it did not want to suggest strings of place-names where more coherent alternatives existed.

Due to the Revised Recommendations attitude towards naming, the Commission has created a confusing middle-ground. In strict adherence to how a name is read in English, "Swansea West Gower " is not accurate. Is that "Swansea West" or "West Gower "? There is room for uncertainty and that's exactly what the Commission is supposed to avoid.

I urge the Commission to ensure that names make sense, at first glance, particularly when these names will be attached to Senedd constituencies, ballot papers, and other connected uses for years. Please consider my alternative name of "Swansea West and Gower".

"Blaenau Gwent Caerffili Rhymni"

The Commission set out in the Initial Recommendations a view that combined constituency names should not be a combination of geographic areas. This view seems to have been diluted or even overwritten with the Revised Recommendations.

I still believe that this name looks like a placeholder because no alternative exists. I urge the Commission to consider how to encourage both voters and electoral administrators to engage in the democratic process, for which names play an important part. For the sake of clarity, if nothing else, I suggest "West Gwent" as an alternative here.

"Mynwy Torfaen"

As above, I have concerns that the Commission has placed the weight of the Welsh language above the requirement to give coherent, recognisable names to combined constituencies. In this example, no explicit explanation is provided to justify using Welsh language terms in part of Wales where both Westminster and Senedd constituencies have never used the word "Mynwy" before. I suggest my alternative "East Gwent". In both this and the previous suggestion, this is the same as my initial email to you.

Both "De-ddwyrain Caerdydd Penarth (Cardiff South-east Penarth)" and "Gogledd-orllewin Caerdydd (Cardiff North-west)"

I acknowledge that the Commission has altered the proposed combination of existing constituencies in Cardiff. I agree with the new proposed boundaries.

As with Swansea, I think the Commission has erred in using direct translations for the English names of these seats. When written down "Cardiff South-east Penarth" could cause confusion for voters and electoral administrators.

This new seat resembles and reflects prior Westminster constituencies. I suggest on that basis that this seat is called "Cardiff Central and Penarth", using the 'and' in English for grammar and clarity.

The new North West seat is coherent and logical. I would suggest that "Cardiff Northwestern" rather than just "north west" would be a more suitable name to reflect the true geographic extent of the boundaries.

I wish the Commission all the best in the final stages of the process.

Warm regards

Respondent type

Member of public

This comment refers to

The entire area under review.