Comment DBCC-8327

Totally ridiculous, on at least two counts. I don't know how the seat was geographically evaluated but to say, and I quote from your documentation, that the seat would " combine the whole of the Ceredigion and Pembrokeshire principal council areas into one constituency, which has good road links between the two areas and is therefore a cohesive constituency" is not correct. Good road links!!! Which roads were travelled on in coming to this conclusion? The roads in Ceredigion, moving down towards Pembrokeshire, are amongst the worst in Wales. There are far better road links between Carmarthenshire and Pembrokeshire, with numerous stretches of dual carriageway.

If the Commission, as stated, also considers local ties, such as shared history, the Welsh language, and socio-economic considerations in an attempt to propose constituencies which feel as natural as possible across Wales, then again to propose a Ceredigion Penfro seat, taking into account the whole of Pembrokeshire, is not valid. The language difference between Ceredigion and North Pembrokeshire where Welsh is still a predominant language, with the rest of Pembrokeshire is significant. There are vast areas of Pembrokeshire which are nearly totally Anglicised with very little tolerance towards the Welsh language. I would be very interested to know what "shared history" is being referred to? What socio-economic factors? Whilst both Ceredigion and Penfro have large swathes of agricultural activity and tourism, Penfro also has a large scale oil refining industry as a dominant factor.

There is no sense at all in joining these two very different areas into one constituency.

Respondent type

Member of public

This comment refers to

The entire area under review.