Newport areas could join Cardiff seat in elections shake-up

VOTERS in Duffryn could be served by a MP who also counts parts of the North of Cardiff in his constituency under new proposals announced today.

Earlier this year the Boundary Commission for Wales proposed reducing the number of Gwent MPs from six to five, with one constituency covering most of urban Newport and the constituency of Islwyn being split up.

But after a consultation launched in January, the proposed area of Newport West and Sirhowy has been withdrawn and a new area of Cardiff North and South West Gwent has been proposed instead.

Under the revised proposals, the Caerphilly constituency would expand to include the Abercarn, Cross Keys, Pengam, Pontllanfraith and Ynysddu areas of Islwyn.

Paul Flynn, MP for Newport West, dubbed the Cardiff North and South West Gwent proposal “Tory-land” in a response to the consultation earlier this year.

The area would include the Newport council wards of Graig, Marshfield, Tredegar Park which includes the Duffryn estate, Rogerstone and Risca.

A new consultation is to run from today until December 18 – but reports have suggested that Liberal Democrats will block the UK government plans for reducing the number of MPs and for having a similar sized electorate in each constituency.

Ben Whitestone, secretary to the commission, said it is required by law to complete the review and deliver final recommendations.

A future government could bring forward the proposals again, he said. This would be the final opportunity for the public to have a say on the proposals.

Comments (12)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:49am Wed 24 Oct 12

Owain Vaughan says...

The whole thing is nonsensical. Why does it matter if each constituency has a different number of electors anyway? Forcing together different areas with nothing in common just to fit an arbitrary numerical quota means that the MP cannot possibly serve the interests of his/her constituents as they will be different and potentially mutually exclusive.

The original system of borough and county constituencies makes much more sense. The urban areas form their own constituencies with the rural remainder forming separate ones. This way the different problems of urban and rural life can be addressed separately. Throwing them both together into geographically meaningless chunks serves nobody but the mathematicians who drew this nonsense up.
The whole thing is nonsensical. Why does it matter if each constituency has a different number of electors anyway? Forcing together different areas with nothing in common just to fit an arbitrary numerical quota means that the MP cannot possibly serve the interests of his/her constituents as they will be different and potentially mutually exclusive. The original system of borough and county constituencies makes much more sense. The urban areas form their own constituencies with the rural remainder forming separate ones. This way the different problems of urban and rural life can be addressed separately. Throwing them both together into geographically meaningless chunks serves nobody but the mathematicians who drew this nonsense up. Owain Vaughan

12:45pm Wed 24 Oct 12

james.dyer7@ntlworld.com says...

Owain - agreed. It's better than what they originally proposed but still not right. What the are doing is trying to get more Tory MPs in by altering boundaries.
Owain - agreed. It's better than what they originally proposed but still not right. What the are doing is trying to get more Tory MPs in by altering boundaries. james.dyer7@ntlworld.com

12:59pm Wed 24 Oct 12

Owain Vaughan says...

Time for the Lib Dems to actually do something in the coalition and block this!
Time for the Lib Dems to actually do something in the coalition and block this! Owain Vaughan

1:03pm Wed 24 Oct 12

james.dyer7@ntlworld.com says...

owain - that's their intention if you read the national press. What makes me laugh is that on Newport East they are putting Caerleon with Torfaen and a load of the rest to Monmouth. Its a big joke.
owain - that's their intention if you read the national press. What makes me laugh is that on Newport East they are putting Caerleon with Torfaen and a load of the rest to Monmouth. Its a big joke. james.dyer7@ntlworld.com

2:08pm Wed 24 Oct 12

Owain Vaughan says...

Both sets of plans are ridiculous with respect to Newport. Carving bits off into four separate constituencies. Where is the sense in that?

The most sensible proposals I've seen are by the Monmouthshire Association:

http://monmouthshire
-association.org.uk/
boundary-reviews/201
3/proposals
Both sets of plans are ridiculous with respect to Newport. Carving bits off into four separate constituencies. Where is the sense in that? The most sensible proposals I've seen are by the Monmouthshire Association: http://monmouthshire -association.org.uk/ boundary-reviews/201 3/proposals Owain Vaughan

4:34pm Wed 24 Oct 12

pjwivell says...

So what's supposed reason for all this boundry change. If they are intent on chopping bit's off the boundry of Newport, does that mean Newport will cease to exist, and that way the Welsh Office or the Government can then take back the City Status. Don't get me wrong I agree with a lot of people who think there is nothing much done in the City, to warrent the status. But being a person born and bred in Newport, and seen the results of useless Council decisions, that have brought the Town, and now the City to absalute rock bottom. It makes me feel ashamed to say I live in Newport. So by doing this is the Government giving Newport to other local Governments to see if they can do better. I live in the area that will come under the Cardiff area, and that's something I do not want. Let the people of Newport have a vote as to what they want.
So what's supposed reason for all this boundry change. If they are intent on chopping bit's off the boundry of Newport, does that mean Newport will cease to exist, and that way the Welsh Office or the Government can then take back the City Status. Don't get me wrong I agree with a lot of people who think there is nothing much done in the City, to warrent the status. But being a person born and bred in Newport, and seen the results of useless Council decisions, that have brought the Town, and now the City to absalute rock bottom. It makes me feel ashamed to say I live in Newport. So by doing this is the Government giving Newport to other local Governments to see if they can do better. I live in the area that will come under the Cardiff area, and that's something I do not want. Let the people of Newport have a vote as to what they want. pjwivell

4:40pm Wed 24 Oct 12

james.dyer7@ntlworld.com says...

pjwivell - no, no. you got it all wrong. the new boundaries only operate during parliament elections. newport as a city stays the same.
pjwivell - no, no. you got it all wrong. the new boundaries only operate during parliament elections. newport as a city stays the same. james.dyer7@ntlworld.com

4:47pm Wed 24 Oct 12

Severn40 says...

Before we get too excited about this and claim Newport is being cut up - it is happening elsewhere. Three of the Cardiff seats will now include parts of Vale of Glamorgan, RCT, Newport and Caerphilly. Swansea seats will include parts of Neath Port Talbot and Carmarthenshire etc etc. A Cardiff perspective could argue why should their city include parts of Newport?
Before we get too excited about this and claim Newport is being cut up - it is happening elsewhere. Three of the Cardiff seats will now include parts of Vale of Glamorgan, RCT, Newport and Caerphilly. Swansea seats will include parts of Neath Port Talbot and Carmarthenshire etc etc. A Cardiff perspective could argue why should their city include parts of Newport? Severn40

4:49pm Wed 24 Oct 12

james.dyer7@ntlworld.com says...

severn - so what? we all know that. Hell of a mess though.
severn - so what? we all know that. Hell of a mess though. james.dyer7@ntlworld.com

6:32pm Wed 24 Oct 12

Bobevans says...

Owain Vaughan wrote:
The whole thing is nonsensical. Why does it matter if each constituency has a different number of electors anyway? Forcing together different areas with nothing in common just to fit an arbitrary numerical quota means that the MP cannot possibly serve the interests of his/her constituents as they will be different and potentially mutually exclusive.

The original system of borough and county constituencies makes much more sense. The urban areas form their own constituencies with the rural remainder forming separate ones. This way the different problems of urban and rural life can be addressed separately. Throwing them both together into geographically meaningless chunks serves nobody but the mathematicians who drew this nonsense up.
So you are suggesting that in some areas their vote should have more weight than elsewhwere

Currently constituencies range from a over a 1000,000 to just 22,000 but both only return 1 MP
[quote][p][bold]Owain Vaughan[/bold] wrote: The whole thing is nonsensical. Why does it matter if each constituency has a different number of electors anyway? Forcing together different areas with nothing in common just to fit an arbitrary numerical quota means that the MP cannot possibly serve the interests of his/her constituents as they will be different and potentially mutually exclusive. The original system of borough and county constituencies makes much more sense. The urban areas form their own constituencies with the rural remainder forming separate ones. This way the different problems of urban and rural life can be addressed separately. Throwing them both together into geographically meaningless chunks serves nobody but the mathematicians who drew this nonsense up.[/p][/quote]So you are suggesting that in some areas their vote should have more weight than elsewhwere Currently constituencies range from a over a 1000,000 to just 22,000 but both only return 1 MP Bobevans

7:32am Thu 25 Oct 12

Mr Angry says...

This is an expensive waste of taxpayers money, as the attempted Gerrymandering by Cameron will not suceed, the Lib Dems are blocking it when it comes to the Commons.

What old Lord Snooty has done is looked at he political map and ensured that areas that dont support the Tories, Wales,Scotland, Inner Cities and The North all loose seats, whereas the Tory powerbase of the South East of England remains unscathed.

Its not about 'leveling things' its about rigging the next Election.

Bob Evans can't see that.
This is an expensive waste of taxpayers money, as the attempted Gerrymandering by Cameron will not suceed, the Lib Dems are blocking it when it comes to the Commons. What old Lord Snooty has done is looked at he political map and ensured that areas that dont support the Tories, Wales,Scotland, Inner Cities and The North all loose seats, whereas the Tory powerbase of the South East of England remains unscathed. Its not about 'leveling things' its about rigging the next Election. Bob Evans can't see that. Mr Angry

9:37am Thu 25 Oct 12

Owain Vaughan says...

Bobevans - what I am suggesting that in some areas the electorate should be a different size. That doesn't mean their vote has less weight - in fact it may mean their vote has MORE weight. If urban and rural areas are split up then it's quite clear to see that the opinions of the rural inhabitants would not be drowned out by the urban and vice versa. Mixing them up means that neither has their voice heard as they frequently contradict each other. And for what? Some hypothetical "fairness" based solely on the size of the electorate? Since when is that even possible, given that this is only the sixth review of constituencies since 1954?

We need a return to proper borough and county constituencies, not arbitrary slices of towns jumbled together with rural areas and slices of other towns.
Bobevans - what I am suggesting that in some areas the electorate should be a different size. That doesn't mean their vote has less weight - in fact it may mean their vote has MORE weight. If urban and rural areas are split up then it's quite clear to see that the opinions of the rural inhabitants would not be drowned out by the urban and vice versa. Mixing them up means that neither has their voice heard as they frequently contradict each other. And for what? Some hypothetical "fairness" based solely on the size of the electorate? Since when is that even possible, given that this is only the sixth review of constituencies since 1954? We need a return to proper borough and county constituencies, not arbitrary slices of towns jumbled together with rural areas and slices of other towns. Owain Vaughan

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree