LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR

REVIEW OF PART OF THE BOUNDARY BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF , THE OF AND THE COUNTY OF IN THE AREA OF

REPORT AND PROPOSALS

LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR WALES

REVIEW OF PART OF THE BOUNDARY BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF CARMARTHENSHIRE, THE COUNTY BOROUGH OF AND THE COUNTY OF POWYS IN THE AREA OF CWMLLYNFELL

REPORT AND PROPOSALS

1. INTRODUCTION

2. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

3. SCOPE AND OBJECT OF THE REVIEW

4. DRAFT PROPOSALS

5. REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED IN RESPONSE TO THE DRAFT PROPOSALS

6. ASSESSMENT

7. BRYN-MORGAN BRIDGE

8. PROPOSALS

9. CONSEQUENTIAL ARRANGEMENTS

10. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

11. RESPONSES TO THIS REPORT

The Local Government Boundary Commission For Wales Caradog House 1-6 St Andrews Place CARDIFF CF10 3BE Tel Number: (029) 2039 5031 Fax Number: (029) 2039 5250 E-mail: [email protected] www.lgbc-wales.gov.uk

Sue Essex AM Minister for Finance, Local Government and Public Services The National Assembly for Wales

REVIEW OF PART OF THE BOUNDARY BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF CARMARTHENSHIRE, THE COUNTY BOROUGH OF NEATH PORT TALBOT AND THE COUNTY OF POWYS IN THE AREA OF CWMLLYNFELL

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 This report concerns the review of part of the boundary between the County of Carmarthenshire, the County Borough of Neath Port Talbot and the County of Powys in the Area of Cwmllynfell and our proposals for a new boundary. (A map showing the area under review can be found at Appendix 6).

2. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

2.1 We propose that:

S the boundary between the County of Carmarthenshire and the County Borough of Neath Port Talbot should be realigned so that the area of the existing of Cwmllynfell is within the area administered by Carmarthenshire County Council.

S a new Cwmllynfell Community is created within Carmarthenshire consisting of the area of the existing Cwmllynfell Community and the Llynfell ward of the Community of . We propose a new Quarter Bach Community consisting of the Quarter Bach and wards of the existing Community of Quarter Bach.

S the boundary between Neath Port Talbot and Powys should be realigned so that a small area of the existing Cwmllynfell Community at Lower Bryn-Morgan Bridge is included within the area administered by Powys County Council.

3. SCOPE AND OBJECT OF THE REVIEW

3.1 Section 54(1) of the Local Government Act 1972 (the Act) provides that the Commission may in consequence of a review conducted by them make proposals to the National Assembly for Wales for effecting changes appearing to the Commission desirable in the interests of effective and convenient local government.

Procedure

3.2 Section 60 of the Act lays down procedural guidelines that are to be followed in carrying out a review. In line with that guidance, we wrote to the principal councils, the community councils, the Members of Parliament for the local constituencies, the Assembly Members for the area, the local authority associations, the police authority for the area and political

- 1 -

parties to inform them of our intention to conduct the review, to request their preliminary views. We invited the principal councils to submit suggestions for changes to the boundary. We also publicised our intention to conduct the review in local newspapers circulating in the area and asked the councils to display a number of public notices.

4. DRAFT PROPOSALS

4.1 In response to our initial invitation, we received representations from Carmarthenshire County Council, Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council, Cwmllynfell Community Council, Rt. Hon Peter Hain MP, Gwenda Thomas AM, Dyfed Powys Police Authority and a resident. These representations were taken into consideration and summarised in our Draft Proposals published on 15 November 2002.

4.2 Our Draft Proposals recommended that the boundary between the County of Carmarthenshire and the County Borough of Neath Port Talbot in the area of Cwmllynfell should be realigned in the area under review to follow the River Llynfell from the point on the existing boundary at the A4068 road bridge at Cwmllynfell until it again meets the existing boundary at the confluence of the River Llynfell and the River Twrch.

4.3 In our Draft Proposals report we noted the alternative proposal made by Cwmllynfell Community Council to create a new community by combining the existing Cwmllynfell Community with a substantial part of the Llynfell Ward of the Community of Quarter Bach. We were of the view that we had insufficient evidence at that stage to consider that the proposal by Cwmllynfell Community Council would be of benefit in terms of effective and convenient local government. We therefore noted Cwmllynfell Community Council’s proposal and invited further comment to inform our further consideration of this issue.

4.4 Copies of the Draft Proposals were sent to all the councils, bodies and individuals referred to in paragraph 3.2 seeking their views. A copy was also sent to everyone who had submitted preliminary comments. By public notice we also invited any other organisation or person with an interest in the review to submit their views. Copies were also made available for inspection at the offices of Carmarthenshire County Council, Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council and the Commission and were also deposited at the offices of the Dyfed Powys Police Authority. In addition we obtained, from Carmarthenshire County Council and Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council, addresses for all of the residents in the area affected by the review. We wrote to the residents on 7 June 2003 providing a summary of our Draft Proposals and informing them of a public meeting which was held on 19 June 2003 at the Millennium Hall, Cwmllynfell. This meeting, which was attended by 112 people, was held in order to provide a detailed explanation of the draft proposals, so that the local inhabitants would then be in a position to respond by the due date. As a result of writing to the residents and the information provided at the meeting, we are of the opinion that the draft proposals were understood by the local community and we were gratified by the excellent response in terms of the number of representations that were subsequently received (Appendix 5).

- 2 -

5. REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED IN RESPONSE TO THE DRAFT PROPOSALS

5.1 Representations have been received from Carmarthenshire County Council; Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council; Powys County Council; Cwmllynfell Community Council; Ystradgynlais Town Council; Adam Price MP; Rhodri Glyn Thomas AM; 120 other interested bodies and residents and 6 petitions with a total of 544 signatories. All of these representations have been considered carefully before formulating our final proposals.

5.2 Copies of the representations received from Carmarthenshire County Council may be found at Appendices 1 and 2.

5.3 Copies of the representations received from Neath Port Talbot County Council may be found at Appendices 3 and 4.

5.4 A summary of the remaining representations may be found at Appendix 5.

6. ASSESSMENT

6.1 Cwmllynfell Community Council in its original proposal stated that at present local authority services could only be provided by crossing and re-crossing the boundaries that exist between the County Borough of Neath Port Talbot and the County of Carmarthenshire. They considered that duplication exists (in service provision) and that this is wasteful in terms of resources and detracts from the effective and convenient local government that could be provided if the area was served by one County Council and one Community Council. They also considered that this would serve to reinforce the sense of community spirit which already exists. We consider that these points have merit.

6.2 It is apparent from a majority of representations received that there is considered to be a close community of interest between the villages of Cwmllynfell, Pen-Rhiw-fawr, Cefn- bryn-brain and Ystradowen. The four villages are in close proximity lying on opposite slopes of the valley of the River Llynfell with the existing boundary partly following the river and partly cutting across land on the northern slope of the valley (see map at Appendix 6). A number of the representations have indicated that including the villages together under one authority would allow that authority to provide local government services more effectively and efficiently than the present arrangements.

6.3 The information we have received following the publication of our Draft Proposals report both in writing and expressed at the public meeting held on 19 June 2003 has contributed to our view that it would be in the interests of effective and convenient local government for the villages of Cwmllynfell, Pen-Rhiw-fawr, Cefn-bryn-brain and Ystradowen to be included together in a new community within the same unitary authority area. This is especially so insofar as the major services of Education, Refuse Collection and Highways are concerned, and delivery of other services could undoubtedly benefit from the identifying of a community with common interests.

6.4 Both county authorities provided information relating to the appropriateness of the future location of the combined community and the suitability of that particular authority as a

- 3 -

provider of services. However, we are of the view that an identified and accepted community of interest contributes significantly to the formulation of policy and service delivery strategies which are beneficial to effective and convenient local government.

6.5 It was very evident from the Public Meeting held at the Millennium Hall that there were large numbers of Welsh speaking residents living in the proposed community. An examination of the last Census statistics shows that the proposed community would have just over 73% of the population who are Welsh speaking. This is somewhat higher than the surrounding communities located within Neath Port Talbot and Powys. The proposed community would form a part of a high density Welsh speaking population that is evident from the Census data consulted for this area. Language can be seen as one of the factors determining a local sense of community. The comparable communities with similar density levels of Welsh speakers are found in Carmarthenshire.

6.6 Moreover we noted that the existing Cwmllynfell electoral division is within Neath Port Talbot. This division, despite covering a relatively large area, has the lowest number of electors in the county being 46% below the (1995) county average. The number of electors within the division represents less that 1% of the electorate of Neath Port Talbot. The size of the proposed Cwmllynfell electoral division will be more in line with electoral divisions in Carmarthenshire (see 9.2 below). We consider therefore that the Cwmllynfell area has more in common with the rural districts of Carmarthenshire than the majority of districts of Neath Port Talbot which are more urban in nature and this in our view supports the recommendation for inclusion of the proposed new community within Carmarthenshire.

6.7 It is clear from the representations received that those residents currently living in Carmarthenshire wished to remain in Carmarthenshire and did not wish to become part of Neath Port Talbot.

6.8 The majority of residents in the Cwmllynfell Ward of the Community of Cwmllynfell would appear to support the combining of the villages within one community area within Carmarthenshire but there are several representations from residents who would prefer to remain in Neath Port Talbot. The residents in the Pen-Rhiw-fawr Ward of the Community of Cwmllynfell appear to be more equally split in their preference for which unitary authority the proposed community should come under. However, having regard to the written representations received and the comments made at the public meeting held on 19 June 2003, we have come to the conclusion that there is a significant majority support for the creation of this new community within Carmarthenshire.

6.9 A number of the representations made reference to the lack of public transport links between Cwmllynfell and other parts of Neath Port Talbot. In contrast it was pointed out that there were public transport links with Ammanford in Carmarthenshire which meant that Ammanford was used by residents of Cwmllynfell for local shopping and other needs.

6.10 A number of representations were received from parents and from teachers employed in primary schools in the review area; expressing concern at possible adverse effects the proposed boundary change would have on the future of the primary education service. There are now four primary schools operating in the review area – Cefnbrynbrain and Ystradowen within Carmarthenshire and Cwmllynfell and in Neath Port Talbot. Carmarthenshire are currently considering the provision of a new primary school in their

- 4 -

part of the review area but have indicated that should the boundary change proposed be approved, they would reassess the position

6.11 It is no part of the Commission’s brief to prejudge the necessity for a review of educational provision that may be deemed necessary. However, as a matter of principle the Commission is of the view that any such review should encompass the whole of a recognised area of community interest in the interests of both pupils and convenient and effective local government. Full consultation with all interests affected would no doubt be undertaken in the formulation of policies and service delivery strategies which are beneficial for effective and convenient local government and implementation of changes proposed, and we are satisfied from the representations we have received that both Education Authorities would strive to achieve the highest possible standards of primary education consistent with the assessed population needs of the area.

6.12 A number of the representations we received expressed concerns with regard to the continuation of funding of the Millennium Hall in Cwmllynfell. In their second representation (Appendix 3), Carmarthenshire County Council have given the assurance that they would provide the funding of the Millennium Hall should it transfer to Carmarthenshire. We are therefore satisfied that the proposed change would not have a detrimental effect on the operation of the Millennium Hall.

6.13 We concur with the comments of Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council that differences in the level of Council tax should not be a determining factor in boundary change. The level of Council Tax is significantly influenced by Assembly Government financial assistance which itself is calculated to reflect need and will vary from year to year.

6.14 Having considered all of the information made available to us we are of the view that the proposed new Community should be within the Carmarthenshire County Council area in the interests of more effective and convenient local government and in accordance with the wishes of the large majority of residents who responded to consultation on these proposed boundary changes.

7. BRYN-MORGAN BRIDGE

7.1 In the course of the review we received a representation from a resident of the Bryn-Morgan Bridge area of the Community of Cwmllynfell. The resident requested that the Commission consider a change to the boundary between Neath Port Talbot and Powys so as to include their property within the County of Powys. We considered this request and decided that the proposal had some merit. We therefore agreed to extend the consideration of the county boundaries in the area of Cwnllynfell to include the area of Bryn-Morgan Bridge. We wrote to Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council, Powys County Council, Cwmllynfell Community Council and Ystradgynlais Town Council requesting their views on this proposal. We also included details of this proposed change, with a map, in the letter sent to residents on 7 June 2003.

7.2 We received representations about this proposal from Powys County Council, Cwmllynfell Community Council, Ystradgynlais Town Council and two others. No other representations were received regarding this proposal. The representations are included in the summary of representations at Appendix 5.

- 5 -

7.3 We have had regard to the fact that the only access to this property is from the County of Powys, and it would appear reasonable that the highway access to the property should be the responsibility of a single highway authority. It also appears to us that the property is isolated from the rest of the Community of Cwmllynfell and that the community of interest of the residents of the property lie with Cwm-twrch in the County of Powys. We are therefore of the view that in the interests of convenient and effective local government a boundary change is appropriate to incorporate the property within the County of Powys.

8. PROPOSALS

8.1 Having considered all of the evidence available to us, we propose that the boundary between the County of Carmarthenshire and the County Borough of Neath Port Talbot should be realigned in the area under review to follow the southern boundary of the existing Cwmllynfell Community. The proposed change to the boundary is shown in blue on the map at Appendix 7.

8.2 Consequently the area of the existing Cwmllynfell Community will be transferred from the Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council Unitary Authority to the Carmarthenshire County Council Unitary Authority with the exception of that part of the existing Cwmllynfell Community at Lower Bryn-Morgan Bridge (shown on the map at Appendix 8) which will be transferred to the Powys County Council Unitary Authority. A new Cwmllynfell Community will be formed by combining the area of the existing Cwmllynfell Community with the Llynfell ward of the existing Quarter Bach Community. A new Quarter Bach Community will be formed from the Quarter Bach and Brynamman wards of the existing Quarter Bach Community.

8.3 A detailed map to a larger scale showing the proposed new boundary can be inspected at the offices of Carmarthenshire County Council, Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council, Powys County Council and at the office of the Commission in Cardiff.

9. CONSEQUENTIAL ARRANGEMENTS

9.1 Under Section 54 (1) (e) of the Act, the Commission may make proposals for a change of electoral arrangements for any local government area, which is consequential on any proposed change in local government areas. The details of the proposed changes to the electoral arrangements for the principal areas of Carmarthenshire and Neath Port Talbot and the communities of Quarter Bach and Cwmllynfell follow below.

9.2 The County of Carmarthenshire is divided for electoral purposes into 58 electoral divisions represented by 74 councillors. The existing Quarter Bach electoral division consists of the Quarter Bach Community with 2,200 electors represented by 1 councillor. The proposed changes would reduce the size of the Quarter Bach Community and thus the Quarter Bach electoral division by 668 electors to 1,532 electors. Although this is lower than the county average of 1 councillor to 1,809 electors there are several electoral divisions within Carmarthenshire with similar or lower number of electors. We propose therefore a revised Quarter Bach electoral division consisting of the revised Quarter Bach Community represented by 1 councillor. The proposed new Cwmllynfell Community will have an

- 6 -

electorate of 1,578. We consider that this is an appropriate number of electors to form a new Cwmllynfell electoral division within Carmarthenshire with 1,578 electors represented by 1 councillor. This will result in a change to the electoral arrangements of Carmarthenshire County Council with an increase to 59 electoral divisions represented by 75 councillors.

9.3 The County Borough of Neath Port Talbot is divided for electoral purposes into 42 electoral divisions represented by 64 councillors. The proposed changes would result in the loss of the Cwmllynfell electoral division reducing the electoral arrangements of the County Borough Council to 63 councillors representing 41 electoral divisions.

9.4 The Community of Quarter Bach in Carmarthenshire is divided into three wards for community electoral purposes as follows:

Ward Name Electors Councillors Quarter Bach 842 5 Brynamman 690 5 Llynfell 668 4 Total 2,200 14

9.5 The Community of Cwmllynfell in Neath Port Talbot is divided into two wards for community electoral purposes as follows:

Ward Name Electors Councillors Cwmllynfell 685 6 Penrhiwfawr 225 3 Total 910 9

9.6 In considering the changes required to the community electoral arrangements for the two revised community areas, we propose to utilise the existing community wards. We propose therefore that the new Cwmllynfell Community in Carmarthenshire is divided into three wards for community electoral purposes as follows:

Ward Name Electors Councillors Cwmllynfell 685 5 Penrhiwfawr 225 3 Llynfell 668 5 Total 1,578 13

We propose that, in order to give a degree of parity between the levels of representation in the new community wards, the number of councillors representing the Cwmllynfell ward be reduced to 5 and the number of councillors representing the Llynfell ward be increased to 5.

We also propose that the revised Quarter Bach Community in Carmarthenshire is divided into two wards for community electoral purposes as follows:

- 7 -

Ward Name Electors Councillors Quarter Bach 842 6 Brynamman 690 5 Total 1,532 11

Given the higher number of electors in the Quarter Bach ward in comparison to the Brynamman ward, an additional councillor should be allocated to the Quarter Bach ward.

The community ward boundaries are marked in black on the map at Appendix 7.

9.7 The boundary between Carmarthenshire and Neath Port Talbot and the boundary between Powys and Neath Port Talbot form part of the boundary between the Dyfed Powys and Authority areas. We recommend that the changes proposed to the unitary authority boundaries be also applied to the boundary between the two police authorities.

10. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

10.1 We wish to express our gratitude to the principal councils and all the community councils for their assistance during the course of the review and to all bodies and persons who made representations to us.

11. RESPONSES TO THIS REPORT

11.1 Having completed our review of part of the boundary between the County of Carmarthenshire, the County Borough of Neath Port Talbot and the County of Powys in the Area of Cwmllynfell and submitted our recommendations to the National Assembly for Wales, we have fulfilled our statutory obligation under the directions issued by the National Assembly for Wales.

11.2 It now falls to the National Assembly for Wales, if it thinks fit, to implement them with or without modifications by means of an Order or to direct the Commission to conduct a further review. Such an Order will not be made earlier than a period of six weeks from the date that the Commission’s recommendations are submitted to the National Assembly for Wales.

11.3 Any further representations concerning the matters in the report should be addressed to the National Assembly for Wales. They should be made as soon as possible, and in any event not later than six weeks from the date that the Commission’s recommendations are submitted to the National Assembly for Wales. Representations should be addressed to:

Local Government Modernisation 2 Division National Assembly for Wales Cathays Park Cardiff CF10 3NQ

- 8 -

MRS S G SMITH LLB (Chair)

J E DAVIES ICSA IPFA (Deputy Chair)

D H ROBERTS BSc DMS MBCS MCMI (Member)

E H LEWIS BSc. DPM FRSA FCIPD (Secretary) March 2004

- 9 - Appendix 1

- 1 - Appendix 1

- 2 - Appendix 1

- 3 - Appendix 1

- 4 - Appendix 1

- 5 - Appendix 1

- 6 - Appendix 1

- 7 - Appendix 1

the

- 8 - Appendix 1

- 9 - Appendix 1

- 10 - Appendix 2

- 1 - Appendix 2

- 2 - Appendix 3

- 1 - Appendix 3

- 2 - Appendix 3

- 3 - Appendix 4

- 1 - Appendix 4

- 2 - Appendix 4

- 3 - Appendix 4

- 4 - Appendix 4

- 5 - Appendix 5

Cwmllynfell

1. Adam Price MP (Carmarthen East and Dinefwr) supported the proposal by Cwmllynfell Community Council to integrate the community with the Llynfell ward of the Community of Quarter Bach in Carmarthenshire.

2. Rhodri Glyn Thomas AM (Carmarthen East and Dinefwr), also supported the proposal from Cwmllynfell Community Council.

3. Marie Thomas, Chairperson, Rhiwfawr Community Association, objected to changing the existing boundary. She considered that a change to the boundary could affect the Association’s funding and result in the loss of classes held at their Hall by Neath Port Talbot’s Life Long Learning Department. She considered that Rhiwfawr, being situated at the end of the , had more affinity with the old county of Glamorganshire than with Carmarthenshire. She pointed out that Rhiwfawr was only 10 miles from Neath whilst the County Hall in Carmarthenshire was over 30 miles away.

4. Ms M Thomas, Chairperson of the Management Committee of Neuadd Cwmllynfell Hall expressed concern at the proposed change to the boundary. She said that currently Neuadd Cwmllynfell Hall received financial contributions from Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council towards management and running costs. She considered that the Hall would be unable to continue without such contributions and it would be totally detrimental to the Community should the funding cease. She considered that reassurance would be required from Carmarthenshire County Council that a similar level of funding would be provided by them.

5. 33 residents of Cwmllynfell supported the proposal to amalgamate the Community of Cwmllynfell and the Llynfell Ward of the Community of Quarter Bach within Carmarthenshire. Some of the residents gave one or more of the following reasons for supporting the change:

S The existing boundary divides villages on the slopes of the same valley with the areas either side of Cwmllynfell being in Carmarthenshire; S Residents of areas included in the proposals who are currently in Carmarthenshire wish to remain in Carmarthenshire; S Cwmllynfell is a rural community which would be better served by a rural authority such as Carmarthenshire; S Cwmllynfell is isolated from the urban centre of Neath Port Talbot and the interests of the largely urban Neath Port Talbot Council do not coincide with those of the residents of the area; S Cwmllynfell has strong cultural, social and economic ties with Carmarthenshire but no historical or cultural affinity with Neath Port Talbot; S Cwmllynfell, Ystradowen and Cefn-bryn-brain are predominantly Welsh speaking areas as are Ammanford and Carmarthen. However, Welsh is not widely spoken in Neath or Port Talbot; S Most residents of the area use Ammanford for their shopping as there is no direct bus service from Cwmllynfell to either Neath or Port Talbot. However, there is a direct public bus service to Ammanford; S The existing boundary makes service provision inefficient;

- 1 - Appendix 5

S Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council have not provided satisfactory services to the area, particularly relating to road maintenance. Carmarthenshire County Council would provide better services to the area as they are used to dealing with isolated rural communities; S Carmarthenshire County Council has agreed to match the funding currently provided for the running of the Cwmllynfell Millennium Hall; S Carmarthenshire County Council only closes very small schools of 20 pupils or less while Cwmllynfell Primary School has 70 pupils; and S Carmarthenshire County Council are opposed to the extension of the open cast mining which is in-keeping with the wishes of the residents of the local communities, whereas Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council are in favour of extending the open cast mining.

6. 4 residents of Rhiwfawr supported the proposal to amalgamate the Community of Cwmllynfell and the Llynfell Ward of the Community of Quarter Bach within Carmarthenshire. The following reasons were given in support of the change:

S The existing boundary is confusing and results in political and economic divisions within the area. The review area is a small close knit community which should be united in order to move forward and improve its prospects financially and socially; S Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council did not have the necessary understanding and ethos to provide services and support to rural areas such as Rhiwfawr and Cwmllynfell; S The overall attitude and ethos of Carmarthenshire County Council is more in line with what is expected from a rural community; S Rhiwfawr has more affinity with the Amman Valley than Neath Port Talbot; and S Neath Port Talbot are in favour of extending the open cast mining in the area that is considered to be a threat to the local environment. Carmarthenshire are opposed to extending open cast mining in the area.

7. 6 residents of Brynamman / Upper Brynamman supported the proposal to amalgamate the Community of Cwmllynfell and the Llynfell Ward of the Community of Quarter Bach within Carmarthenshire. One considered that the proposal was desirable because the two areas had cultural, social and economic ties.

8. A resident of Ystradowen said that he supported the proposals made by Quarter Bach Community Council. He said that it was a common held belief that residents of the area had lost out as a result of living where three counties meet as they are on the periphery of all of them. He considered that Cwmllynfell, Cefn-bryn-brain, Ystradowen and Rhiwfawr should be united due to their strong affinity with each other with the Amman River forming the boundary to the West.

9. A resident of Upper supported changing the boundary to include her property in Carmarthenshire. She pointed out that Dyfed-Powys Police rather than South Wales Police already policed her area.

10. A resident of Cefn-bryn-brain supported the proposal that Cwmllynfell join with the Llynfell ward of the Community of Quarter Bach and the new community to be included in the County of Carmarthenshire. She considered Carmarthenshire, being a rural authority, would be best suited to administer the new community. She did not support the inclusion of

- 2 - Appendix 5

the new community in Neath Port Talbot and said that the Llynfell ward and any other part of the Amman Valley currently in Carmarthenshire should remain in Carmarthenshire. She also said that she had no objection to the Commission’s proposal, outlined in the Draft Proposals report, to re-align the boundary between Carmarthenshire and Neath Port Talbot to follow the River Llynfell as she considered that the properties currently in Neath Port Talbot in that area was an anomaly.

11. The following letter was received from the 23 residents of Quarter Bach:

In response to your request for my comments regarding the proposals for boundary changes in the area of Cwmllynfell I make such comments as follows:

While it is appreciated that your aim is in the interests of effective and convenient local government it “cuts both ways” as far as services are concerned; that is to say,

(a) if the residents of the County of Carmarthenshire were to be absorbed into the County Borough of Neath Port Talbot they would enjoy the services provided by Neath Port Talbot, but, equally;

(b) if the residents of Neath Port Talbot were to be absorbed into the County of Carmarthenshire they would enjoy the services provided by the County of Carmarthenshire.

You are no doubt aware that this question was put to the Quarter Bach Community some years ago which produced a resounding rejection to the suggestion of entering the then (West ) Council area. I do not think that local opinion has changed since that time.

My personal position as a resident of Quarter Bach in the County of Carmarthenshire is that:

(1) I totally reject the proposal that the Quarter Bach Community Area should be taken into the Neath Port Talbot Area.

(2) I believe that there is considerable evidence that Cwmllynfell Community Council Area favour being brought into the Quarter Bach Area.

12. Two residents considered that Llynfell should join Cwmllynfell within the County Borough of Neath Port Talbot. They pointed out that Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council had already invested in the Cwmllynfell Community Centre, which serves the valley of Cwm Twrch. They considered that the question of an extension of open cast mining was a vital one for the area and that having the Communities of Cwmllynfell and Llynfell within Neath Port Talbot meant that decisions concerning this issue would be made, whereas Carmarthenshire County Council had no real influence on open cast policy.

13. A resident of Cwmllynfell supported the proposal made by Cwmllynfell and Quarter Bach Community Councils to unite Rhiwfawr, Ystradowen, Cwmllynfell, Cefnbrynbrain and Rhosaman. However, she considered that it was unimportant which local authority the new area came under; the important issue was that the villages were united.

- 3 - Appendix 5

14. A resident of Cefn-bryn-brain said that he supported the Commission’s proposal to re- align the boundary between Neath Port Talbot and Carmarthenshire to follow the River Llynfell. With regard to the proposals made by Cwmllynfell Community Council he was opposed to Cefn-bryn-brain being transferred from Carmarthenshire into Neath Port Talbot.

15. 6 residents of Cefn-bryn-brain made representations stating that they wished to remain in Carmarthenshire. Several felt that the rural nature of their area had little affinity with Neath Port Talbot.

16. 6 residents made representations stating that they wished to remain in Carmarthenshire. Some considered that Carmarthenshire County Council provided a better service than Neath Port Talbot would.

17. 6 residents of Ystradowen made representations stating that they wished to remain in Carmarthenshire. One considered that Carmarthenshire County Council provided a better service than Neath Port Talbot would.

18. A resident of Upper Brynamman said that the Llynfell ward and any part of the Amman Valley currently in Carmarthenshire should remain in Carmarthenshire.

19. 4 residents of Brynamman said that they wished to remain part of Carmarthenshire. One expressed concern that if Llynfell were joined to Cwmllynfell within Neath Port Talbot then Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council may extend open cast mining into areas currently part of Carmarthenshire.

20. 2 residents of Rhosaman objected to any extension of the Neath Port Talbot boundary into the village of Rhosaman. They had no objection to Cwmllynfell being included in Carmarthenshire or the existing boundary being retained. If any changes were made to the boundary to include Cwmllynfell within Carmarthenshire then they wished Rhosaman to remain in the Quarter Bach ward.

21. 9 residents of Cwmllynfell objected to the proposal to merge the Community of Cwmllynfell with the Llynfell ward of the Community of Quarter Bach within the County of Carmarthenshire. The residents gave one or more of the following reasons for their objection to the proposal:

S Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council provide satisfactory services to the area, transfer to Carmarthenshire would mean a decline in the standard of services; S Transfer to Carmarthenshire would mean the closure of local schools with resulting loss of employment; S Transfer to Carmarthenshire would mean an end to funding for the Cwmllynfell Millennium Hall resulting in its closure; S Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council provided more support for school staff and expenditure on education than Carmarthenshire and as a result standards are higher in Neath Port Talbot schools; S Carmarthenshire is a large authority already and the distance from Cwmllynfell to Carmarthenshire council offices is twenty six mile, making them difficult to reach for Cwmllynfell residents; and S Hospitals in Carmarthenshire are not as close to Cwmllynfell as those in Neath Port Talbot and Swansea making them inconvenient to reach.

- 4 - Appendix 5

22. 7 residents of Rhiwfawr objected to the proposal to merge the Community of Cwmllynfell with the Llynfell ward of the Community of Quarter Bach within the County of Carmarthenshire. Some gave one or more of the following reasons:

S The proposals failed to take into consideration the two completely opposing attitudes within the two communities. There was little social or cultural affinity between Cwmllynfell and Ystradowen and combining them would cause a lot of ill feeling; S The closest school to Rhiwfawr in Neath Port Talbot is , which is 2.5 miles away. If Rhiwfawr were transferred to Carmarthenshire then the closest school in the authority would be Ammanford which is 13 miles away; S Carmarthenshire County Council would close or merge local schools; S Although the council tax in Carmarthenshire is cheaper, the council have axed services such as ‘meals-on-wheels’; S Although Rhiwfawr is currently on the edge of Neath Port Talbot, should the proposed boundary change go ahead then it will simply mean Rhiwfawr will be on the edge of Carmarthenshire instead; and S Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council have served Rhiwfawr well.

23. The Head Teacher (Mrs A Szulik), Deputy Head Teacher and 4 employees of Cwmllynfell Primary School, together with 14 local residents objected to the proposal to unite the communities of Cwmllynfell, Pen-Rhiwfawr, Cefn-Bryn-Brain and Ystradowen within the County of Carmarthenshire for the following reasons:

S Carmarthenshire is in the process of closing or amalgamating schools in the area and this may include Cwmllynfell Primary School should the proposed changes go ahead; S The loss of employment due to closure or amalgamation would be catastrophic to part- time employees of the school who would have difficulty finding employment elsewhere in the area; S The provisions for 3 year old children and the important role of nursery nurses in Carmarthenshire schools; S The Amalgamation would mean that one local authority would run four small rural schools which are the centres of the community; S The education budgets for the two local authorities differ considerably and affects the ratio of staff to children. A change of local authority could result in the loss of one or more teaching posts; S Retaining the existing boundary would ensure that Cwmllynfell community would retain its own identity and that the local school can continue to provide an excellent education whilst working alongside its neighbouring schools; S The lack of Administrative Assistants at Carmarthenshire schools. S In neighbouring schools, head teachers have very little non-contact time to carry out their administrative duties due to heavy teaching commitments, making the job more stressful. S Deputy Heads are not employed in our neighbouring schools, which are funded by Carmarthenshire. This places a burden on the shoulders of teaching staff in running the school during the heads absence. S Parents in the community know and expect that their children will start nursery at the school when they are three. Neighbouring schools start the children’s attendance at four.

- 5 - Appendix 5

S Cwmllynfell Primary School has developed an excellent working partnership with Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council. Transfer to another authority would mean having to develop a new working partnership and learning different procedures.

24. A resident of Ystradowen said that she wished to remain part of Carmarthenshire. She also considered that Cwmllynfell and should also be transferred to Carmarthenshire. She said that change to the existing boundary could mean upheaval and disruption to local authority services provided to the elderly.

25. A resident of Rhiwfawr agreed with the Commission’s proposal to alter the boundary to follow the River Llynfell.

26. A petition with 203 signatories was received supporting the proposal to combine Cwmllynfell and Llynfell and for this community to be placed within Carmarthenshire.

27. 8 residents of Upper Cwmtwrch signed the following petition: With reference to your recent letter (June 7th 2003) concerning the proposed boundary change between the County Borough of Neath Port Talbot and the County of Carmarthenshire, I would like to state that the persons below have no objections to the change.

28. A petition with 50 signatories stated the following:

We, the staff and parents of Ysgol Rhiwfawr in the County of Neath Port Talbot most strongly oppose the proposal by Cwmllynfell Community Council to review the boundary between the County Borough of Neath Port Talbot and the County of Carmarthenshire in the area of Cwmllynfell and Rhiwfawr.

29. A petition with 78 signatories stated the following:

We the undersigned, strongly object to the boundary change proposed by Cwmllynfell Community Council due to the effect it would have on Cwmllynfell Primary School if it was run by Carmarthenshire County Council.

30. A petition with 64 signatories stated the following:

We the undersigned, residents of the community of Cwmllynfell and Rhiwfawr support the maintenance of the status quo with regard to the boundary in the area of Cwmllynfell. Further, we are opposed to the proposal that the Community of Cwmllynfell be merged with the Llynfell ward of the Community of Quarter Bach, and that the new enlarged community be located within the County of Carmarthenshire.

Brynmorgan Bridge

1. Powys County Council considered that the river forms a convenient, well marked and easily understood boundary and did not see any special reason to move away from that general principle in relation to the specific proposal at Upper Cwmtwrch (Brynmorgan Bridge). The Council therefore remained content with the existing boundary at this point.

- 6 - Appendix 5

2. Cwmllynfell Community Council had no objection to the Commission’s proposed change to the boundary in the area of Brynmorgan Bridge. They pointed out that vehicular access to the property in the area could only be gained from Powys and that the location of the property suggested an affinity with Cwmtwrch and Powys.

3. Ystradgynlais Town Council objected to the Commission’s proposed change to the boundary at Brynmorgan Bridge. They considered that the boundary in the area should follow the river with no exceptions.

4. A resident of Upper Cwmtwrch supported the changes concerning the boundary in the vicinity of her residence at Lower Brynmorgan Bridge.

5. A resident of Cefn-bryn-brain wrote concerning the re-alignment of the boundary at Lower Bryn-Morgan Bridge, he considered that the proposal made sense as it brought both parts of the A4068 under the same authority.

- 7 -