LOCAL DEMOCRACY AND BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR

Review of the Electoral Arrangements of the County of

Draft Proposals Report

December 2020

© LDBCW copyright 2020

You may re-use this information (excluding logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open- government-licence or email: [email protected]

Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.

Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to the Commission at [email protected]

This document is also available from our website at www.ldbc.gov.wales FOREWORD

This is our report containing our Draft Proposals for the County of Monmouthshire.

In September 2013, the Local Government (Democracy) (Wales) Act 2013 (the Act) came into force. This was the first piece of legislation affecting the Commission for over 40 years and reformed and revamped the Commission, as well as changing the name of the Commission to the Local Democracy and Boundary Commission for Wales.

The Commission published its Council Size Policy for Wales’ 22 Principal Councils, its first review programme and a new Electoral Reviews: Policy and Practice document reflecting the changes made in the Act. A glossary of terms used in this report can be found at Appendix 1, with the rules and procedures at Appendix 4.

This review of the County of Monmouthshire is the twenty-second of the programme of reviews conducted under the new Act and Commission’s policy and practice. The issue of fairness is set out clearly in the legislation and has been a key principle for our Policy and Practice. We are also required to look to the future and have asked the Council to give us predictions of the number of electors in five years’ time. We also look at the number of electors not registered to vote.

In working up our proposals, we have considered local ties and those who wish to retain current boundaries. We have looked carefully at every representation made to us. However, we have had to balance these issues and representations against all the other factors we have to consider, and the constraints set out above. In particular, the requirement for electoral parity, democratic fairness for all electors, is the dominant factor in law and this is what we have tried to apply.

Finally, may I thank the Members and officers of the for helping us develop our draft proposals, the and Town Councils for their contribution and all those who made representations.

We look forward to receiving any views you may wish to share.

Dr Debra Williams Chair

LOCAL DEMOCRACY AND BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR WALES

REVIEW OF THE ELECTORAL ARRANGEMENTS OF THE COUNTY OF MONMOUTHSHIRE

DRAFT PROPOSALS REPORT

Contents Page

Chapter 1 Introduction 1 Chapter 2 Summary of Draft Proposals 2 Chapter 3 Assessment 5 Chapter 4 The Draft Proposals 7 Chapter 5 Summary of Proposed Arrangements 30 Chapter 6 Responses to the Draft Proposals 32 Chapter 7 Acknowledgements 33

APPENDIX 1 GLOSSARY OF TERMS APPENDIX 2 EXISTING COUNCIL MEMBERSHIP APPENDIX 3 PROPOSED COUNCIL MEMBERSHIP APPENDIX 4 RULES AND PROCEDURES APPENDIX 5 SUMMARY OF INITIAL REPRESENTATIONS APPENDIX 6 CABINET SECRETARY FOR FINANCE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT 23 JUNE 2016 WRITTEN STATEMENT

1st Edition printed December 2020

The Commission welcomes correspondence and telephone calls in Welsh or English. Mae’r ddogfen ar hon ar gael yn y Gymraeg.

The translation of this report was provided by Trosol

The Local Democracy and Boundary Commission for Wales Hastings House Fitzalan Court CF24 0BL Tel Number: (029) 2046 4819 Fax Number: (029) 2046 4823 E-mail: [email protected] www.ldbc.gov.wales

LOCAL DEMOCRACY AND BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR WALES

Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION

1. The Local Democracy and Boundary Commission for Wales (the Commission) is conducting a review of the electoral arrangements of the County of Monmouthshire. This review is being conducted in accordance with the Local Government (Democracy) (Wales) Act 2013 (the Act), specifically Sections 29, 30 and 34-36.

2. The Commission has a duty to conduct a review of all 22 of Wales’ Principal Councils every ten years. This ten-year programme was due to commence in January 2014. However, due to the uncertainties in local government at the time the Commission suspended its programme. This programme of reviews has come as a result of the former Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government’s Written Statement of 23 June 2016. The Commission was asked to restart its programme of reviews with an expectation that all 22 electoral reviews be completed in time for the new arrangements to be put in place for the 2022 local government elections. The Written Statement can be found at Appendix 6.

3. The rules and procedures the Commission follows can be found in the Commission’s Electoral Reviews: Policy and Practice [2016] and outlined in Appendix 4.

4. A Glossary of Terms can be found at Appendix 1, providing a short description of some of the common terminology used within this report.

5. The Commission is now seeking views on the proposed electoral arrangements identified at Chapter 4 in this report. On receipt of these views the Commission will consider the representations and make final proposals to Welsh Government. It will then be for Welsh Government Ministers to make the Order, if they deem it appropriate, with or without modification.

6. Monmouthshire County Council completed its own review of community areas within Monmouthshire. The Commission submitted its report in relation to that community review to Welsh Government in January 2019. On 15 January 2020 after considering representations made, the Minister for Housing and Local Government stated that Welsh Government had accepted the recommendations in the Commission’s report. Those recommendations will be implemented by means of an Order of the Welsh Ministers. The Commission is therefore conducting its electoral review on the basis of the community areas in Monmouthshire as they will be once the Order of the Welsh Ministers comes into force.

7. The Commission welcomes representations that are based on evidence and facts which are relevant to the proposals under consideration.

Page 1

MONMOUTHSHIRE DRAFT PROPOSALS

Chapter 2. SUMMARY OF DRAFT PROPOSALS • The Commission proposes a change to the arrangement of electoral wards that will achieve a significant improvement in the level of electoral parity across the County of Monmouthshire. • The Commission proposes a council of 46 members, an increase from the current size of 45. This results in a proposed county average of 1,599 electors per member. • The Commission proposes 42 electoral wards. • The largest under-representation (in terms of electoral variance) within the proposals is (19% above the proposed county average). At present the greatest under- representation is in Larkfield and St Kingsmark (31% above the proposed county average). • The largest over-representation (in terms of electoral variance) within the proposals is Mardy (21% below the proposed county average). At present the greatest over- representation is in (30% below the proposed county average). • The Commission is proposing four multi-member wards in the county consisting of four two- member electoral wards. • The Commission has proposed no changes to 31 electoral wards. • The Commission received representations from the Monmouthshire County Council, five town and community councils, one County Councillor and six members of the public. The Commission considered the representations carefully before it formulated its proposals. A summary of these representations can be found at Appendix 5.

Summary Maps 1. On the following pages are thematic maps illustrating the current and proposed arrangements and their variances from the proposed county average of 1,599 electors per member. Those areas in green are within +/-10% of the county average; yellow and hatched yellow between +/-10% and +/-25% of the county average; orange and hatched orange between +/-25% and +/-50% of the county average. 2. As can be seen from these maps the proposed arrangements provide for a significant improvement in electoral parity across the county.

Page 2

LOCAL DEMOCRACY AND BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR WALES

Page 3

MONMOUTHSHIRE DRAFT PROPOSALS

Page 4

LOCAL DEMOCRACY AND BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR WALES

Chapter 3. ASSESSMENT Council size 1. The number of elected members for the County of Monmouthshire has been determined by the Commission’s Council Size Policy and methodology. This policy can be found in our Electoral Reviews: Policy and Practice document. At present the size of the Council at 45 members is one member below the methodology’s overall aim. The methodology sets out a size of the Council of 46 for this review. 2. The Commission reviewed the electoral arrangements for the County of Monmouthshire, in light of its methodology and took into account the representations which had been made. For the reasons given below, the Commission believes that in the interests of effective and convenient local government a council of 46 members would be appropriate to represent the County of Monmouthshire. 3. The Commission has provided a set of arrangements that provides for effective and convenient local government. The Commission is restrained by the building blocks that it can use to create new electoral wards. The current building blocks in the County of Monmouthshire have led the Commission to creating the proposals as set out in Chapter 4 of this report. Number of electors 4. The numbers shown as the electorate for 2020 and the estimates for the electorate in the year 2025 are those submitted by Monmouthshire County Council. The forecast figures supplied by Monmouthshire County Council show a forecasted increase in the electorate of Monmouthshire from 73,545 to 79,133. The Office for National Statistics (ONS) has also provided their estimated number of persons eligible to vote but who are not on the electoral register. This showed an estimated 3,024 more people eligible to vote than the 2020 electorate. 5. The Commission is aware that Welsh Government is legislating to extend the franchise to include 16 and 17 year olds and foreign nationals, not currently eligible to vote, at the 2022 local government elections. The Commission‘s Council Size Policy utilises the entire population to determine Council Size and these two groups were included in the Council Size deliberations. 6. While 16 and 17 year olds are not in the existing electoral figures provided by the County of Monmouthshire, they will have been included in the forecasted figures provided by the Council. These figures have been included in the Commission’s deliberations on its recommendations. 7. Foreign nationals are included in the census data provided by the ONS. Consideration of this data has been included as part of the Commission’s deliberations on its recommendations. Councillor to electorate ratio 8. In respect of the number of electors per councillor in each electoral ward, there is a wide variation from the current county average of 1,634 electors per councillor ranging from 31% below (1,123 Govilion and 1,131 Llanbadog) to 28% above (2,087 Larkfield and St Kingsmark). The determination of the Council of 46 members (see paragraph 2) results in an average of 1,599 electors being represented by each councillor. 9. The Commission considered the ratio of local government electors to the number of

Page 5

MONMOUTHSHIRE DRAFT PROPOSALS

councillors to be elected, with a view to proposing changes to ensure that the number of local government electors shall be, as near as may be, the same in every ward in the principal area. The size and character of the Council was also considered as were a wide range of other factors including local topography, road communications and local ties. Judgement and Balance 10. In producing a scheme of electoral arrangements, the Commission must have regard to a number of issues contained in the legislation. In the proposed scheme, the Commission has placed emphasis on achieving improvements in electoral parity whilst maintaining community ties wherever possible. The Commission has made every effort to ensure that the revised electoral wards are an appropriate combination of communities and community wards. 11. In some areas, because of the number of electors in a community or community ward, the Commission has considered the retention or creation of multi-member wards in order to achieve appropriate levels of electoral parity. This issue often arises in urban areas where the number of electors is too high to form a single-member ward. It also may arise in more rural wards where the creation of single-member wards would result in substantial variances in electoral parity. The Commission acknowledges the established practice of single-member wards within the County of Monmouthshire and this is reflected in the Commission’s proposals. 12. The Commission has looked at each area and is satisfied that it would be difficult to achieve electoral arrangements that keep the existing combination of communities and community wards without having a detrimental effect on one or more of the other issues that the Commission must consider. The Commission recognises that there may be different combinations of communities and community wards that better reflect community ties and it would welcome any alternative suggestions that comply with the legislation. Electoral Ward Names 13. The Commission is naming electoral wards and not the places within the proposed electoral wards. In the creation of these draft proposals, the Commission has considered the names of all the electoral wards proposed in Welsh and English, where appropriate. For these draft proposals we have selected names of either electoral wards or communities that appear in Orders, where they exist, as these are considered to be the existing legal names. Views are welcomed on the proposed names and any alternative names suggested will be considered. 14. The Commission consulted with the Commissioner on the suitability of the names in their draft form prior to the publication of these draft proposals, with a particular focus on the Welsh language names. This recognises the Welsh Language Commissioner’s responsibility to advise on the standard forms of Welsh place-names and specialist knowledge in the field. At each proposal an indication is given of the Welsh Language Commissioner’s recommendation and, where they differ, the specific recommendation and why the Commissioner proposed an alternative to the Commission’s proposed name. It is hoped that this process will encourage debate on the proposed names and will ensure the eventual, final proposals of the Commission are accurate and meet local wishes.

Page 6

LOCAL DEMOCRACY AND BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR WALES

Chapter 4. THE DRAFT PROPOSALS 1. The Commission’s proposals are described in detail in this chapter. For each new proposal the report sets out: • The name(s) of the existing electoral wards which wholly or in part constitute the proposed ward; • A brief description of the existing electoral wards in terms of the number of electors now and projected and their percentage variance from the proposed county average; • Key arguments made during the initial consultation (if any). Although not all representations are mentioned in this section, all representations have been considered and a summary can be found in Appendix 5; • The views of the Commission; • The composition of the proposed electoral ward and the proposed name; • A map of the proposed electoral ward (see key at bottom of the page 10).

Retained Electoral Wards 2. The Commission has considered the electoral arrangements of the existing electoral wards and the ratio of local government electors to the number of councillors to be elected. It is proposed that the existing arrangements should be retained within the following electoral wards. Names displayed in bold within the list below denote the electoral wards where the existing geography and electoral ward names to prescribed within the recommendations in the Monmouthshire Community Review published January 2019, and which the Commission is proposing to retain.

• • Magor East • • Magor West • Caldicot Cross • Mardy • Cantref • Osbaston • Castle • Overmonnow • Croesonen • Park • • Pen Y Fal • • Portskewett • Dewstow • Raglan • Gobion Fawr • • • • Grofield • • Lansdown • St Arvans • • • Llangybi Fawr • • 3. The Commission would welcome any comments on the ward names mentioned in this section. 4. The Commission received a representation from Monmouthshire County Council that proposed the town ward of be combined with the town ward of Larkfield to form a two-member ward due to the projected increase of 1,158 electors. The Council stated their preference for single member wards, however they noted that the increase in the future number of electors in Chepstow Castle might mean that single-member wards for the town

Page 7

MONMOUTHSHIRE DRAFT PROPOSALS

of Chepstow would not be appropriate. The Commission considered the representation, however this proposal results in a two-member ward and has proposed that the existing single-member electoral ward remain for this area which would be consistent with its proposals for single-member wards for the rest of the town of Chepstow (see page 24). The Commission acknowledges the future level of representation is projected to be 47% above the proposed county average if the existing arrangement remain. The Commission would recommend that if this increase in electorate is realised, that the levels of electoral variance would be addressed in future electoral reviews. 5. The Commission received a representation from Monmouthshire County Council that proposed that the electoral ward of Portskewett be increased by one member to form a two- member ward due to the projected increase of 1,024 electors. The Council did acknowledge the levels of electoral variance of this proposal and stated that they were unclear on what level of representation to recommend. They stated their belief that the Portskewett electoral ward should mirror the community boundaries of the Community of Portskewett. The Commission considered the representation, but this proposal results in a level of representation that is 41% below the proposed county average and has proposed that the existing arrangements remain for this area. The Commission acknowledges the future level of representation is projected to be 70% above the proposed county average if the existing arrangements remain. The Commission would recommend that if this increase in electorate is realised, that the levels of electoral variance would be addressed in future electoral reviews. 6. Monmouthshire County Council stated their preference that the community wards of Magor East, Magor West and form three single-member wards. The Council did acknowledge the future level of representation is projected to be 29% above the proposed county average for Magor East. They therefore proposed that the community wards of Magor East and West be combined to form a two-member ward and the community ward of Undy form a single- member ward. The Council stated that this would retain the historic links between Magor East and West and maintains Undy as a separate area. The Commission considered the representation and has retained the existing arrangements for the area as the levels of electoral parity are appropriate. 7. Community Council objected to the changes to the community boundaries and consequential changes to the community ward and electoral ward boundaries for Magor with Undy Community as a result of the recent community review. The Community Council stated their support for the additional member for Magor East and accepted that a reduction in community councillors was likely. The Community Council also stated that they were not particularly happy in being made a town but accepted the fact due to the change in the size of the villages in the area. The Community Council did request a name, The Mill, for the Magor East electoral ward and The Elms, for the Magor West. They also requested that the community wards be renamed their original names of Mill, Elms, Salisbury and Denny. The Commission has retained the electoral ward names of Magor East and Magor West; and the community ward names of Magor East, Magor West and Undy as recommended in the Monmouthshire Community Review published January 2019. 8. Goetre Fawr Community Council stated their concern at what they considered to be the unsatisfactory way in which the recent community review had been undertaken and requested the boundaries be reviewed. The Community Council agreed that the electoral boundaries should be aligned with the community boundaries. 9. The Commission received a representation from Grosmont Fawr Community Council which

Page 8

LOCAL DEMOCRACY AND BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR WALES

stated their objection to the changes to the community boundaries for the Community of Grosmont Fawr as a result of the recent community review. 10. The Commission received a representation from Community Council which stated their support for the changes to the community boundaries as a result of the recent community review. The Community Council also stated that the electoral boundaries should be aligned with the community boundaries for this electoral review as far as possible. 11. The Commission received a representation from County Councillor D Jones (Crucorney) which objected to the changes to the community boundaries and consequential changes to the community ward and electoral ward boundaries for the Community of Grosmont as a result of the recent community review in particular the transfer of the village . 12. The Commission received six representations from residents of Monmouthshire which objected to the changes to the community boundaries and the consequential changes to the community ward of Citra as a result of the Monmouthshire Community Review that was conducted by Monmouthshire County Council and published January 2019. 13. The recent Monmouthshire Community Review conducted by Monmouthshire County Council was submitted to the Minister for Housing and Local Government. in January 2019. The community review recommendations have been accepted by Welsh Government and an Order is being drafted. Changes to community arrangements are dealt with under a Section 31 of the legislation, as part of a community review led by Monmouthshire County Council.

Page 9

MONMOUTHSHIRE DRAFT PROPOSALS

Proposed Electoral Wards 14. The Commission considered changes to the remaining electoral wards. Details of the current electoral arrangements can be found at Appendix 2. The Commission’s proposed arrangements can be found at Appendix 3.

Proposed Electoral Community Community Ward Ward Boundary Boundaries Boundaries

Page 10

LOCAL DEMOCRACY AND BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR WALES

Govilon and 15. The existing Govilon electoral ward is comprised of the Govilon ward of the Community of . It has 1,123 electors (1,123 projected) represented by one councillor which is 30% below the proposed council size aim. 16. The existing Llanfoist Fawr electoral ward is composed of the Llanfoist and wards of the Community of Llanfoist Fawr. It has 1,860 electors (2,176 projected) represented by one councillor which is 16% above the proposed county average. 17. The Commission received one representation concerning these wards from Monmouthshire County Council. 18. Monmouthshire County Council proposed combining the current electoral wards to form a two-member electoral ward with acceptable levels of variance. The Council stated that the proposed ward would encompass the whole of the Community of Llanfoist Fawr. 19. The Commission proposes that the Community of Llanfoist Fawr is used to form an electoral ward of 2,983 electors (3,299 projected)which, if represented by two councillors would result in a level of representation that is 7% below the proposed county average. 20. The Commission has given the proposed electoral ward the Welsh language name of Llan- ffwyst Fawr a Gofilon and the English language name of Llanfoist Fawr and Govilon. The Welsh Language Commissioner agreed with the Welsh language name and proposed the English language name of Llanfoist and Gofilon. Gofilon is the form recommended in the national standard reference work, A Gazetteer of Welsh Place-Names (University of Wales Press, 1967). One should not deviate from its recommendations without good reason. If the difference between the Welsh form and the 'English' form consists of only one or two letters, the use of a single form is recommended, with preference being given to the Welsh form. The Commission would welcome any suggestions for alternative names. 21. The Commission agrees with the recommendation made by the Council and the improvement in electoral parity. It is the view of the Commission that this arrangement best addresses the existing inappropriate levels of electoral variance. This arrangement would see the whole of the community united within one electoral ward and would build on established communication and social links in the area.

Page 11

MONMOUTHSHIRE DRAFT PROPOSALS

Page 12

LOCAL DEMOCRACY AND BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR WALES

Mitchel Troy and United 22. The existing electoral ward is comprised of the Community of Mitchel Troy. It has 1,151 electors (1,181 projected) represented by one councillor which is 28% below the proposed county average. 23. The existing electoral ward is comprised of the Community of Trellech United. It has 1,940 electors (1,986 projected) represented by one councillor which is 21% above the proposed county average. 24. The Commission received two representations concerning these wards from Monmouthshire County Council and Raglan Community Council. 25. Monmouthshire County Council put forward two options for these wards. The first option was to combine both wards to form a multi-member ward. The second option was to transfer the community ward from the Trellech United electoral ward to the Mitchel Troy electoral ward. The Council stated that if the second option was to be implemented then a consequential change should also be made to transfer the Penallt ward between the two communities so that whole communities are retained within electoral wards ensuring clear boundaries and areas of responsibility. 26. Raglan Community Council objected to the changes to the community boundaries and consequential changes to the community ward and electoral ward boundaries for the Community of Raglan as a result of the recent community review. They requested that the Commission return the Pen-y-Clawdd ward, and the areas Cuckoo’s Row and the Warrage to the Raglan electoral ward and make the consequential changes to the community and community ward boundaries. They stated that the community ties in these areas were stronger with Raglan than with Mitchel Troy. 27. The Commission proposes that the Penallt community ward of the Community of Trellech United is combined with the Community of Mitchel Troy to form an electoral ward of 1,595 electors (1,645 projected)which, if represented by one councillor would result in a level of representation that is equal to the proposed county average. 28. The Commission has given the proposed electoral ward the Welsh language name of Llanfihangel Troddi; and the English language name of Mitchel Troy. The Welsh Language Commissioner is in agreement with the proposed name. The Commission would welcome any suggestions for alternative names. 29. As a consequence, the Commission proposes that the remainder of the Community of Trellech United is used to form an electoral ward of 1,496 electors (1,522 projected) which, if represented by one councillor would result in a level of representation that is 6% below the proposed county average. 30. The Commission has given the proposed electoral ward the Welsh language name of Tryleg Unedig; and the English language name of Trellech United. The Welsh Language Commissioner is in agreement with the proposed name. The Commission would welcome any suggestions for alternative names. 31. The Commission agrees with the second option recommended by Monmouthshire County Council and the improvement in electoral parity. It is the view of the Commission that this arrangement best addresses the existing inappropriate levels of electoral variance. This proposal does split the Community of Trellech United, however it is the view of the Commission that the proposed arrangement provides single-member wards in the area with

Page 13

MONMOUTHSHIRE DRAFT PROPOSALS

both electoral wards having acceptable levels of variance. 32. Monmouthshire County Council has made suggestions as to the consequential arrangements for the Communities of Mitchel Troy and Trellech United as a result of transferring the community ward of Penallt. The Commission considered this proposal, however due to the community review recently carried out and recommendations agreed by Welsh Government, the Commission wishes to avoid further confusion to the electorate by avoiding a further change to the community arrangements. 33. The Commission notes that this proposal splits the Community of Trellech United. The Commission would welcome representations on the alternative proposal to combine the Communities of Mitchell Troy and Trellech United to form a multi-member ward. 34. The Commission did consider the representation from Raglan Community Council. The changes to Raglan community boundaries and consequential changes to the community ward and electoral ward boundaries were part of the community review recently carried out and recommendations have been agreed by Welsh Government.

Page 14

LOCAL DEMOCRACY AND BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR WALES

Page 15

MONMOUTHSHIRE DRAFT PROPOSALS

Page 16

LOCAL DEMOCRACY AND BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR WALES

Llanbadoc and

35. The existing electoral ward is comprised of the Community of Llanbadoc. It has 1,131 electors (1,161 projected) represented by one councillor which is 29% below the proposed county average. 36. The existing Usk electoral ward is comprised the Town of Usk. It has 1,947 electors (1,987 projected) represented by one councillor which is 22% above the proposed county average. 37. The Commission received one representation concerning these wards from Monmouthshire County Council. 38. Monmouthshire County Council proposed combining the current electoral wards to form a two-member electoral ward with acceptable levels of variance. The Council stated that this would enable the electoral ward to include whole communities. 39. The Commission proposes that the Community of Llanbadoc and the Town of Usk are combined to form an electoral ward of 3,078 electors (3,148 projected) which, if represented by two councillors would result in a level of representation that is 4% below the proposed county average. 40. The Commission has given the proposed electoral ward the Welsh language name of Llanbadog a Brynbuga; and the English language name of Llanbadoc and Usk. The Welsh Language Commissioner agreed with the Welsh language name and proposed the English language name of Llanbadog and Usk. Llanbadog is the form recommended in the national standard reference work, A Gazetteer of Welsh Place-Names (University of Wales Press, 1967). One should not deviate from its recommendations without good reason. If the difference between the Welsh form and the 'English' form consists of only one or two letters, the use of a single form is recommended, with preference being given to the Welsh form. The Commission would welcome any suggestions for alternative names. 41. The Commission agrees with the recommendations made by the Council and the improvement in electoral parity. It is the view of the Commission that the proposed arrangement best addresses the existing levels of electoral variance. 42. The Commission did consider alternative arrangements but the proposed arrangement would see the whole communities united within one electoral ward and would build on established communication and social links in the area.

Page 17

MONMOUTHSHIRE DRAFT PROPOSALS

Page 18

LOCAL DEMOCRACY AND BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR WALES

Drybridge 43. The existing Drybridge electoral ward is composed of the Drybridge and Town wards of the Town of . It has 3,522 electors (3,662 projected) represented by two councillors which is 10% above the proposed county average. 44. The Commission received one representation concerning this ward from Monmouthshire County Council. 45. Monmouthshire County Council proposed to split the existing electoral ward to create two new single-member wards with acceptable levels of variance. The Council stated that although the current arrangement was only 10% above the proposed county average the proposed arrangement would return two single-member wards with clear boundaries which would be their preference. 46. The Commission proposes that the Drybridge ward of the Town of Monmouth is used to form an electoral ward of 1,772 electors (1,912 projected) which, if represented by one councillor would result in a level of representation that is 11% above the proposed county average. 47. The Commission has given the proposed electoral ward the single name of Drybridge. The Welsh Language Commissioner is in agreement with the proposed name. The Commission would welcome any suggestions for alternative names. 48. As a consequence, the Commission proposes that the Town ward of the Town of Monmouth is used to form an electoral ward of 1,750 electors (1,750 projected) which, if represented by one councillor this would result in a level of representation that is 9% above the proposed county average. 49. The Commission has given the proposed electoral ward the Welsh language name of Y Dref; and the English language name of Town. The Welsh Language Commissioner is in agreement with the proposed name. The Commission would welcome any suggestions for alternative names. 50. The Commission agrees with the recommendation made by the Council. It is the view of the Commission that the proposed arrangement provides two single-member wards in the area with acceptable levels of variance.

Page 19

MONMOUTHSHIRE DRAFT PROPOSALS

Page 20

LOCAL DEMOCRACY AND BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR WALES

Page 21

MONMOUTHSHIRE DRAFT PROPOSALS

This page is intentionally blank.

Page 22

LOCAL DEMOCRACY AND BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR WALES

Bulwark and Thornwell, and Larkfield and St Kingsmark 51. The existing Bulwark and Thornwell electoral ward is composed of the Bulwark, Maple Avenue and Thornwell wards of the Town of Chepstow. It has 3,854 electors (3,854 projected) represented by two councillors which is 21% above the proposed county average. 52. The existing Larkfield and St Kingsmark electoral ward is composed of the Larkfield, Mount Pleasant and St Kingsmark wards of the Town of Chepstow. It has 4,173 electors (4,173 projected) represented by two councillors which is 31% above the proposed county average. 53. The Commission received one representation concerning these wards from Monmouthshire County Council. 54. Monmouthshire County Council stated their preference for single member wards. However, the Council noted that the increase in the future number of electors in Chepstow Castle might mean that single-member wards for the town would not be appropriate and proposed two alternative options. 55. The first option combined the town wards of Chepstow Castle and Larkfield to form a two- member ward and retain the existing two-member ward of Bulwark and Thornwell. The first option also formed two single-member wards from the town wards of Mount Pleasant and St Kingsmark. 56. The second option combined the town wards of Chepstow Castle, Larkfield and Mount Pleasant to form a three-member ward and retain the existing two-member ward of Bulwark and Thornwell. The second option also formed a single-member ward from the town ward of St Kingsmark. 57. For the purposes of a council scheme the working group stated their preference for the second option which returned more single-member wards. 58. The Commission proposes that the Bulwark ward of the Town of Chepstow is used to form an electoral ward of 1,873 electors (1,873 projected) which, if represented by one councillor would result in a level of representation that is 17% above the proposed county average. 59. The Commission has given the proposed electoral ward the single name of Bulwark. The Welsh Language Commissioner is in agreement with the proposed name. The Commission would welcome any suggestions for alternative names. 60. The Commission proposes that the Thornwell ward of the Town of Chepstow is used to form an electoral ward of 1,388 electors (1,388 projected) which, if represented by one councillor would result in a level of representation that is 13% below the proposed county average. 61. The Commission has given the proposed electoral ward the single name of Thornwell. The Welsh Language Commissioner is in agreement with the proposed name. The Commission would welcome any suggestions for alternative names. 62. As a consequence, the Commission proposes that the Larkfield and Maple Avenue wards of the Town of Chepstow are combined to form an electoral ward of 1,659 electors (1,659 projected) which, if represented by one councillor would result in a level of representation that is 4% above the proposed county average. 63. The Commission has given the proposed electoral ward the single language name of Larkfield. The Welsh Language Commissioner is in agreement with the proposed name. The Commission would welcome any suggestions for alternative names.

Page 23

MONMOUTHSHIRE DRAFT PROPOSALS

64. The Commission proposes that the St Kingsmark ward of the Town of Chepstow is used to form an electoral ward of 1,535 electors (1,535 projected) which, if represented by one councillor would result in a level of representation that is 4% below the proposed county average. 65. The Commission has given the proposed electoral ward the single name of St Kingsmark. The Welsh Language Commissioner agreed with the English language name and proposed the Welsh language name of Llangynfarch. This name has been recorded since the twelfth century and despite falling out of wide use and circulation for centuries it is recorded in several standard reference works and there seems to be increasing local awareness of the name. The Commission would welcome any suggestions for alternative names. 66. The Commission proposes that the Mount Pleasant ward of the Town of Chepstow is used to form an electoral ward of 1,572 electors (1,572 projected) which, if represented by one councillor would result in a level of representation that is 2% below the proposed county average. 67. The Commission has given the proposed electoral ward the single name of Mount Pleasant. The Welsh Language Commissioner is in agreement with the proposed name. The Commission would welcome any suggestions for alternative names. 68. The Commission considered alternative options for Chepstow Castle and proposes to retain the existing arrangements. (see pages 7 and 8, para 4) 69. The Commission considered the representation made by the Council and proposed that the existing single-member electoral ward of Chepstow Castle remain. This is consistent with its proposals for single-member wards for the rest of the Town of Chepstow and was the stated preference of the Council for this area in their representation. It is the view of the Commission that the proposed wards have levels of variance that are appropriate for the existing electorate.

Page 24

LOCAL DEMOCRACY AND BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR WALES

Page 25

MONMOUTHSHIRE DRAFT PROPOSALS

Page 26

LOCAL DEMOCRACY AND BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR WALES

Page 27

MONMOUTHSHIRE DRAFT PROPOSALS

Page 28

LOCAL DEMOCRACY AND BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR WALES

Page 29

MONMOUTHSHIRE DRAFT PROPOSALS

Chapter 5. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ARRANGEMENTS 1. The existing electoral arrangements (as shown in Appendix 2) provide for the following levels of electoral representation within the County of Monmouthshire: • Electoral variance ranges from 31% below the current county average (Govilon and Llandadoc) to 28% above the current county average (Larkfield and St Kingsmark) of 1,634 electors per councillor. • Four electoral ward has levels of representation more than 25% above or below the current county average of 1,634 electors per councillor. • 16 electoral wards have levels of representation between 10% and 25% above or below the current county average of 1,634 electors per councillor. • 20 electoral wards have levels of representation less than 10% above or below the current county average of 1,634 electors per councillor. 2. In comparison with the existing electoral arrangements shown above, the proposed electoral arrangements (as shown in Appendix 3) illustrate the following improvements to the electoral representation across the County of Monmouthshire: • Electoral variance ranges from 21% below the proposed county average (Mardy) to 19% above the proposed county average (Portskewett) of 1,599 electors per councillor. • None of the electoral wards have levels of representation more than 25% above or below the proposed county average of 1,599 electors per councillor. • 14 electoral wards have levels of representation between 10% and 25% above or below the proposed county average of 1,599 electors per councillor. • 28 electoral wards have levels of representation less than 10% above or below the proposed county average of 1,599 electors per councillor. 3. As described in Appendix 4, in producing a scheme of electoral arrangements the Commission must have regard to a number of issues contained in the legislation. It is not always possible to resolve all of these, sometimes conflicting, issues. In the Commission’s proposed scheme, it has placed emphasis on achieving improvements in electoral parity whilst maintaining community ties wherever possible. 4. The Commission recognises that the creation of electoral wards which depart from the pattern which now exists may impact upon existing ties between communities and straddle multiple community councils. As such, the Commission has made every effort to ensure that the revised electoral wards are appropriate combinations of communities and community wards. 5. The Commission has looked at each area and is satisfied that it would be difficult to achieve electoral arrangements that keep the existing combination of communities and community wards without having a detrimental effect on one or more of the other issues that it must consider. The Commission recognises however that there may be different combinations of communities and community wards that better reflect community ties and it would welcome any alternative suggestions that comply with the legislation.

Page 30

LOCAL DEMOCRACY AND BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR WALES

6. In this document the proposed electoral wards have been given working names which are intended to represent an area rather than particular settlements, villages, or towns. The Commission recognises that there may be names that are more appropriate and it would welcome alternative suggestions. The Commission would request that these suggested names should not merely consist of listed communities and villages but, instead, should reflect the character of the areas involved as well as being effective in either Welsh or English. 7. This draft scheme represents the Commission’s preliminary views on the electoral arrangements for the County of Monmouthshire. It welcomes any representations in respect of these proposals. The Commission will consider carefully all representations made to it before formulating our final proposals and submitting them to the Welsh Government.

Page 31

MONMOUTHSHIRE DRAFT PROPOSALS

Chapter 6. RESPONSES TO THIS REPORT 1. All observations on these draft proposals should be sent to: The Chief Executive Local Democracy and Boundary Commission for Wales Hastings House Fitzalan Court Cardiff CF24 0BL

Or by email to:

[email protected]

no later than 10 March 2021.

Page 32

LOCAL DEMOCRACY AND BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR WALES

Chapter 7. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 1. The Commission wishes to express its gratitude to the principal council, the Community Councils and other interested bodies and persons for their assistance during the course of developing these draft proposals. The Commission commend the draft proposals contained within this report.

Dr DEBRA WILLIAMS (Chair)

CERI STRADLING (Deputy Chair)

DAVID POWELL (Member)

JULIE MAY (Member)

THEODORE JOLOZA (Member)

SHEREEN WILLIAMS MBE OStJ (Chief Executive)

December 2020

Page 33 APPENDIX 1

APPENDIX 1 – GLOSSARY OF TERMS

Commission The Local Democracy and Boundary Commission for Wales.

Community (area) The unit of local government that lies below the level of the Principal Council.

Community Council An elected council that provides services r to particular thei community area. A Communityouncil C may be divided for community electoral purposes into community wards.

Community / Town An area within a Community Council created for community electoral ward purposes.

County Average Elector to Councillor average for the principal authority area.

Directions Directions issued by Welsh Ministers under Section 48 of the Act.

Electoral wards The areas into which Principal Councils are divided for the purpose of electing county councillors, previously referred to as electoral divisions. Electoral review A review in which the Commission considers the electoral arrangements for a Principal Council.

Electoral variance How far the number of electors per councillor in a ward varies from the county average; expressed as a percentage.

Electorate The number of persons registered to vote in a local government area.

Estimated The estimated number of eligible persons (18+) within a local Population of government area who are eligible to vote. These figures have been Eligible Voters sourced from the Office of National Statistics’ 2015 Ward population estimated for Wales, mid-2015 (experimental statistics). Interested party Person or body who has an interest in the outcome anof electoral review such as a ommunity c or town council, local MP or AM or political party. Order Order made by an implementing body, givingffect e to proposals made by the Principal Council or the Commission.

Over- Where there are fewer electors per councillor in a ward compared to representation the county average. APPENDIX 1

Principal area The area governed by a Principal Council: in Wales a county or .

Principal council The single tier organ of local government, responsible for all or almost all local government functions within its area. A county or county borough council. Projected The five-year forecast of the electorate. electorate

Split Community A Community which is divided between two, or more, Electoral Wards.

The Act The Local Government (Democracy) (Wales) Act 2013.

Town Council A Community Council with the status of a town are known as Town Councils. A Town ouncil C may be divided for community electoral purposes into wards. Under- Where there are more electors per councillor in a ward compared to representation the county average. MONMOUTHSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL APPENDIX 2 EXISTING COUNCIL MEMBERSHIP

% variance % variance No. OF 2020 2020 ELECTORATE 2025 No. NAME DESCRIPTION from County from County COUNCILLORS ELECTORATE RATIO 2025 RATIO average average 1 Bulwark and Thornwell The proposed Bulwark, Maple Avenue and Thornwell wards of the Town of Chepstow 2 3,854 1,927 18% 3,854 1,927 10%

2 Caerwent The proposed Community of Caerwent 1 1,798 1,798 10% 1,798 1,798 2%

3 Caldicot Castle The proposed Caldicot Castle ward of the Town of Caldicot 1 1,349 1,349 -17% 1,609 1,609 -9%

4 Caldicot Cross The proposed Caldicot Cross ward of the Town of Caldicot 1 1,567 1,567 -4% 1,599 1,599 -9%

5 Cantref The proposed Cantref and Llanwenarth Citra wards of the Town of 1 1,688 1,688 3% 1,688 1,688 -4%

6 Chepstow Castle The proposed Chepstow Castle ward of the Town of Chepstow 1 1,369 1,369 -16% 2,527 2,527 44%

7 Croesonen The proposed Croesonen ward of the Community of 1 1,551 1,551 -5% 1,551 1,551 -12%

8 Crucorney The proposed Communities of Crucorney and Grosmont 1 1,652 1,652 1% 1,712 1,712 -3%

The proposed Community of Devauden and the Llangwm and wards of the 9 Devauden 1 1,312 1,312 -20% 1,342 1,342 -24% proposed Community of

10 Dewstow The proposed Dewstow ward of the Town of Caldicot 1 1,459 1,459 -11% 1,459 1,459 -17%

11 Drybridge The proposed Drybridge and Town wards of the Town of Monmouth 2 3,522 1,761 8% 3,662 1,831 4%

12 Gobion Fawr The proposed Communities of Gobion Fawr and Llanarth 1 1,674 1,674 2% 1,694 1,694 -4%

13 Goetre Fawr The proposed Community of Goetre Fawr 1 1,857 1,857 14% 1,857 1,857 6%

14 Govilon The proposed Govilon ward of the Community of Llanfoist Fawr 1 1,123 1,123 -31% 1,123 1,123 -36%

15 Grofield The proposed Grofield ward of the Town of Abergavenny 1 1,823 1,823 12% 1,917 1,917 9%

16 Lansdown The proposed Lansdown ward of the Town of Abergavenny 1 1,740 1,740 6% 1,790 1,790 2%

Larkfield and St The proposed Larkfield, Mount Pleasant and St Kingsmark wards of the Town of 17 2 4,173 2,087 28% 4,173 2,087 19% Kingsmark Chepstow

18 Llanbadoc The proposed Community of Llanbadoc 1 1,131 1,131 -31% 1,161 1,161 -34%

19 Llanelly The proposed Community of Llanelly 2 3,315 1,658 1% 3,315 1,658 -6%

20 Llanfoist Fawr The Llanellen and Llanfoist wards of the Community of Llanfoist Fawr 1 1,860 1,860 14% 2,176 2,176 24% The proposed Community of Llangybi and the and Llantrisant wards of the 21 Llangybi Fawr 1 1,502 1,502 -8% 1,522 1,522 -13% proposed Community of Llantrisant Fawr 22 Llantilio Crossenny The proposed Communities of and Whitecastle 1 1,683 1,683 3% 1,713 1,713 -3%

23 Magor East The proposed Magor East and Undy wards of the Community of Magor with Undy 2 3,110 1,555 -5% 4,092 2,046 16% MONMOUTHSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL APPENDIX 2 EXISTING COUNCIL MEMBERSHIP % variance % variance No. OF 2020 2020 ELECTORATE 2025 No. NAME DESCRIPTION from County from County COUNCILLORS ELECTORATE RATIO 2025 RATIO average average 24 Magor West The proposed Magor West ward of the Community of Magor with Undy 1 1,643 1,643 1% 1,643 1,643 -7%

The proposed Mardy and Sgyridd wards, and the Pantygelli ward of the Community of 25 Mardy 1 1,258 1,258 -23% 1,694 1,694 -4% Llantilio Pertholey

26 Mitchel Troy The proposed Community of Mitchel Troy 1 1,151 1,151 -30% 1,181 1,181 -33%

27 Osbaston The proposed Osbaston ward of the Town of Monmouth 1 1,714 1,714 5% 1,714 1,714 -3%

28 Overmonnow The proposed Overmonnow ward of the Town of Monmouth 1 1,470 1,470 -10% 1,862 1,862 6%

29 Park The proposed Park ward of the Town of Abergavenny 1 1,546 1,546 -5% 1,582 1,582 -10%

30 Pen Y Fal The proposed Pen Y Fal ward of the Town of Abergavenny 1 1,538 1,538 -6% 1,640 1,640 -7%

31 Portskewett The proposed Community of Portskewett 1 1,900 1,900 16% 2,924 2,924 66%

32 Raglan The proposed Community of Raglan 1 1,745 1,745 7% 1,835 1,835 4%

33 Rogiet The proposed Community of Rogiet 1 1,400 1,400 -14% 1,422 1,422 -19%

34 Severn The proposed Severn and The Village wards of the Town of Caldicot 1 1,752 1,752 7% 1,752 1,752 0%

35 Shirenewton The proposed Communities of and Shirenewton 1 1,782 1,782 9% 1,816 1,816 3%

36 St Arvans The proposed Communities of St Arvans and 1 1,540 1,540 -6% 1,562 1,562 -11%

37 Trellech United The proposed Community of Trellech United 1 1,940 1,940 19% 1,986 1,986 13%

38 Usk The proposed Town of Usk 1 1,947 1,947 19% 1,987 1,987 13%

39 West End The proposed West End ward of the Town of Caldicot 1 1,382 1,382 -15% 1,382 1,382 -21%

40 Wyesham The proposed Wyesham ward of the Town of Monmouth 1 1,725 1,725 6% 1,817 1,817 3% TOTAL: 45 73,545 1,634 79,133 1,759 Ratio is the number of electors per councillor Electoral figures supplied by Monmouthshire County Council Population figures supplied by the Office for National Statistics

2020 2025 Greater than + or - 50% of County average 0 0% 1 3% Between + or - 25% and + or - 50% of County average 4 10% 4 10% Between + or - 10% and + or - 25% of County average 16 40% 13 33% Between 0% and + or - 10% of County average 20 50% 22 55% MONMOUTHSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL APPENDIX 3 PROPOSED COUNCIL MEMBERSHIP

% variance % variance No. OF 2020 2020 ELECTORATE 2025 No. NAME DESCRIPTION from County from County COUNCILLORS ELECTORATE RATIO 2025 RATIO average average 1 Bulwark The proposed Bulwark ward of the Town of Chepstow 1 1,873 1,873 17% 1,873 1,873 9%

2 Caerwent The proposed Community of Caerwent 1 1,798 1,798 12% 1,798 1,798 5% The proposed Caldicot Castle ward of the Town of 3 Caldicot Castle 1 1,349 1,349 1,609 1,609 Caldicot -16% -6% The proposed Caldicot Cross ward of the Town of 4 Caldicot Cross 1 1,567 1,567 1,599 1,599 Caldicot -2% -7% The proposed Cantref and Llanwenarth Citra wards of 5 Cantref 1 1,688 1,688 1,688 1,688 the Town of Abergavenny 6% -2% The proposed Chepstow Castle ward of the Town of 6 Chepstow Castle 1 1,369 1,369 2,527 2,527 Chepstow -14% 47% The proposed Croesonen ward of the Community of 7 Croesonen 1 1,551 1,551 1,551 1,551 Llantilio Pertholey -3% -10% 8 Crucorney The proposed Communities of Crucorney and Grosmont 1 1,652 1,652 3% 1,712 1,712 0% The proposed Community of Devauden and the 9 Devauden Llangwm and Llansoy wards of the proposed 1 1,312 1,312 -18% 1,342 1,342 -22% Community of Llantrisant Fawr 10 Dewstow The proposed Dewstow ward of the Town of Caldicot 1 1,459 1,459 -9% 1,459 1,459 -15%

11 Drybridge The proposed Drybridge ward of the Town of Monmouth 1 1,772 1,772 11% 1,912 1,912 11% The proposed Communities of Gobion Fawr and 12 Gobion Fawr 1 1,674 1,674 1,694 1,694 Llanarth 5% -2% 13 Goetre Fawr The proposed Community of Goetre Fawr 1 1,857 1,857 16% 1,857 1,857 8%

14 Grofield The proposed Grofield ward of the Town of Abergavenny 1 1,823 1,823 14% 1,917 1,917 11% The proposed Lansdown ward of the Town of 15 Lansdown 1 1,740 1,740 1,790 1,790 Abergavenny 9% 4% The proposed Larkfield and Maple Avenue wards of the 16 Larkfield 1 1,659 1,659 1,659 1,659 Town of Chepstow 4% -4% The proposed Community of Llanbadoc and the Town of 17 Llanbadoc and Usk 2 3,078 1,539 3,148 1,574 Usk -4% -9% 18 Llanelly The Community of Llanelly 2 3,315 1,658 4% 3,315 1,658 -4% Llanfoist Fawr and 19 The Community of Llanfoist Fawr 2 2,983 1,492 -7% 3,299 1,650 -4% Govilon The proposed Community of Llangybi and the 20 Llangybi Fawr Gwernesney and Llantrisant wards of the proposed 1 1,502 1,502 -6% 1,522 1,522 -12% Community of Llantrisant Fawr MONMOUTHSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL APPENDIX 3 PROPOSED COUNCIL MEMBERSHIP

% variance % variance No. OF 2020 2020 ELECTORATE 2025 No. NAME DESCRIPTION from County from County COUNCILLORS ELECTORATE RATIO 2025 RATIO average average 21 Llantilio Crossenny The proposed Communities of Skenfrith and Whitecastle 1 1,683 1,683 5% 1,713 1,713 0% The proposed Magor East and Undy wards of the 22 Magor East 2 3,110 1,555 4,092 2,046 Community of Magor with Undy -3% 19% The proposed Magor West ward of the Community of 23 Magor West 1 1,643 1,643 1,643 1,643 Magor with Undy 3% -4% The proposed Mardy and Sgyridd wards, and the 24 Mardy 1 1,258 1,258 1,694 1,694 Pantygelli ward of the Community of Llantilio Pertholey -21% -2% The proposed Community of Mitchel Troy and the 25 Mitchel Troy 1 1,595 1,595 1,645 1,645 Penallt ward of the Community of Trellech United 0% -4% The proposed Mount Pleasant ward of the Town of 26 Mount Pleasant 1 1,572 1,572 1,572 1,572 Chepstow -2% -9% 27 Osbaston The proposed Osbaston ward of the Town of Monmouth 1 1,714 1,714 7% 1,714 1,714 0% The proposed Overmonnow ward of the Town of 28 Overmonnow 1 1,470 1,470 1,862 1,862 Monmouth -8% 8% 29 Park The proposed Park ward of the Town of Abergavenny 1 1,546 1,546 -3% 1,582 1,582 -8% The proposed Pen Y Fal ward of the Town of 30 Pen Y Fal 1 1,538 1,538 1,640 1,640 Abergavenny -4% -5% 31 Portskewett The proposed Community of Portskewett 1 1,900 1,900 19% 2,924 2,924 70%

32 Raglan The proposed Community of Raglan 1 1,745 1,745 9% 1,835 1,835 7%

33 Rogiet The proposed Community of Rogiet 1 1,400 1,400 -12% 1,422 1,422 -17% The proposed Severn and The Village wards of the 34 Severn 1 1,752 1,752 1,752 1,752 Town of Caldicot 10% 2% 35 Shirenewton The proposed Communities of Mathern and Shirenewton 1 1,782 1,782 11% 1,816 1,816 6% The proposed Communities of St Arvans and Wye 36 St Arvans 1 1,540 1,540 1,562 1,562 Valley -4% -9% The proposed St Kingsmark ward of the Town of 37 St Kingsmark 1 1,535 1,535 1,535 1,535 Chepstow -4% -11% 38 Thornwell The proposed Thornwell ward of the Town of Chepstow 1 1,388 1,388 -13% 1,388 1,388 -19%

39 Town The proposed Town ward of the Town of Monmouth 1 1,750 1,750 9% 1,750 1,750 2% MONMOUTHSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL APPENDIX 3 PROPOSED COUNCIL MEMBERSHIP

% variance % variance No. OF 2020 2020 ELECTORATE 2025 No. NAME DESCRIPTION from County from County COUNCILLORS ELECTORATE RATIO 2025 RATIO average average

The proposed , Llanishen, and 40 Trellech United Trellech Town wards of the Community of Trellech 1 1,496 1,496 -6% 1,522 1,522 -12% United

41 West End The proposed West End ward of the Town of Caldicot 1 1,382 1,382 -14% 1,382 1,382 -20%

42 Wyesham The Wyesham ward of the Town of Monmouth 1 1,725 1,725 8% 1,817 1,817 6% TOTAL: 46 73,545 1,599 79,133 1,720 Ratio is the number of electors per councillor Electoral figures supplied by Monmouthshire County Council

2020 2025 Greater than + or - 50% of County average 0 0% 1 2% Between + or - 25% and + or - 50% of County average 0 0% 1 2% Between + or - 10% and + or - 25% of County average 14 33% 11 26% Between 0% and + or - 10% of County average 28 67% 29 69% APPENDIX 4

RULES AND PROCEDURES

Scope and Object of the Review

1. Section 29 (1) of the Local Government (Democracy) (Wales) Act 2013 (the Act) lays upon the Commission the duty, at least once in every review period of ten years, to review the electoral arrangements for every principal area in Wales for the purpose of considering whether or not to make proposals to the Welsh Government for a change in those electoral arrangements. In conducting a review the Commission must seek to ensure effective and convenient local government (Section 21 (3) of the Act).

2. The former Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government of the Welsh Government has asked the Commission to submit a report in respect of the review of electoral arrangements for the County of Monmouthshire before the 2022 local government elections.

Electoral Arrangements

3. The changes that the Commission may recommend in relation to an electoral review are:

(a) such changes to the arrangements for the principal area under review as appear to it appropriate; and

(b) in consequence of such changes:

(i) Such community boundary changes as it considers appropriate in relation to any community in the principal area;

(ii) Such community council changes and changes to the electoral arrangements for such a community as it considers appropriate; and

(iii) Such preserved county changes as it considers appropriate.

4. The “electoral arrangements” of a principal area are defined in section 29 (9) of the Act as:

i) the number of members for the council for the principal area;

ii) the number, type and boundaries of the electoral wards;

iii) the number of members to be elected for any electoral ward in the principal area; and

iv) the name of any electoral ward. APPENDIX 4

Considerations for a review of principal area electoral arrangements

5. Section 30 of the Act requires the Commission, in considering whether to make recommendations for changes to the electoral arrangements for a principal area, to:

(a) seek to ensure that the ratio of local government electors to the number of members of the council to be elected is, as nearly as may be, the same in every electoral ward of the principal area;

(b) have regard to:

(i) the desirability of fixing boundaries for electoral wards which are and will remain easily identifiable;

(ii) the desirability of not breaking local ties when fixing boundaries for electoral wards.

6. In considering the ratio of local government electors to the number of members account is to be taken of:

(a) any discrepancy between the number of local government electors and the number of persons that are eligible to be local government electors (as indicated by relevant official statistics); and

(b) any change to the number or distribution of local government electors in the principal area which is likely to take place in the period of five years immediately following the making of any recommendation.

Local government changes

7. The last local government Order was in 2002. Monmouthshire County Council completed its own review of community areas within Monmouthshire. The Commission submitted its report in relation to that community review to Welsh Government in January 2019. On 15 January 2020 after considering representations made, the Minister for Housing and Local Government indicated that Welsh Government had accepted the recommendations in the Commission’s report. The Commission understands that those recommendations will be implemented by means of an Order of the Welsh Ministers.

Procedure

8. Chapter 4 of the Act lays down procedural guidelines which are to be followed in carrying out a review. In compliance with this part of the Act, we wrote on 1 July 2020 to Monmouthshire County Council, all the Community and Town Councils in the area, the Members of Parliament for the local constituencies, Members of the for the area, and other interested parties to inform them of the Commission’s intention to conduct the review and to request their preliminary views. The Commission invited APPENDIX 4

the County Council to submit a suggested scheme or schemes for new electoral arrangements. The Commission also asked Monmouthshire County Council to display a number of public notices in their area. The Commission also made available copies of our Electoral Reviews: Policy and Practice document. In addition the Commission made a presentation to both County and Community councillors explaining the review process.

9. The boundaries of the proposed electoral wards are shown by continuous yellow lines on the map placed on deposit with this Report at the Offices of Council and the Office of the Commission in Cardiff as well as on the Commission’s website (http://ldbc.gov.wales).

Policy and Practice

10. The Commission published its Electoral Reviews: Policy and Practice document in November 2016. This document details its approach to resolving the challenge of balancing electoral parity and community ties; it sets out the issues to be considered and gives some understanding of the broad approach which the Commission takes towards each of the statutory considerations to be made when addressing a review’s particular circumstances. However, because those circumstances are unlikely to provide for the ideal electoral pattern, in most reviews compromises are made in applying the policies in order to strike the right balance between each of the matters we must consider.

11. The document also provides the overall programme timetable, and how this was identified, and the Commission’s Council Size Policy. The document can be viewed on the Commission’s website or are available on request.

Crown Copyright

12. The maps included in this report and published on the Commissions website were produced by the Local Democracy and Boundary Commission for Wales under licence from Ordnance Survey. These maps are subject to © Crown Copyright. Unauthorised reproduction will infringe Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. Any newspaper editor wishing to use the maps as part of an article about the draft proposals should first contact the copyright office at Ordnance Survey. APPENDIX 5

SUMMARY OF REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED FOR THE COMMISSION’S INITIAL CONSULTATION ON THE REVIEW OF ELECTORAL ARRANGEMENTS IN THE COUNTY OF MONMOUTHSHIRE

1. Monmouthshire County Council emailed on 17 August 2020 outlining the Council’s recommendations to the Commission. Below is the response and recommendations sent to the Commission.

1 APPENDIX 5

2 APPENDIX 5

3 APPENDIX 5

4 APPENDIX 5

5 APPENDIX 5

6 APPENDIX 5

7 APPENDIX 5

8 APPENDIX 5

9 APPENDIX 5

2. Gotre Fawr Community Council emailed on 15 July 2020 stating their concern at what they considered to be the unsatisfactory way in which the recent community review had not been undertaken and requested the boundaries be reviewed. They did agree that the electoral boundaries would be aligned with the eventual community boundaries for this electoral review. 3. Grosmont Fawr Community Council emailed on 8 September 2020 stating their objection to the changes to the community boundaries for Grosmont Fawr Community as a result of the recent community review. They stated their preference that the present arrangements remain and that the electoral review is conducted using these arrangements as a ‘baseline’. 4. Llanover Community Council emailed on 20 September 2020 stating their support for the changes to the community boundaries as a result of the recent community review. They also stated that the electoral boundaries should be aligned with the eventual community boundaries for this electoral review as far as possible and this should apply to the proposed new community of Gobion Fawr. 5. Magor with Undy Community Council emailed on 28 September 2020 stating their objection to the changes to the community boundaries and consequential changes to the community ward and electoral ward boundaries for Magor with Undy Community as a result of the recent community review. They stated their support for the additional member for Magor East and accepted that a reduction in community councillors was likely. They also stated that they were not particularly happy in being made a town but accepted the fact due to the change in the size of the villages in the area. They did request that a name change for the Magor East electoral ward to The Mill and Magor West to The Elms. They also requested that the community wards be renamed their original names of Mill, Elms, Salisbury and Denny. 6. Raglan Community Council emailed on 28 September 2020 stating their objection to the changes to the community boundaries and consequential changes to the community ward

10 APPENDIX 5

and electoral ward boundaries for Raglan Community as a result of the recent community review. They requested that the Local Democracy and Boundary Commission for Wales transfer back Pen-y-Clawdd ward, and the areas Cuckoo’s Row and The Warrage to the Raglan electoral ward and make the consequential changes to the Community and Community ward boundaries. They stated that the community ties in these areas where stronger with Raglan than with Mitchel Troy. 7. Councillor D Jones (Crucorney) emailed on 27 September 2020 stating their objection to the changes to the community boundaries and consequential changes to the community ward and electoral ward boundaries for Grosmont Community as a result of the recent community review in particular the transfer of the village Lanvetherine. They stated that the existing arrangements prior to the community review should remain. 8. A resident of Monmouthshire emailed on 17 August 2020 stating their objection to the changes to the community boundaries and consequential changes to the community ward Llanwenarth Citra as a result of the recent community review. 9. A resident of Monmouthshire emailed on 17 August 2020 stating their objection to the changes to the community boundaries and consequential changes to the community ward Llanwenarth Citra as a result of the recent community review. 10. A resident of Monmouthshire wrote on 18 August 2020 stating their objection to the changes to the community boundaries and consequential changes to the community ward Llanwenarth Citra as a result of the recent community review. 11. A resident of Monmouthshire wrote on 24 August 2020 stating their objection to the changes to the community boundaries and consequential changes to the community ward Llanwenarth Citra as a result of the recent community review. 12. A resident of Monmouthshire emailed on 3 September 2020 stating their objection to the changes to the community boundaries and consequential changes to the community ward Llanwenarth Citra as a result of the recent community review. 13. A resident of Monmouthshire emailed on 20 September 2020 stating their objection to the changes to the community boundaries and consequential changes to the community ward Llanwenarth Citra as a result of the recent community review.

11 APPENDIX 6

WRITTEN STATEMENT BY THE WELSH GOVERNMENT

TITLE LOCAL ELECTIONS AND ELECTORAL ARRANGEMENTS

DATE Thursday 23rd JUNE 2016

MARK DRAKEFORD, CABINET SECRETARY FOR FINANCE AND BY LOCAL GOVERNMENT

The Local Authority Elections (Wales) Order 2014 provided for local elections in Wales to be delayed for a year, from May 2016 to May 2017. This allowed the elections to be separated from the Assembly elections.

At the present time, the Local Government Act 1972 provides that ordinary elections to local government in Wales take place on the first Thursday of May every four years. Therefore, the next local government elections would normally take place in May 2021. Since the implementation of the provisions of the Wales Act 2014, elections to the National Assembly take place on a five-yearly cycle. The policy of the Welsh Government is that elections at local level should also be placed on a five year cycle. It is intended that councillors elected next May will therefore hold office until May 2022.

The Wales Bill, currently before Parliament, includes provisions which would enable the Assembly to legislate to determine the term of office for local government. As the Bill is currently in draft form and should these provisions, for any reason, not come into force, the Welsh Government could use the same powers under the Local Government Act 2000 as we did in 2014 to delay the elections by a year. This statement therefore provides clarity to local government as to the length of office of those to be elected next year.

1 APPENDIX 6

In the light of this, I have considered the decision made last year in relation to the electoral arrangements of some principal councils. It was determined that reviews conducted by the Local Democracy and Boundary Commission for Wales in relation to nine principal areas would not be implemented, given the intention that councils elected in 2017 would only serve a short term prior to mergers.

However, even though the elections in May next year will now result in a full term, due to their proximity, the arrangements which would be required and the disruption for potential candidates, I do not intend to implement any changes to current electoral arrangements in advance of the 2017 elections resultant from those reviews. The councils concerned are Carmarthenshire, Ceredigion, Conwy, Denbighshire, Gwynedd, Monmouthshire, Pembrokeshire, Powys and Torfaen.

The decision that councils will be elected for a full term also means that the Local Democracy and Boundary Commission (the Commission) will return to its normal ten-year cycle of reviews of electoral arrangements. I expect the Commission to publish a new, prioritised programme as soon as possible which takes into account the age of the current arrangements in some areas and the amount of change since the last review was undertaken. I will ask the Commission, in planning their work, to start by revisiting the nine outstanding reviews, with a view to presenting fresh reports on these at the very start of their programme.

It is my intention that reviews of electoral arrangements in principal councils will be conducted against a set of common criteria to be agreed through the Commission. I also expect electoral reviews to have been completed for all 22 authorities within the next local government term.

These arrangements provide clarity for those considering standing for election in 2017 and also set out a long term planning horizon for local authorities and their public service partners. However, I want to be clear that discussions on the reform agenda are on-going with local authorities and other stakeholders. I will be proposing a way forward on local government reform in the Autumn.

2

© LDBCW Copyright 2020