4. 4. Motion under Standing Order 26.91 Seeking the Assembly's Agreement to Introduce a Member Bill on Protection of Historic Place Names

Part of the debate – in the Senedd at 3:01 pm on 15 March 2017.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Siân Gwenllian Siân Gwenllian Plaid Cymru 3:01, 15 March 2017

(Translated)

Thank you, and warm congratulations to Dai Lloyd on his attempt to introduce a Member’s Bill as regards the protection of historic place names in Wales. I’m very pleased to support him today, and I’m confident that he will receive cross-party support. The historic names of Wales are part of our proud heritage, and they deserve the same protection as rare plants and animals. Very often, the original Welsh name is full of meaning, and, in a couple of words, you can get a wealth of historic background as regards the landscape or local history.

Unfortunately, there are a number of examples of pointless changes or perhaps corruption of our traditional place names. We’ve heard a number of examples of this today. I am going to talk about an example from my constituency that led to a short, but, I’m pleased to say, effective, campaign to retain the historic name of a famous mansion, namely Plasty Glynllifon. It stands in a large, walled country park about six miles from Caernarfon on the main route to the Llŷn peninsula. The name Glynllifon was used as far back as the sixteenth century—a 100 room mansion in a 700 acre park—but, in 2015, there was an attempt to change the name. A company from Yorkshire in England called MBI Sales proposed to sell units in the historic mansion as buy-to-rent opportunities. This came to the attention of the local population, and it was noted that the name Glynllifon wasn’t being used, but that the company had coined a new name, ‘Wynnborn Mansion’, with no mention of the real name, Plas Glynllifon. All the marketing materials referred to ‘Wynnborn Mansion’. It was an attempt, apparently, to create a particular kind of image—an echo of ‘To the Manor Born’, or the famous opera location Glyndebourne, perhaps, that, in rural Wales, did not fit at all.

The local people were livid. No local consultation had taken place on the name change. An effective campaign was launched, and I had the privilege of leading that campaign. At the time, I was a member of Gwynedd Council’s language committee, and I got cross-party support to try and get the company to change their mind. I received support from every part of the community, because the non-Welsh speakers were just as supportive as the Welsh speakers. Very strong feelings came to the fore, and it was good to see how important local heritage was to the people of the constituency. I met with MBI Sales, there was a great deal of press attention, and, finally, in the face of such local opposition, the company changed its mind and reverted to using Plas Glynllifon in October 2015. By the way, nothing came of the idea of buy-to-rent, and by now I understand that Plas Glynllifon is in new hands, and those owners intend to convert it into a hotel, keeping the original name, Plas Glynllifon, with all its associated history.

This is just one story, and, thankfully, it had a positive outcome. But how many names, and, therefore, how much of our heritage has already been lost forever? I’m pleased to see that Dai Lloyd’s Bill offers a number of options as regards how to address this matter of protecting historic names. I note the comments of the Cabinet Secretary for the economy, but I do wish Dai well, and thank him for bringing this Bill forward. There is a great difference between guidelines and placing protection into law and legislation, and that is what is required in this case. Thank you.