Governor Jane Owen has appointed a new Electoral Boundary Commission to review all 19 constituencies, opening another attempt to rebalance representation after an earlier set of recommendations failed to secure parliamentary approval.

The commission is chaired by Mark Ramkerrysingh, a Trinidad and Tobago lawyer who has previously led boundary commissions in Trinidad and Tobago and Bermuda. Derek Norwood Jones and Richard Christian are the other members. The panel held its first meeting on 26 August and is expected to report within nine months of its appointment.

The review follows substantial growth in the electorate. The terms of reference say the number of registered voters increased 21%, from 21,226 in April 2017 to 25,666 in July 2025.

Those voters are not distributed evenly. A Commonwealth Parliamentary Association election-observation report found that West Bay South had 1,773 registered voters, compared with 899 in East End. As both are single-member constituencies, the figures produce a nearly two-to-one difference in the number of registered voters represented by each MP. The report recommended revising the boundaries before the next general election to advance equality of the vote.

The new commission has been instructed to work towards a preferred variance of 10% from the average constituency electorate, with a maximum variance of 15%. It must also account for the constitutional requirement that Cayman Brac and Little Cayman return two MPs.

Where practicable, the commission is expected to preserve the traditional district boundaries of East End, North Side, Bodden Town, George Town and West Bay. It must disclose how many voters would be moved between constituencies and consider whether the number of elected members should increase. It will also examine constituency names and the social, economic and demographic characteristics of the electorate.

The Governor said electoral boundaries “play a vital role in supporting fair and effective representation”. She encouraged the public to participate in the consultation.

The previous commission submitted its report on 4 August 2023. Draft orders intended to implement its recommendations were rejected by Parliament on 26 July 2024 and again on 31 January 2025.

According to the new terms of reference, concerns raised during the parliamentary debates included low participation in the consultation, limited public understanding of the proposals, the absence of detailed terms of reference and the practical risks of changing constituencies less than a year before a general election. The document says members feared that late changes could confuse voters and reduce turnout.

That timing concern is consistent with the Venice Commission’s electoral guidance, which says the drawing of constituency boundaries generally should not be open to amendment less than one year before an election. The guidance also says departures from the normal constituency size should ordinarily remain within 10% and should not exceed 15% except in special circumstances.

Lessons from the UK

Recent British experience demonstrates that boundary changes can affect representation, campaign strategy and election administration even though they do not determine how people vote.

New Westminster boundaries were used at the 2024 UK general election. Only 65 of the 650 constituencies were unchanged, while the other 585 underwent at least some alteration. Wales lost eight constituencies, reducing its allocation to 32. Ogmore in South Wales was divided among five successor constituencies without a close equivalent to the former seat. Such changes can disrupt established voter relationships, local party organisations and candidates’ campaign bases.

A notional analysis by election specialists Colin Rallings and Michael Thrasher applied the 2019 votes to the new constituency map. It estimated that the Conservatives would have held 372 seats rather than 365, while Labour would have held 201 rather than 203. The estimated Conservative majority was 94, compared with the actual 2019 majority of 80.

Those were retrospective estimates, not actual election results or predictions. The authors cautioned that voters placed in different constituencies might behave differently because the competitiveness, candidates and political context of their new seats would also change.

The UK review also created administrative difficulties. In a post-election survey by the Electoral Commission, almost a quarter of responding administrators reported no problems managing the new boundaries. The remaining three-quarters experienced at least some issues, including incompatible electoral-management systems, new cross-authority arrangements, production of voting materials and confusion over replacement postal votes.

An earlier British exercise illustrates a different risk. A review launched in 2011 proposed reducing the House of Commons from 650 to 600 seats and imposing a tighter electorate limit. The Boundary Commission for England ceased work after Parliament changed the law in 2013 and postponed the review. The proposals therefore did not take effect on the planned timetable, showing how technical boundary work can be stranded when the governing rules or political timetable change.

The Cayman commission’s terms appear designed to address some of those risks. Its consultation is expected to include broadcast town-hall meetings, focus groups, surveys, interviews and online engagement. Records of the engagement must be published.

Mr Ramkerrysingh said the commission was “committed to conducting a thorough and independent review of Cayman’s electoral boundaries”.

The final political hurdle will remain Parliament. Under the current UK system, Parliament cannot amend or vote on a boundary commission’s final recommendations. In Cayman, the draft order implementing the commission’s recommendations must receive parliamentary approval, and Parliament can reject it.

The UK evidence does not establish that boundary changes decide elections. It does show that new lines can alter the electoral baseline on which candidates campaign, officials administer the vote and electors choose their representatives. For the Cayman review to succeed where the previous effort failed, its calculations, consultation and implementation timetable will need to be understood as well as technically defensible.