Jump to content
The Christmas Logo Competition is back. See thread in Sheffield Discussions for details ×

Parliamentary electoral boundary changes. What could it mean for the

Recommended Posts

The Boundaries of our parliamentary constituencies were due to be redrawn before the recent election, but were put back until 2018 with a plan to reduce the number of MPs to 600.

 

The reson for the review was the inequality of constituency size as populations migrate. The largest UK constituency currently has more than 110,000 registered voters, whilst the smallest less than 22,000.

 

What will these revisions mean to the status quo?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the moment the electoral boundaries tend to favour Labour, allegedly. So now the Tories are in power they will probably try and either weight the scales more fairly, or maybe give them an extra nudge in the Blue direction.

 

It won't be all plain sailing for Cameron though. Some of the seats that vanish will have to be Tory seats. The sitting MP's aren't going to be too happy about that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Boundaries of our parliamentary constituencies were due to be redrawn before the recent election, but were put back until 2018 with a plan to reduce the number of MPs to 600.

 

The reson for the review was the inequality of constituency size as populations migrate. The largest UK constituency currently has more than 110,000 registered voters, whilst the smallest less than 22,000.

 

What will these revisions mean to the status quo?

 

These are two extremes caused by them being islands.

 

The smallest that is not an island is Arfon in Wales wity 41,138 voters and the largest is East Ham in London with 91,531 voters. Still a large disparity but not as extreme as you have made out.

 

Personally I think all constituencies should be the same size, but this will not sit well with the Labour supporters as this almost always means they lose seats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't there something already in place that will come in before the next election? and I'd heard that that favoured the Tories so they're hardly likely to defer it. This present system is very unfair and certainly favours the Labour Party so anything that makes it fairer is a good thing (unless you're a leftie of course) :hihi:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
These are two extremes caused by them being islands.

 

The smallest that is not an island is Arfon in Wales wity 41,138 voters and the largest is East Ham in London with 91,531 voters. Still a large disparity but not as extreme as you have made out.

 

Personally I think all constituencies should be the same size, but this will not sit well with the Labour supporters as this almost always means they lose seats.

 

I'm just going on the figures from Electoral Reform Society.

 

 

http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/boundary-reform

 

"What are the issues?

 

Constituency size. One of the principles of a fair Parliament is equal-sized constituencies to ensure equal representation for all citizens. At the moment, constituencies vary in size from less than 22,000 to more than 110,000. Keeping constituency sizes up-to-date will require more frequent boundary reviews, which may disrupt the link between MPs and votes. Whilst the numbers are important, it is also crucial to have a system that does not awkwardly split up or graft together different communities."

 

I'm not sure why being an island warrants a seperate MP when they could be joined on to another islansd or even a chunk of mainland. That way all votes become equal.

Edited by anarchist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm just going on the figures from Electoral Reform Society.

 

 

http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/boundary-reform

 

Without context, figures are meaningless. Like I said, there is still disparity that should be addressed. The only reason it wasn't sorted within the last parliament is because the lib dems opposed it, presumably because it was not in their favour.

 

The boundary changes should not be subject to the whim of parliament in my view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Without context, figures are meaningless. Like I said, there is still disparity that should be addressed. The only reason it wasn't sorted within the last parliament is because the lib dems opposed it, presumably because it was not in their favour.

 

The boundary changes should not be subject to the whim of parliament in my view.

 

The boundary changes are decided by the boundary commission not by parliament. What the MPs would need to vote on is the reduction in MP numbers.

 

The lib dems removed their support for the boundary changes, which would massively favour the conservatives over labour, because the conservatives failed in their end of the bargain on Lords reform.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The new 'equalised' constituency rules will apply to everywhere except (for geographical reasons):

a. Isle of Wight;

b. Shetlands; and

c. Western Isles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The new 'equalised' constituency rules will apply to everywhere except (for geographical reasons):

a. Isle of Wight;

b. Shetlands; and

c. Western Isles.

 

Ironically decreasing the number of MPs to 600 will increase the inequity between the islands where an MP can be elected on 7000 votes and the urban ones where it will require 30,000.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Isn't there something already in place that will come in before the next election? and I'd heard that that favoured the Tories so they're hardly likely to defer it. This present system is very unfair and certainly favours the Labour Party so anything that makes it fairer is a good thing (unless you're a leftie of course) :hihi:

 

According to the Mirror if the changes had not been blocked by the liberals the results of the election would have been

 

Conservative 322 seats

Labour 204 seats

SNP 50 seats

Libdem 4 seats

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm all for decreasing the number of MPs! Lords Chamber too!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The current boundaries favour Wales and Scotland so they need making larger which will result in fewer Scottish and Welsh MP's.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_Kingdom_Parliament_constituencies

 

It can't be right that Isle of Wight has 110,924 people for one seat whilst Na h-Eileanan an Iar only has 21,837

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.