2023 Constituent Boundary Review

Will it make voting fairer or not?

  • Yes

  • No


Results are only viewable after voting.

Sherburnflyer92

Premium Member+
Subscriber
May 7, 2011
2,142
283
28
37,000FT - soon!
Hello All,

https://boundarycommissionforengland.independent.gov.uk/2023-review/

The Boundary Commission has been commissioned to review the boundaries of all constituencies. They've ensured constituencies must not have less then 69,724 parliamentary electors but not more then 77,062 apart from protected constituencies (for England there is 2 on the Isle of Wight - though currently only 1 seat on the Island the proposal is to Split it into two). But I think that's legal stuff and way over my head.

Now the question I saw/debate going on was is this a fairer way of voting? IE the same amount of electorate get a choice of who they choose?
Or should it be done based on population taking into account migration/immigration and the younger population that are entitled to vote? Bit like the American system.

My argument with the population is that we will have more seats/MPs for big area's of population and very little seats/seats gobbled up into one due to the limited population in the Countryside etc. An electorate is a slightly bit fairer and won't have the issue as I said earlier. More MP's for largely densely populated areas.

For Leeds NW (my local seat) we will be loosing two council wards which are moving to join the new seat of Headingley and gaining Guiseley/Rawdon and Horsforth which makes sense as they are truly Leeds NW. That I think may make the seat a Tory swing sweat with the Lib Dems and therefore we loose our Labour MP (Yey).

With this I don't understand why we are not having a General Election? Surely with new boundaries it's better to have a complete refresh in parliament?

For example if they just change over; two council wards for new Leeds NW (Guiseley/Rawdon and Horsforth) gain a Labour MP having voted at the last GE for a Conservative MP and been served by a Conservative MP for 11 years. For Local airport supporters in the area this is good news; given we now loose our green communist MP and his GALBA/GEN Z/Cancel Culture fans as they move over to new seat Headingley.

I'm going to do an analysis of Leeds. I don't think we actually gain/nor loose any MP's.
 
Last edited:

TheLocalYokel

Administrator
Staff member
Jan 14, 2009
15,867
343
Wurzel Country
IMPORTANT!! To reduce spam, we request that you make a post soon after completing your registration. We request you keep your account active by posting regularly. Inactive accounts risk being deleted.
Yes
Apart from the protected constituencies in the UK it's seen as a fairer distribution of work where MPs represent approximately the same number of constituents. Because of population movement and growth it's necessary from time to time for constituency sizes and areas to be reviewed, and we are currently at the beginning of the latest review. There will be a number of consultations, including seeking the views of political parties and affected constituents, before a report is submitted to the Speaker of the Commons in June 2023. The government must then make an order to the privy council bringing into effect the recommendations of the boundary commissions from all four UK nations. If the next general election is held after that date it will be based on the new constituencies.

If these proposals are finally agreed England would gain ten MPs, Scotland would lose two and Wales would lose eight. The south of England would have more MPs with the north of England having fewer. Broadly it's calculated that the Conservatives would be the main beneficiary when it comes to the political parties.
 

JENNYJET

Platinum Member
Subscriber
Subscriber
Subscriber
Dec 15, 2015
1,997
233
61
ASTWOOD BANK, WORCESTERSHIRE.
By trying to understand it I got a headache. My constituency of Redditch County has a town population of c85k plus outlying villages. They suggest carving off slices of Bromsgrove and Droitwich plus outlying bits of Worcester City thus creating a mega seat at Redditch. By the following review it might itself be divided into Red. West and East.

One cannot reduce the size of the House and have smaller constituencies.
 

Sherburnflyer92

Premium Member+
Subscriber
May 7, 2011
2,142
283
28
37,000FT - soon!
I think the plan is to reduce the size/increase the size of constituencies to make them equal or far more equal in size then they are. For example one constituency may represent 100,000+ of the electorate. Whilst another may represent 30,000+ of the electorate. (Of course greatly exaggerated).

It's not done on population which was the debate I saw on Twitter (for once people weren't actually been dicks they were having a genuine debate). Some suggest it's fairer, others suggest it isn't.

I'll have a look at your seat Jenny at some point. It's done on local council wards within the seats. So for example; I will remain in Leeds North West as my council ward seat mine remains within it; but the Leeds NW seat looses two labour strong hold council wards and gains two very strong conservative council wards. So Leeds NW will probably become a swing seat for Tory/Lib Dem or a safe Tory seat.
 

JENNYJET

Platinum Member
Subscriber
Subscriber
Subscriber
Dec 15, 2015
1,997
233
61
ASTWOOD BANK, WORCESTERSHIRE.
It is bonkers! Our system works and population is a movable feast as new estates are built more electors follow but when those estates become owner occupied, people move along the ladder and wards change flavour and colour. What I prefer not to have is a population derived seat system but to keep a constituency type Parliamentary arrangement.

An alternative is too horrific, Electoral College!!
 

Sherburnflyer92

Premium Member+
Subscriber
May 7, 2011
2,142
283
28
37,000FT - soon!
It is keeping that. All they are doing is reviewing the electorate entitled voters and ensuring that all constituency seats are within a certain amount of entitled voters.

What I wish they did on the site is a comparison of current and proposed voters. I think we have this every 10 years or so. I know the last one was 2010.
 

TheLocalYokel

Administrator
Staff member
Jan 14, 2009
15,867
343
Wurzel Country
IMPORTANT!! To reduce spam, we request that you make a post soon after completing your registration. We request you keep your account active by posting regularly. Inactive accounts risk being deleted.
Yes
It is bonkers! Our system works and population is a movable feast as new estates are built more electors follow but when those estates become owner occupied, people move along the ladder and wards change flavour and colour. What I prefer not to have is a population derived seat system but to keep a constituency type Parliamentary arrangement.

An alternative is too horrific, Electoral College!!

It is keeping that. All they are doing is reviewing the electorate entitled voters and ensuring that all constituency seats are within a certain amount of entitled voters.

What I wish they did on the site is a comparison of current and proposed voters. I think we have this every 10 years or so. I know the last one was 2010.
This would be the seventh periodic review of Westminster constituencies under the current system - the first was in the mid-1950s.

As has been said, because of the dynamics of population movement some constituencies would in time see a very large electorate and others a very small one if nothing was done to address the situation.

My Bristol constituency was renamed three or four reviews ago and altered in area. The current proposals would see an extra Bristol constituency, with my constituency losing some wards to the new constituency but gaining others from neighbouring existing constituencies which in turn would see changes into their area in order to provide broadly similar-size constituencies across the city.

When I first voted which was in the 1964 general election Bristol had six constituencies but one, Bristol Central, lost so many voters as people then moved out of the centre of the city that the constituency became ridiculously small in terms of the electorate size and was abolished in the next review. The current proposal for an additional Bristol constituency and a re-jigging of others reflects in part population movement back in to the central areas.
 

JENNYJET

Platinum Member
Subscriber
Subscriber
Subscriber
Dec 15, 2015
1,997
233
61
ASTWOOD BANK, WORCESTERSHIRE.
The simplistic method is each City and Town to have one Commons MP and Hamlets or villages ( grouped if necessary ) to also be represented my MP. The caveat with that is the Parliament be reconstituted to allow associate members be elected to the larger localities whereby a single MP would be overwhelmed. Lichfield would be 1 MP and Birmingham would have several associate members plus the City MP. The small cities like St. David's and Ely would also be represented by MP as with larger Towns.

It would require some organising but it might allow those individual places to retain a distinctive identity, e.g. The cities of London and Westminster keep their singular seat but Hownslow and Hammersmith might become associate member seats or grouped. Within Parliament, each seat has equal status, it just a rejigging of the electoral registers.

Ultimately, a house of representatives and a Senate would allow a newly reformed Parliament since the current one has not been largely reformed since a certain Oliver Cromwell was a member.
 

KARFA

Well-Known Member
Jun 3, 2014
820
113
How do you ensure each constituency is roughly the same size in your system - and therefore ensure that each voter has roughly the same representation?
 

JENNYJET

Platinum Member
Subscriber
Subscriber
Subscriber
Dec 15, 2015
1,997
233
61
ASTWOOD BANK, WORCESTERSHIRE.
The voter selects the candidate and once elected is expected to represent the electorate allocated to the seat. Size of same and geographical considerations are incidental as the typical voter considers party before candidate i.e. if Boris was Labour he may well be elected if standing for a historical Labour seat.
 

Sherburnflyer92

Premium Member+
Subscriber
May 7, 2011
2,142
283
28
37,000FT - soon!
Isn’t that some form of proportional representation?

They vote for local MP, then proportionally the more votes for a party in that region the more seats added to the total win?
 

JENNYJET

Platinum Member
Subscriber
Subscriber
Subscriber
Dec 15, 2015
1,997
233
61
ASTWOOD BANK, WORCESTERSHIRE.
Not my understanding or intent. I indicated that some work would be required to come to an equitable solution. One person one vote would remain as the method, the solution to be designed.

The party of affiliation should not be an impediment as I would expect more independents to allow themselves to stand unrestrained.
 

KARFA

Well-Known Member
Jun 3, 2014
820
113
the problem with regional lists as we have seen elsewhere in the uk is that you break the link with the MP and a specific area with a constituency party who select their candidate, and the list just serves as somewhere the central party hq can shove in their favourite people.

what is the problem with the current constituency system to which regional lists is an answer?
 

JENNYJET

Platinum Member
Subscriber
Subscriber
Subscriber
Dec 15, 2015
1,997
233
61
ASTWOOD BANK, WORCESTERSHIRE.
The list method , to my mind, is a padding exercise, identifying gaps to be filled with cannon fodder. Hardly committed party members rather weather vanes as Tony Benn once described them.
 
Top Bottom
  AdBlock Detected
Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks some useful and important features of our website. For the best possible site experience please take a moment to disable your AdBlocker.