Trying to give my two pennies worth
So, yesterday Parliament returned after the summer recess and we were straight in the chamber to discuss and vote on the Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill. This is a hugely hot topic, as you can read in my article in the Enfield Advertiser tomorrow, so lots of MPs wanted to have a say on it. Like many others, I bobbed up and down trying to get to ask questions and give my input, but unfortunately did not get to utter a word.
The simple problem with this Bill is that the Coalition Government has lumped everything together from whether or not we should have a referendum on the alternative vote to whether the number of MPs should be reduced through arbitrary boundary changes and no consultation. Because a lot of Labour MPs (and others) are objecting to certain aspects of the Bill, namely the issues surrounding boundary changes, we are being made to look like we're anti-reform.
In reality, the Labour Party had already stated in its pre-election manifesto that we were happy to have a referendum on AV. We have by no means gone back on our word on this and have even repeatedly asked Nick Clegg to separate the Bill out so we can still vote "yes" to having a referendum on voting reform, but vote "no" to other major aspects of the Bill which are too critical to the future of Parliament to simply let pass by without any objection.
To summarise, the Liberal Democrats and Conservatives want to gerrymander constituencies by imposing a top-down, hasty and undemocratic review of boundaries. They will base the number of constituents in each constituency on who is on the Electoral Register when it is updated in December, but what they don't seem to recognise is that millions of unregistered voters will be excluded from the calculations. They will have no chance to appeal the boundaries.
Taking Edmonton and Enfield for an example, the following is true:
1. A comparatively high proportion of Edmonton's 65,443-strong electorate are not on the electoral register and are likely to still not be on there when the Boundary Commission makes its calculations.
2. This will lead to distorted electoral data. The constituency will be thought to be smaller than it is and, in order to reduce the number of MPs in Parliament, there is a good chance that Enfield will only retain two MPs, not three. This will actually leave constituents underrepresented and struggling to get the help they need from their MP.
3. There is a likelihood that when the new boundaries are drawn up, they won't respect local authority boundaries (or any other geographical boundary) so the constituency of Edmonton could, for example, include parts of Haringey as well as Enfield causing numerous administrative, political and organisational problems.
4. Reducing the number of MPs by 50 will save little money. In fact, it is likely to end up costing more money. Not only will the rushed boundary review itself cost a serious amount of money, but there is quite a large possibility that the reduced number of MPs will need more staff just to help them with the extra work that the extra constituents present them with. Extra staff are not free.
The Bill is heavily flawed. And partisan. I will be doing everything I can from here to try to separate the Bill, however, you have the power to do something too and make sure you complete the electoral registration canvas forms that should have already been put through your letterbox - this will ensure that you are on the Electoral Register, and if the boundary changes are rushed through, at least they will be based on slightly more accurate information.
The simple problem with this Bill is that the Coalition Government has lumped everything together from whether or not we should have a referendum on the alternative vote to whether the number of MPs should be reduced through arbitrary boundary changes and no consultation. Because a lot of Labour MPs (and others) are objecting to certain aspects of the Bill, namely the issues surrounding boundary changes, we are being made to look like we're anti-reform.
In reality, the Labour Party had already stated in its pre-election manifesto that we were happy to have a referendum on AV. We have by no means gone back on our word on this and have even repeatedly asked Nick Clegg to separate the Bill out so we can still vote "yes" to having a referendum on voting reform, but vote "no" to other major aspects of the Bill which are too critical to the future of Parliament to simply let pass by without any objection.
To summarise, the Liberal Democrats and Conservatives want to gerrymander constituencies by imposing a top-down, hasty and undemocratic review of boundaries. They will base the number of constituents in each constituency on who is on the Electoral Register when it is updated in December, but what they don't seem to recognise is that millions of unregistered voters will be excluded from the calculations. They will have no chance to appeal the boundaries.
Taking Edmonton and Enfield for an example, the following is true:
1. A comparatively high proportion of Edmonton's 65,443-strong electorate are not on the electoral register and are likely to still not be on there when the Boundary Commission makes its calculations.
2. This will lead to distorted electoral data. The constituency will be thought to be smaller than it is and, in order to reduce the number of MPs in Parliament, there is a good chance that Enfield will only retain two MPs, not three. This will actually leave constituents underrepresented and struggling to get the help they need from their MP.
3. There is a likelihood that when the new boundaries are drawn up, they won't respect local authority boundaries (or any other geographical boundary) so the constituency of Edmonton could, for example, include parts of Haringey as well as Enfield causing numerous administrative, political and organisational problems.
4. Reducing the number of MPs by 50 will save little money. In fact, it is likely to end up costing more money. Not only will the rushed boundary review itself cost a serious amount of money, but there is quite a large possibility that the reduced number of MPs will need more staff just to help them with the extra work that the extra constituents present them with. Extra staff are not free.
The Bill is heavily flawed. And partisan. I will be doing everything I can from here to try to separate the Bill, however, you have the power to do something too and make sure you complete the electoral registration canvas forms that should have already been put through your letterbox - this will ensure that you are on the Electoral Register, and if the boundary changes are rushed through, at least they will be based on slightly more accurate information.