For years now, the Conservatives have vowed to reduce the number of Parliamentary constituencies from 650 to 600. They claim that it’s to cut the cost of politics, equalise the number of people in each constituency and bring the UK into line with other Western nations when it comes to the number of people per elected representative. Even if you were to take this at face value, it makes the Conservatives hypocrites as they are quite happy to increase the number of unelected Peers in the House of Lords but not even keep the same number of elected MPs. In addition, surely having more elected representatives in Parliament in comparison to other Western nations is a good thing? Even on a practical level, MPs already having a growing amount casework, partly because the Internet makes it easier for constituents to contact their MP, increasing the number of people in each constituency will just increase the amount of casework further. The ‘reasons’ for the boundary changes don’t even make sense.
However, anyone who is even vaguely sceptical can see that these are not the real reasons why. There is nothing wrong with making the number of people in each constituency equal, but that has to be done after a drive to get people on the electoral role. People in poor and inner city areas are less likely to be on the electoral role, leaving them with less representation if these boundary changes are to pass. Not only has there been no attempt to do this, the boundary review has not even taken into account all of the people who registered to vote prior to the EU referendum. This means on top of reducing the number of constituencies, Labour will be impacted much more than the Conservatives, and everyone knows it. Regardless of whether or not the Tories will admit it, it’s gerrymandering.
On top of that, despite the Boundary Commission pledging to respect communities and natural boundaries (e.g. rivers), in many cases this has just not happened. In Tower Hamlets in London, the Bangladeshi community has been split in two while the City has remained intact. On Teesside, the current Middlesbrough constituency has been increased to include wards from Stockton North (e.g. Stockton town centre), Stockton South (e.g. Ingleby Barwick) and Middlesbrough South and Cleveland East, creating Middlesbrough West and Stockton East. The Stockton North constituency has been split between the proposed new Middlesbrough West and Stockton East, Hartlepool amd Billingham (which includes all but one Billingham ward) and Stockton West. The changes in Teesside have not only turned 5 Labour constituencies and 1 marginal but currently Conservative constituency into 3 likely Labour constituencies and 2 likely Conservative constituencies, but it has also split up a small town and a village that don’t need to be split up – Billingham (which is split between Hartlepool and Billingham and Stockton West) and Norton (which is split between Stockton West and Middlesbrough West and Stockton East). It has divided the Middlesbrough constituency by a river – the Stockton Town Centre ward and Norton South ward are north of the Tees while the remaining wards are south of the Tees. Both of these are perfect examples of how the Boundary Commission have not respected local communities or natural boundaries, despite saying they would.
These new constituencies created by the Boundary Commission reduce the amount of representation for poorer people, they reduce the amount of representation for the country as a whole, they will divide up local communities and they are clearly gerrymandered.
