Electoral reformers should oppose the coalition’s gerrymandering

RT @leftfootfwd Electoral reformers should oppose the coalition's gerrymandering http://bit.ly/dd5YGW

@charles_anglin Agreed. But there are compelling arguments against the speed & process used by the Coalition http://bit.ly/beokvq

Great article from @leftfootfwd about electoral reform bill http://j.mp/cXpynA

RT @HouseofTwits: RT @leftfootfwd Electoral reformers should oppose the coalition's gerrymandering http://bit.ly/dd5YGW

Electoral reformers should oppose the coalition's gerrymandering: http://bit.ly/dd5YGW argues @wdjstraw on @leftfootfwd

Clegg has betrayed every electoral reformer by combining reform with gerrymandering – http://bit.ly/dd5YGW

RT @jreynoldsMP Clegg has betrayed every electoral reformer by combining reform with gerrymandering – http://bit.ly/dd5YGW

Nick, I agree with Will. "Equal sized MP seats must be of those entitled to vote rather than just those registered." http://s.coop/1×2

RT @jreynoldsMP: Clegg has betrayed every electoral reformer by combining reform with gerrymandering – http://bit.ly/dd5YGW

Perhaps people think like I do voting for a party that then does what ever it wants for five years, has become a waste of time, I will not be voting in May for the local election assembly election or AV, why bother the fact is once a Party takes over it’s five years in power my thoughts worries or even my fears are dumped until the next election.

So I think those who think labour is better then Tory or Tories better then labour good luck, it’s not for me.

@torybear Many thanks, but it's true! What Clegg has slipped into Schedule 2 is gerrymandering plain & simple http://bit.ly/beokvq

rt @DavidTaylor85 "Equal sized seats must be those entitled2vote not just registered." http://s.coop/1×2 <compulsery voted wld undo problem

The gender and BME impact point of a smaller House is explained in this post.
http://www.nextleft.org/2010/07/why-smaller-commons-will-set-back.html

I am surprised this has not been picked up by women’s groups and other equality campaigners, and then the media, given the strength of rhetorical commitment by party leaderships to this issue. All parties told the Speakers’ conference it was an important priority to accelerate progress.

This proposal to reduce the size of Commons all but guarantees they could not do that, nor even sustain current rates of gradual progress.

Labour’s gender imbalance is 69-31 (54-46 in class of 2010) and Tories is 84-16 (76-24 in class of 2010). This smaller Commons proposal will freeze in something much too close to those current ratios, because less than 20-30 candidates will defend party-held seats instead of 60-80.

My reading is that the proposal closes off any chance of the LibDems moving from their curent 88-12 Commons (still 90-10 in class of 2010) gender imbalance to even an 80-20 gender imbalance within the next decade without a willingness to deselect current MPs, or major gains at the election (which not even the most confident LD is predicting).

So whatever they do on future selections, where some were planning to usee this Parliament to seriously look at the lack of progress. My understanding is that Cameron and Clegg, as well as Brown and Harman for Labour, said they were seriously and not merely rhetorically committed to this issue.

The leasy cynical reading is that they have not noticed this impact, and that nobody has pointed it out to them. I suggest Lynne Featherstone should get leading academics and the ECHR to report on the equality and gender impact before the Bill goes forward. She is certainly committed on this issue. So why would she refuse to study it?

RT @torybear: Have a lot of time for @wdjstraw and pretty sure deep down he knows the "gerrymandering" line is bollocks: http://bit.ly/dd5YGW

@charlotteahenry The carve outs for Lib Dems in Schedule 2 is gerrymandering, plain & simple. http://bit.ly/beokvq

Electoral reformers should oppose the coalition's gerrymandering http://bit.ly/dd5YGW via @leftfootfwd

RT @jreynoldsMP: Clegg has betrayed every electoral reformer by combining reform with gerrymandering – http://bit.ly/dd5YGW

RT @leftfootfwd: Electoral reformers should oppose the coalition's gerrymandering http://bit.ly/dd5YGW

Populations move and so it is impossible to keep constituencies exactly the same size.

The Boundaries Commission give these values for the seat sizes at the last election:

Total Registered voters 38,129,082
Average per seat (Electoral Quota) 71,537
Largest (Isle of Wight) 110,228
Smallest (Wirrel West) 55,152
Standard Deviation 5,884

The standard deviation of the constituencies at the 2010 election was 8% of the mean, two standard deviations (96% of the seats) is 16%. Two standard deviations is generally thought of as covering “most” of the cases. In Nick Cleggs announcement in Parliament earlier this month said that the Boundary Commission should ensure that all the seats should be within 5% of the mean. That would mean a standard deviation of 2.5% or 1600 people. This level of accuracy would be very difficult to achieve, and anyway, since populations change it would be out of date very quickly.

My gut feeling is that it will not be possible to achieve this “equalisation” before the next election without a large amount of money being put into the Boundaries Commission.

Jack Straw is right to question the gerrymandering aspect of arbitrarily drawing the boundaries rather than the accepted process of local consultation (what the fuck has happened to all of this “Big Society” local decision making?). It will upset a lot of people who will find that they are put in a constituency that does not honour geographical or local government boundaries.

RT @leftfootfwd: Electoral reformers should oppose the coalition's gerrymandering http://bit.ly/dd5YGW

RT @jreynoldsMP: Clegg has betrayed every electoral reformer by combining reform with gerrymandering – http://bit.ly/dd5YGW

RT @jreynoldsMP: Clegg has betrayed every electoral reformer by combining reform with gerrymandering – http://bit.ly/dd5YGW

RT @jreynoldsMP: Clegg has betrayed every electoral reformer by combining reform with gerrymandering – http://bit.ly/dd5YGW

RT @jreynoldsMP: Clegg has betrayed every electoral reformer by combining reform with gerrymandering – http://bit.ly/dd5YGW

RT @leftfootfwd: Electoral reformers should oppose the coalition's gerrymandering http://bit.ly/dd5YGW < gd article on +ve way forward

RT @jreynoldsMP: Clegg has betrayed every electoral reformer by combining reform with gerrymandering – http://bit.ly/dd5YGW

RT @jreynoldsMP: Clegg has betrayed every electoral reformer by combining reform with gerrymandering – http://bit.ly/dd5YGW

RT @jreynoldsMP: Clegg has betrayed every electoral reformer by combining reform with gerrymandering – http://bit.ly/dd5YGW

Good analysis RT @leftfootfwd: Electoral reformers should oppose coalition's gerrymandering http://bit.ly/dd5YGW

RT @johnprescott: Good analysis RT @leftfootfwd: Electoral reformers should oppose coalition's gerrymandering http://bit.ly/dd5YGW

RT @johnprescott: Good analysis RT @leftfootfwd: Electoral reformers should oppose coalition's gerrymandering http://bit.ly/dd5YGW

RT @johnprescott: Good analysis RT @leftfootfwd: Electoral reformers should oppose coalition's gerrymandering http://bit.ly/dd5YGW

RT @leftfootfwd: Electoral reformers should oppose the coalition's gerrymandering http://bit.ly/dd5YGW

RT @jreynoldsMP: Clegg has betrayed every electoral reformer by combining reform with gerrymandering – http://bit.ly/dd5YGW

RT @johnprescott: Good analysis RT @leftfootfwd: Electoral reformers should oppose coalition's gerrymandering http://bit.ly/dd5YGW

RT @johnprescott: RT @leftfootfwd: Electoral reformers shd oppose coalition's gerrymandering http://bit.ly/dd5YGW <Absolutely – cheats!

RT @leftfootfwd: Electoral reformers should oppose the coalition's gerrymandering http://bit.ly/dd5YGW

@andypickwell RT @jreynoldsMP: Clegg has betrayed every electoral reformer by combining reform with gerrymandering – http://bit.ly/dd5YGW

RT @leftfootfwd: Electoral reformers should oppose coalition's gerrymandering http://bit.ly/dd5YGW

RT @jreynoldsMP: Clegg has betrayed every electoral reformer by combining reform with gerrymandering – http://bit.ly/dd5YGW

RT @lewis_baston: RT @leftfootfwd: Electoral reformers should oppose coalition's gerrymandering http://bit.ly/dd5YGW

RT @lewis_baston: RT @leftfootfwd: Electoral reformers should oppose coalition's gerrymandering http://bit.ly/dd5YGW

RT @cllrtheo: RT @lewis_baston: RT @leftfootfwd: Electoral reformers should oppose coalition's gerrymandering http://bit.ly/dd5YGW

When it comes down to substance, this article admits that the gov proposals FAIL to gerrymander (see pt 3): http://bit.ly/dd5YGW

RT @JohnPrescott: Good analysis RT @leftfootfwd: Electoral reformers should oppose coalition's gerrymandering http://bit.ly/dd5YGW

Good @leftfootfwd article. Labour's reasoning for opposing the Parliamentary Voting System & Constituencies Bill at end http://bit.ly/dyOPFW

http://bit.ly/biEfAt The Skipton and Ripon constituency covers 1,448 sq km and won't be affected by boundary changes (http://bit.ly/cPXImX)

RT @paulstpancras: RT @lewis_baston: RT @leftfootfwd: Electoral reformers should oppose coalition's gerrymandering http://bit.ly/dd5YGW

This is yet another issue where the LibDems have betrayed their principles, they’ve campaigned for decades for a fairer voting system but are now reducing the number of MPs which is the most blatant attempt at gerrymandering since Building Stable Communities.

It seems that Nick Clegg has no moral or principle that he would not instantly give up in return for a ministerial red box!!! Next he’ll start calling for the UK to leave the EU.

Will,

What a shame that today of all days, LFF have been unable to write the usual 9 am political summary.

Jack would be proud – a chip off the old block.

Unregistered voters are not interested, give them a deadline to register, if they do not, then create boundaries accordingly. Labour’s opposition to reduction of number of seats to 600 and then be roughly equal sized is down to self interest. They did nothing for 13 years in government to correct the bias in our electoral system because it was in their favour. Now they start moaning. A situation of 36% of votes giving 1 party a majority of 60+ seats and then makes another party 20 seats short of a majority is a biased system. The AV referendum and the equal sized constituencies will go through on Coalition votes, get used to being in Opposition.

Can't disagree “@jreynoldsMP: Clegg has betrayed every electoral reformer by combining reform with gerrymandering – http://bit.ly/dd5YGW”

RT @leftfootfwd: Electoral reformers should oppose the coalition's gerrymandering http://bit.ly/dd5YGW

RT @jreynoldsMP: Clegg has betrayed every electoral reformer by combining reform with gerrymandering – http://bit.ly/dd5YGW > damn right!

No need to sound so smug – there will come a time when people will be saying this lot have been in power for long enough. And you will be defeated with another record breaking swing. Something this chimera government could only dream of securing.

RT @theday2day: RT @jreynoldsMP: Clegg has betrayed every electoral reformer by combining reform with gerrymandering – http://bit.ly/dd5YGW > damn right!

http://bit.ly/cPXImX Would I be represented in parliament only if there was a French atheit male MP of Jewish origin with IT experience?

@John Bracewell

Did you read the article? It is an inherent weakness of FPTP that it won’t give the same number of seats for the same voter share as it is not a proportional system. You’ve just puked up the ill informed arguments that the Cleggron are basing this entire gerrymandering exercise on, why bother commenting if your not going to read the article.

Good article. It would indeed to preferable if the boundary commission worked from the number of adults in each area rather than from the electoral register. The post doesn’t talk about the proposed reduction in the number of MPs, which is also advantageous to the Conservatives. It claims to be a cost-cutting measure, yet will be cancelled out by the increase in the House of Lords.

RT @JohnPrescott: Good analysis RT @leftfootfwd: Electoral reformers should oppose coalition's gerrymandering http://bit.ly/dd5YGW

The Bill also calls for 5-yearly boundary revisions, so it’s likely each election (if the fixed-term proposals hold) will be held on the basis of new constituencies. Doesn’t sound like entrenching a particular party domination to me.

And the geographic limits come into play after the reduction in the number of seats, so it’s silly to say that Charlie Kennedy’s seat is protected; who knows how the Scottish seats would be distributed? But representing people in a huge constituency must be more difficult than a compact city seat.

Of course, as Jack Straw conceded this morning, these issues only – but inevitably – arise in single-member seat systems; moving to STV would cure these ills, if not all others!

so if equal size how come Charles Kennedy (Lib dem) seat doesnt get carved up

because opt out for Coalition favoured candidates

gerrymandering

The Lib Dems are well atruley in a hole thats why Camerton is sweaking all the way from India

he knows Tory back benchers will back Labour

certainly wont be in May next year

Lib Dems in power making cuts and no AV

still few percent to go before they hit single figures

bit more labour self interest here, methinks.

RT @theday2day: RT @jreynoldsMP: Clegg has betrayed every electoral reformer by combining reform with gerrymandering – http://bit.ly/dd5YGW > damn right!

Reading: "Electoral reformers should oppose the coalition's gerrymandering | Left Foot Forward" ( http://bit.ly/95Z62R )

1/ Reviews have always been done on the basis of the Electoral register. The desire for a “registration drive”, doesn’t have to delay the bill. Also John Costello is wrong about “distorting the electoral map for good”, as the bill includes a review in each, full parliamentary term, so any distortion can easily be corrected. If the Labour party feels their are unfairly dissadvantaged by a lack of registration, there is nothing to stop them doing something about it. I would imagine that the reason they haven’t, after 13 years in power, is that it’s not really an issue.

2/I don’t know how anyone can complain about changes favouring the Lib Dems, considering the appauling way Lib Dem voters are treated by our voting system

3/ If the bill doesn’t redress Labour’s in built advantage, why are they opposing it ?

4/ The lack of representation in the House of Commons, is primarily down to the selection of candidates by local parties. Maintaining parliament at it’s current size, or even enlarging it, just to improve the “representative balance”, without addressing the root cause, is no solution.

RT @johnprescott: Good analysis RT @leftfootfwd: Electoral reformers should oppose coalition's gerrymandering http://bit.ly/dd5YGW

RT @BevaniteEllie: RT @johnprescott: Good analysis RT @leftfootfwd: Electoral reformers should oppose coalition's gerrymandering http://bit.ly/dd5YGW

[...] controversy about the Government’s Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill rumbling on, [...]

Electoral reformers should oppose the coalition's gerrymandering | Left Foot Forward http://goo.gl/9Br6

[...] at Left Foot Forward, Will Straw has highlighted the issues MPs are currently debating given the content of the Government’s [...]

Demos think Tank for the highest bidder

Will completely agree with this.

I have to admit that point 4 I had not considered. I don’t know everything, you know.

And on the point of cutting the number of MPs, Nick Clegg is not telling the truth when he talks about ‘cutting the cost of politics’. Someone mentioned the increased peers the coalition is looking to create, and also those MPs who are left will have a larger workload. i read in the news earlier this week how some MPs had resorting to sleeping in their offices, which to me shows how hard certainly most work. Therefore, if we cut the number of MPs, we would increase the workload of the remainder, and in time there would be a clammer to give them more allowances, for example more staff.

Indeed. RT @johnprescott: Good analysis RT @leftfootfwd: Electoral reformers should oppose coalition's gerrymandering http://bit.ly/dd5YGW

I have to say, I disagree. I think we should vote yes to the referendum. My reasons are almost entirely what I’d call ‘dark-arts,’ or strategical.

The gerrymandering is a genuine issue. It’s not made up, I accept. But I suspect opposition is far more motivated by spite towards the Lib Dems. Most of the PLP would love to see proportionality thwarted for a generation purely to hurt them. My personal preference is for AV+. But I don’t want this government to introduce it, I want it introduced by a Labour government. It is vital that Nick Clegg is not seen to be delivering on anything or the Lib Dems come anywhere near to grabbing the mantle of reform. So I want this AV bill to crash and burn. But ideally – for the same reason – I don’t want us to have our fingerprints on the trigger. Leave that the Tories, they’re more than capable. Also, there is real strategic value on backing the referendum for the disunity it’ll cause in the coaliton – they have to campaign for different responses, how the FUCK is that going to work? As it is, the Tories will be whipped pretty hard into voting for a referendum – Cam will off record sweeten it as the chance to destroy proportionality for a generation with the added bonus that they’ll almost certainly win the ref. So our opposition is pointless. The public won’t swallow the gerrymandering line – we’ll look opportunistic.

All these strategical benefits seem to me far more important. The gerrymandering is frustrating, but its not the collateral damage it does to us our ‘progressive’ image.

If it was AV+ I’d put aside such strategical concerns, but to be honest AV is too imperfect for me to care.

not worth*

The poorest will never register not with a debt collector armed with the latest electoral roll hot on their tale.

Why 600 seats and not 400?
Far, far too many MPs all living at tax-payers expense.
With much UK law now based in Brussels, we clearly need (at most) 400 MPs and 250 Lords (with co-opted speakers for debates, but with no voting rights)

Gender equality is a mindless mantra – I simply want the best people in any job, anywhere, any time – everything else matters not a jot.

Since the most important and useful job any human can do is to care for their children, I’d expect most MPs to be male -the great tragedy of the past 30 years has been the idea that women NEED to go out to work to be useful or valued.

The greatest harm to our society by a false dogma ever perpetrated on two generations of children and one I hope will change from now on.

see Clegg got Lib Dem partners (wives etc) to No 10 Garden party just in case they were getting cold feet

oh the trappings of power

a few OBES, The Lords etc

just keep being a fig leaf for the Tories

What a rubbisha nd desperate article. A sad case of scrapping the barrel to support a pre-ordained conclusion.

1. People not on the register can’t vote – they are not included by making some constituencies smaller. They still won’t be voting ! In my lcoal council you
get a minimum of three letters and 2 personal visists before they give up trying to register you.

2. What nonsense – the Lib Dems have plenty of seats in large rural areas where they will lose out on this reform. Including the rest of Scotland ! Wales, The Lake District, Devon, Somerset and Cornwall. Why not just accept that these 5 massive rural areas are a special case ?

3. Oh well, Labour are dead keen on correcting the distortions of the electoral system are they ? Well the biggets distortion is the difference between the number of people who vote Lib Dem and the number of MPs they get.

4. If fact your “evidence” points out that rather than being the “worst gerrymandering ever” the changes “are unlikely to have a substantial impact and remove the significant disadvantage currently suffered by the Conservative Party.”
Let alone the Lib Dems !

5. So ethnic minorities should be proportionately represeneted in Parliament, but Lib Dems should not? If you want women,. ethnic minorities and all other sections of society, then support Single Transferable Vote – if you aren’t really arsed about it, join the Labour Party.

3.

2.

RT @leftfootfwd: Electoral reformers should oppose the coalition's gerrymandering http://goo.gl/9Br6

The problem with the redistricting proposals in the current bill http://bit.ly/dqx8Dn

[...] Will Straw (Jack’s lad) notes the Electoral Commission’s investigation into under-registration earlier this year, “The highest concentrations of under-registration are most likely to be found in metropolitan areas, smaller towns and cities with large student populations, and coastal areas with significant population turnover and high levels of social deprivation.” [...]

@Thomoli Electoral reformers should oppose the coalition’s gerrymandering http://is.gd/e0tcc

Totall agree with the posters analysis. I am reluctantly supporting the AV referendum, but feel that the boundary proposal, while I reasonable idea in principle, needs more work, the main adjustment being a change from registered voters to all possible voters in a locale. I hope the Liberal Democrats will encourage these changes.

@barton_of_notts heres a good place to start : http://bit.ly/aXoap1