‘Boundaries are history’s scars’, is a phrase I have used often when discussing devolution. Nowhere are the scars of boundaries more evident than when the Boundary Commission pops up to review parliamentary boundaries, something it has done three times in the last ten years.
Unsurprisingly, this is a hot potato with shouts of gerrymandering from all quarters. The term is named after former USA Vice President Elbridge Gerry, of the then Democratic-Republican Party, who signed a bill that redistributed electoral districts to favour his party in Boston in 1812. It’s a practice that has caught on this side of the pond – although it’s harder to impose a party’s preference than some would have you believe.
Boundary Commission reviews
Understandably, boundaries have to be reviewed periodically. Populations shift, people move out of cities and towns change shape and size. In the UK, the independent Boundary Commission reviews boundaries every five years. They are arm’s length, in that there is no direct ministerial control and no politicians are involved in the appointment of the commissioners who help to make the recommendations.
So far so fair. And then there’s the but. Political interference in the overall makeup of parliamentary seats is particularly evident with the Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Act 2011. This reduced the number of seats from 650 to 600 using the electorate (those registered) rather than the population, with all seats having an electorate within 5 percent of the electoral quota (the average number of parliamentary electorate per constituency).
MPs like Sheffield Central’s Paul Blomfield were quick to point out that punishing low levels of registration in inner cities could threaten Labour-held seats and was anti-democratic. Writing for Labour List he said:
“Creating constituencies of equal electorates ignores the fact that the job of MPs is to represent everybody who lives in their constituency, and not just those who are on the register … By disregarding people who aren’t on the electoral register, the Tories are denying a voice to those who arguably need to be heard the most”.
Parliamentary boundaries bill 2020
Two reviews following 2011 were undertaken, with the 2013 review abandoned and the 2018 completed but not implemented. It didn’t take long for newly elected Tory MPs in 2019 to realise that for some, their newly won seats would disappear. So the plan to reduce the number of constituencies was abandoned. Instead, the government brought in the parliamentary boundaries bill, that removed parliamentary scrutiny of recommendations and based the new boundaries on December 2020 electoral register figures.
According to the Guardian, Labour accused the government of attempting a power grab, with Cat Smith, the shadow Cabinet Office minister, saying:
“The new boundaries will be dangerously unrepresentative of the current electorate. Choosing the electoral register of 1 December 2020 as the basis for drawing new boundaries is politically motivated … the register will be heavily affected by Covid-19 as local councils will struggle to update electoral registers whilst dealing with this crisis”.
Consultation on the proposals ends tomorrow
We are where we are. The 2023 review of parliamentary constituencies was formally launched in January this year. The eight-week consultation process will close on Monday 2 August.
As they stand, the proposals for Yorkshire do not affect the number of seats, which remain at 54. But there are some anomalies, with some seats disappearing altogether such as Elmet and Rothwell. Batley and Spen would change fundamentally, and the constituency of Don Valley would be abolished and be replaced by Doncaster East and Axholme.
There are some big changes for Leeds. Leeds West would go, and a new Pudsey constituency would be created, comprising Bramley and Stanningley (also from Leeds West). Headingley would become a new constituency comprising Armley, Headingley and Hyde Park, Kirkstall and Weetwood. Leeds North East (currently Labour MP Fabian Hamilton) seems to be the only constituency relatively unaffected.
Dr Victoria Honeyman, British politics associate professor at Leeds University, told Yorkshire Live the proposed changes by the Boundary Commission could have a major impact on future elections. “This is basically gerrymandering”, she said. “They’re rebuilding areas.” But she conceded that ruling parties have used this trick for decades.
Breaking up communities
One of the biggest criticisms of these latest set of recommendations is the break-up of seats that have been around for centuries – such as Chester – and as the Guardian states, this will “break up many recognisable communities because of an overly strict set of rules”.
This review is long overdue. But the Financial Times recently concluded that this is probably where the agreement starts and ends. Maths gets in the way and the strict application of numerically equal seats, gives rise to some strange constituencies – when all we actually want are parliamentary seats that are real places. However you frame it “there is little doubt that this set of boundary changes will work to the benefit of the Conservatives, probably by around 5 to 10 seats net” according to the FT.
A lot can still happen
There is some way to go in this process. The consultation for this stage finishes tomorrow (Monday) – feedback and the proposals can be found here. A second consultation period will be launched in 2022, with the final report and recommendations due to be published in June 2023.
A lot can happen in the next 12 months and many MPs will be worrying about more than just boundary changes. At the last general election, some seats changed hands with big swings – and swings are just that, swings. They can just as easily swing back. Tory MPs should be worried about the impact of Brexit on their constituents, as well as changes to Universal credit, growing disparities, and the management of the economy.
The electorate may shift both geographically and politically, but they’re not daft. Unless there are some significant life changing policies for Yorkshire communities, tinkering with boundaries will not necessarily mean a seat stays blue.
