Political Question

[andrewducker]

At the moment the House of Lords are debating the Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill.

I've heard numerous claims that this bill is incredibly unfair, and blatant gerrymandering by the Conservative Party.

Looking at the details, I'm feeling baffled. I can see a claim that the exemption for the three Scottish constituencies (Two Liberal Democrat, on Scottish National Party) are biased in their favour. But I can't see how a system whereby people are grouped together in what's going to be a massively arbitrary manner (each area must be within 5% of the national average, and are set up by independent bodies - the Boundary Commissions).

I don't really have a stake in this one - I'd just like someone to explain how this system would give an advantage to any one party. I can see that it could _remove_ advantage from a party if the old system with much less equal constituency sizes gave that party an advantage, but I'm totally failing to see how it's anything like gerrymandering.

Am I missing something obvious?

Comments

[gonzo21.livejournal.com]

And given how much gerry-mandering New Labour got away with, which didn't cause a fuss, one imagines this must be an order of magnitude above that.

[andrewducker]

Do you have anything on that? Because I don't remember seeing anything on Labour gerrymandering. I have a vague inkling that they have an advantage because the areas their supporters are in have different demographics, but I didn't think there was anything at all blatant going on. As always, happy to be educated if you have something to point me at.

[gonzo21.livejournal.com]

Well where I live, the boundaries got changed to shuffle a lot of traditional Tory votes into a safe Labour seat, making it harder for the tories to mount a comeback in Perth and Kinross. And I was told a lot of little boundary shuffles happened in Glasgow that were very much to Labours advantage over the SNP. But I don't have a source for it I'm afraid.