Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú

Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú BLOGS - Graham Smith's Blog
« Previous | Main | Next »

The principal principle

Graham Smith | 18:08 UK time, Friday, 13 August 2010

Three blog posts on the same subject on the same day? Time to get a life.

I am grateful to officials at the House of Commons for confirming that my analysis of procedure in relation to the Parliamentary Voting Systems and Constituencies Bill is correct.

The Order paper for business on 6th September is now available and you can read it . You can see that there are two amendments, one from Labour and a separate one from a group of Scottish Nationalist and Plaid Cymru MPs. So there will be a division. If enough Tories rebel the government could be in trouble.

Cornwall's six coalition MPs have already missed the deadline for submitting a Second Reading amendment to preserve separate constituencies for Cornwall. I wonder if this is an indication of how seriously they take the issue?

What it means is that if the Super Six really do want to save the Parliamentary boundary with Devon they will have two opportunities to vote to defeat the Bill on Monday 6th September.

I suspect, however, that for entirely different reasons they will vote for the coalition government - the three Lib Dems because they want a referendum on the Alternative Voting system, and the three Conservatives because they want a boundary review which will change future electoral mathematics in their favour.

It is possible to make a principled case either in favour or against both measures. But not if you want to save the boundary between Cornwall and Devon. The Bill in its present form looks like a dog's breakfast designed to hold the coaltion together, rather than make serious democratic reforms. Why not hold separate votes on separate parts of the Bill? But if keeping Cornwall's voters in Cornwall is really the principal concern of your MP, he or she should vote against the Bill on Monday 6th September.

Comments

  • Comment number 1.

    Why is the Devonwall thing important? I'm not getting why you are so adjitated by this. The potential changes to planning and development regulations would have a far more serious effect on more Cornish communities and in a way that would be far harder to unpick. Just imagine needing 80% of Devoran or Helford to agree to a new development... The proposals are a gift to the 2nd & 3rd home owner enclaves effectively giving them a veto over any possible development in their little theme parks.

  • Comment number 2.

    Devonwall is a good story! I'd love to hear from anyone brave enough to go on the record and say they think that, for practical purposes, it's a good idea: if you live in Torpoint or Saltash, for example, the chances are that for healthcare, employment, planning (and shopping!) etc you look more towards Plymouth. So might it not actually be a good idea to have a Member of Parliament whose boundaries mapped yours?

Ìý

Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú iD

Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú navigation

Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú © 2014 The Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.