observer Posted August 7, 2012 Report Share Posted August 7, 2012 See Clegg's seen his backside cos the Tories havn't supported his half baked changes to the House of Lords, and now won't support their proposed changes to constituency boundaries, which would have reduced the number of MPs and created a fairer MP to electorate ratio - which the Tories are now counting on to win the next election. However, whilst imo the Boundary Commission should be independent and be tasked with maintaining equal ratios between the great unwashed and their representatives; without interference by those with a direct interest - namely the politicians. However, according to the TV pundits the irony could be, that in order to increase some partisan "fairness" in Parliament; the Tories may create up to 200 Lords to get the balance they want! Yet another victory for expediency over common sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harry hayes Posted August 7, 2012 Report Share Posted August 7, 2012 Why we keep writing about politicians is beyond me. I agree with your comments Obs but some things don't change - and probably never will. Happy days Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted August 7, 2012 Report Share Posted August 7, 2012 I agree with what Clegg has done the boundary changes would have benefitted the Tories, and whatever you think they did have a deal, which has now been broken. What else could he have done? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted August 7, 2012 Author Report Share Posted August 7, 2012 I think my point is: that for the politicians to decide when and if, they will review boundaries, albeit in this case for partisan parity; it still amounts to interference in the electoral process. Surely the Boundary Commision should operate independently and automatically to maintain equal ratios of representation? H: if you look back in history at some of the changes that have occured; you'll find comments such as yours were made at the time! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted August 8, 2012 Report Share Posted August 8, 2012 Boundary changes when they have happened, have benefitted the party that was in power, I do agree that the boundary comission should be and seen to be completely independent, sadly I cannot see any party not fiddling with it when they get the opportunity Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted August 8, 2012 Author Report Share Posted August 8, 2012 Which is my point: "fiddling" with votes is as bad as "fiddling" expenses in my book - tantamount to gerimandering. Time politicians were subject to the same public regulation and scrutiny, they apply to others? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.