David Cameron has promised that, if he wins, he will reduce the size of the House of Commons, probably by 10 per cent. Andrew Tyrie has set out the scheme in detail1. It sounds like a sensible non-partisan idea. Britain has the largest parliament of any major democracy. We also suffer from the Redistribution of Seats act of 1944 which, by its bad drafting, guarantees an increase in the number of English MPs whenever there is a general redistricting2.
It is said that David Cameron really believes in the reform. Yet it must be one of his manifesto promises least likely to be fulfilled. Conservatives will want to focus on many more urgent parts of their agenda. Moreover, at least 30 Conservative MPs would have to go and all the rest would be unsettled by the universal changing of constituency boundaries. Turkeys don’t vote for an early Christmas.
The latest redistribution took seven years. While it could have been speeded up, there is no doubt that, allowing for due process, the redrawing of boundaries cannot be rushed through in a few months, even if there is no delaying litigation.
There is, of course, a political motive to the measure. The Conservatives have a natural resentment at the pro-Labour bias that, since 1992, has inadvertently developed in the electoral system. In 2005 the Conservatives would have needed an 11 per cent lead in the popular vote to secure a clear majority. Labour only had to be level-pegging in the popular vote to elect the vital 326 MPs. Rallings and Thrasher have shown that even on the new 2010 boundaries the Conservatives need about a nine per cent lead while Labour could just win on a tied vote3.
Conservatives latch on to the fact that in 2005 their seats contained on average 6100 more voters than those won by Labour. They propose that in future all constituencies should be within five per cent of the national average, even though this would mean abandoning the rules that demand respect for local government boundaries. But, as the Plymouth university team have shown, that would make only a small contribution to eliminating the pro-Labour bias in the electoral system4.
It is suggested that Cameron could get the legislation through by holding new MPs to it as a manifesto commitment, by relaxing reselection rules and by lavishing peerages on reluctant members whose careers were being ruined.
In principle most of us probably like the idea of a smaller house and of equal electoral districts. But it is such a far-reaching measure with so many victims that it is hard to see a Conservative government enduring the hassle and the consumption of parliamentary time that would necessarily be involved.
1 Tyrie, A. (MP for Chichester), Pruning the Politicians (2004)
2 Butler D.and McLean I., Fixing the Boundaries (1996) 35-38
3 Rallings, C. and Thrashe,M., Media Guide to the New Parliamentary Constituencies (2007)
4 Borisyuk, C. et al., ‘Parliamentary Constituency Boundary Reviews’, Parliamentary Affairs, January 2010