|
|
Post by dundas on Oct 30, 2019 9:38:42 GMT
What has happened to Nick Clegg's plan to reduce MP numbers to 600. Are they now officially obviated? Should there be an official enquiry (conducted by the 50 least productive MPs) to find out?
|
|
|
|
Post by LDCaerdydd on Oct 30, 2019 10:05:31 GMT
It was Cameron's not Clegg's (although it did become Coalition policy and was ditched in a tic for tat fallout over HoL reform).
The boundary commission are still working on the new 600 seats but the 2017 and 2019 elections have got in the way.
many people on this forum have issue with the figure of 600 as an arbitrary number plucked from the air.
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 36,474
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Oct 30, 2019 11:22:31 GMT
Not to mention that nasty little slogan "cutting the cost of politics" - a reduction of 50 MPs would be literally negligible in this regard, apart from anything else.
|
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Oct 30, 2019 11:44:07 GMT
What has happened to Nick Clegg's plan to reduce MP numbers to 600. Are they now officially obviated? Should there be an official enquiry (conducted by the 50 least productive MPs) to find out? Lib Dem proposals to reduce the number of MPs were always contingent on electoral reform. |
|
|
|
Post by bluelabour on Oct 30, 2019 16:00:34 GMT
Did this feature in the Tories' 2017 manifesto?
|
|
mondialito
Labour
Everything is horribly, brutally possible.
Posts: 4,924 
|
Post by mondialito on Oct 30, 2019 16:03:51 GMT
Did this feature in the Tories' 2017 manifesto? If I recall correctly, it did but I can see Johnson ditching it. He loves the theatre of the Commons, why would he reduce the size of the cheers? |
|
|
|
Post by bluelabour on Oct 30, 2019 16:06:14 GMT
I wonder if we'll see the pledge to introduce FPTP in London mayoral and Assembly elections repeated
|
|
poi
Newbie
Posts: 9
|
Post by poi on Oct 31, 2019 9:02:50 GMT
It was Cameron's not Clegg's (although it did become Coalition policy and was ditched in a tic for tat fallout over HoL reform). The boundary commission are still working on the new 600 seats but the 2017 and 2019 elections have got in the way. many people on this forum have issue with the figure of 600 as an arbitrary number plucked from the air. The commissions have reported. It’s now down to HMG to lay an order and Parliament to vote on it. |
|
wallington
Green
The Pride of Croydon 2022 award winner
Posts: 1,242
|
Post by wallington on Oct 31, 2019 15:24:15 GMT
Cut back massively on the number of members in the House of Lords and increase the number of MPs in the Commons to 700.
|
|
pl
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,563
|
Post by pl on Oct 31, 2019 15:28:30 GMT
Cut back massively on the number of members in the House of Lords and increase the number of MPs in the Commons to 700. The UK already has the fourth largest national parliament after China (2,980), Germany (709) and North Korea (687). Given that two of them are Communist and the third is inflated by 111 overhanging mandates, I'd say that HoC is large enough as it is already. |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Oct 31, 2019 15:43:38 GMT
Cut back massively on the number of members in the House of Lords and increase the number of MPs in the Commons to 700. The UK already has the fourth largest national parliament after China (2,980), Germany (709) and North Korea (687). Given that two of them are Communist and the third is inflated by 111 overhanging mandates, I'd say that HoC is large enough as it is already. The UK has a very centralised structure aside from Scotland and Wales, with local government very weak and regional government not really existing. Almost all other countries have significant internal devolution so their national parliaments do not have the same level of duties. |
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Oct 31, 2019 16:16:44 GMT
What has happened to Nick Clegg's plan to reduce MP numbers to 600. Are they now officially obviated? Should there be an official enquiry (conducted by the 50 least productive MPs) to find out? What happened to the Tory plan to reduce it to 585 members? |
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Oct 31, 2019 19:22:13 GMT
What has happened to Nick Clegg's plan to reduce MP numbers to 600. Are they now officially obviated? Should there be an official enquiry (conducted by the 50 least productive MPs) to find out? What happened to the Tory plan to reduce it to 585 members? That was negotiated away as part of the coalition negotiations. The Conservative idea of reducing the number of MPs by a round number (10%) was as arbitrary as reducing it to a round number (600). I think that the requirement for the electorate to vary by no more than 5% from the average is a much bigger problem than the total number. |
|
|
|
Post by Strontium Dog on Oct 31, 2019 19:53:02 GMT
So long as we're going to retain the ludicrous constituency link and have our legislators doing mountains of casework, I see no rationale for reducing the number of MPs.
|
|
|
|
Post by dundas on Nov 3, 2019 6:52:41 GMT
I wonder if we'll see the pledge to introduce FPTP in London mayoral and Assembly elections repeated This would be great stuff, FPTP needs to be used for as many elections as possible. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 36,474
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Nov 3, 2019 10:03:03 GMT
I wonder if we'll see the pledge to introduce FPTP in London mayoral and Assembly elections repeated This would be great stuff, FPTP needs to be used for as many elections as possible. Narrator's voice - no it doesn't. |
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Nov 3, 2019 12:34:22 GMT
The UK already has the fourth largest national parliament after China (2,980), Germany (709) and North Korea (687). Given that two of them are Communist and the third is inflated by 111 overhanging mandates, I'd say that HoC is large enough as it is already. The UK has a very centralised structure aside from Scotland and Wales, with local government very weak and regional government not really existing. Almost all other countries have significant internal devolution so their national parliaments do not have the same level of duties. Quite. Germany's lower house is really rather bloated for its needs, especially when you consider the federal aspect that you mention and the rather small upper house. Actually, even then, the Landtage are rather bloated too. North Rhine-Westphalia has 200 deputies for 18 million people, and Bavaria 205 for 13 million people. The Saarland has 51 for under a million people! Weimar was worse. It had nearly a hundred fewer seats in the Reichstag, but Prussia's State Diet alone ended up with over 450 deputies for 38 million people. |
|
|
|
Post by iainbhx on Nov 3, 2019 19:52:32 GMT
The UK has a very centralised structure aside from Scotland and Wales, with local government very weak and regional government not really existing. Almost all other countries have significant internal devolution so their national parliaments do not have the same level of duties. Quite. Germany's lower house is really rather bloated for its needs, especially when you consider the federal aspect that you mention and the rather small upper house. Actually, even then, the Landtage are rather bloated too. North Rhine-Westphalia has 200 deputies for 18 million people, and Bavaria 205 for 13 million people. The Saarland has 51 for under a million people! Weimar was worse. It had nearly a hundred fewer seats in the Reichstag, but Prussia's State Diet alone ended up with over 450 deputies for 38 million people. The size of the Reichstag was, of course, dependent on the number of votes cast in the election and worked out roughly at one deputy for each 40,000 valid votes cast. So it varied between 468 and 602 members. The 1936 Reichstag after one of those interesting elections with a 99% turnout was 741 deputies, it grew to 818 at the equally interesting Dec 1938 election, I believe additional deputies were added for some further acquisitions but not all, but they didn't even bother with the fake elections. I think it ended up at 876 deputies. |
|
Crimson King
Lib Dem
Be nice to each other and sing in tune
Posts: 9,378
|
Post by Crimson King on Nov 4, 2019 10:04:19 GMT
This would be great stuff, FPTP needs to be used for as many elections as possible. Narrator's voice - no it doesn't. Although SV is probably the only system which is worse than FPTP, and I would shed no tears if it reverted |
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Nov 4, 2019 16:20:11 GMT
Narrator's voice - no it doesn't. Although SV is probably the only system which is worse than FPTP, and I would shed no tears if it reverted Indeed. If you're going to have a preferential system then it's only fair if voters are able to fully preference, and if you're going to have a two-stage system then voters should know which candidates have made it to the second stage before they cast their votes in that stage. Supplementary vote is the worst way of doing either that has ever actually been used. |
|
