Should Their Lordships //hang Their Heads In Shame//?

[humbersloop]

or are some of the inherent tensions in any coalition government just running their natural course?

[humbersloop]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/jan/14/lib-dems-peers-boundary-review

[jno]

which lordships did you have in mind?

[DangerUXD]

I think the Libdems generally should hang their heads in shame! Hard to imagine enemies being more treacherous than these "friends".

[jno]

the Tories haven't done them any favours, eg on reform of the Lords. So now the LibDem Lords strike back.

[sandyRoe]

Gerrymandering is an ugly word for an even uglier practice. If their lordships have stopped the Tories from giving themselves another 20 seats in parliament that can only be a good thing.

[Canary42]

All the talk about Clegg being a traitor makes me laugh - he was the liar who on election to his party's leadership stated "I will NEVER work with the Tories"

What goes around comes around.

[humbersloop]

well, if you scupper an AV referendum and block Lords' reform, it's hardly surprising that it comes back to bite you when others decide to play the odds too

[ichkeria]

I'm all in favour of fairer constituencies but against making arbitrary. some would say ridiculous divisions. Constituencies should IMO retain if at all possible a local identity.
And it should not be used as a backdoor means of reducing the number of MPs

[aelmpvw]

infundibulum, i think 'house of lards' is a much more apt name

[jake-the-peg]

It was agreed in the coalition agreement that the parties could fight opposite sides of the AV referendum but there would be one

That's not an issue.

But Lords reform was also agreed but Cameron was unable to deliver that and so Lib dem support for boundary changes was withdrawn as a quid pro quo.

Boundary changes would have benefitted the Tories but Lords reform would have been detrimental to them so there's a certain natural justice there.

[modeller]

# I'm all in favour of fairer constituencies but against making arbitrary. some would say ridiculous divisions#
Is that true ? The boundry changes were decided on by a 'cross party' group. Nothing arbitrary about it.
One thing is certain we have far too many MPs . We have the highest % of MPs for our population in Europe.

[Svejk]

Well said Modeller, expect some flak.

[jno]

One thing is certain we have far too many MPs . We have the highest % of MPs for our population in Europe

Or other countries have too few? If your MP had twice as many constituents you'd have half the chance of getting his attention when you needed it.

[anotheoldgit]

Bring the enemy into your camp and what more does you expect?

[emmie]

can't see getting hold of one's MP at all, if you watch the proceedings at the House of Commons how many are in attendance, same if you try and visit one of their surgeries. wasn't these boundary changes proposed by cross parties

[anotheoldgit]

jno

/// If your MP had twice as many constituents you'd have half the chance of getting his attention when you needed it. ///

Or you could say double the amount we already have, and one would have twice the chance of getting his/her attention when one needed it.

Incidentally there are some female MPs also.

[ichkeria]

The 'cross-partiness' of the boundary changes is not the point, which is that whoever suggested them in many cases they involved illogical or bizarre divisions of existing constituencies. There was certainly cross-party alarm at the changes envisaged for our county.
I'm also bemused that people, many of them at the front of the queue when it comes to championing the cause of the UK Parliament over the EU one, are also keen to see the numbers of MPs decline.

[pdq1]

Turkeys don't vote for Xmas. They are all in it together.

[jno]

yes, you could double the amount, aog. There's no "right" number of MPs. But I can't believe there are any women among them; it's hardly ladylike work.