Debates between Wendy Morton and Peter Bone during the 2015-2017 Parliament

Fri 18th Nov 2016

Parliamentary Constituencies (Amendment) Bill

Debate between Wendy Morton and Peter Bone
2nd reading: House of Commons
Friday 18th November 2016

(8 years, 1 month ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Parliamentary Constituencies (Amendment) Bill 2016-17 View all Parliamentary Constituencies (Amendment) Bill 2016-17 Debates Read Hansard Text
Wendy Morton Portrait Wendy Morton
- Hansard - -

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising that, because I was about to talk about my constituency and pick up on some of those points.

Aldridge-Brownhills forms part of the borough of Walsall, along with Walsall North and Walsall South. As I said, its electorate currently stands at about 60,000, which is 7,000 fewer than that of either of my Walsall neighbours. I do not feel this is right, and I accept that changes need to be made to bring my constituency more in line with others across the country. The position is similar in constituencies in Birmingham. Edgbaston, with just under 63,000 electors, borders Hall Green, which has 74,000 electors—a disparity of about 11,000. The situation is repeated in relation to Hall Green and Hodge Hill, and there are other examples across the country. I therefore question what valid democratic reason there is for this Bill to perpetuate these disparities.

Peter Bone Portrait Mr Bone
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Will my hon. Friend give way?

Wendy Morton Portrait Wendy Morton
- Hansard - -

I am going to make some progress because there are still Members who want to speak.

Along with colleagues on the Conservative Benches, I was elected on a manifesto pledge to reduce the number of Members of Parliament, and the Government have a clear mandate from the people to do this.

Peter Bone Portrait Mr Bone
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Will my hon. Friend give way on that point?

Wendy Morton Portrait Wendy Morton
- Hansard - -

I will.

Peter Bone Portrait Mr Bone
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

When that manifesto was drawn up, I am absolutely sure that the people who did so did not think that we would be leaving the European Union and having all the work from the European Union imposed on a reduced number of MPs.

Wendy Morton Portrait Wendy Morton
- Hansard - -

My hon. Friend makes an interesting point, but I still maintain that I was elected on a manifesto pledge to reduce the number of MPs. I recall the same point being made when I was knocking on doors in the 2010 election.

The hon. Member for North West Durham spoke of emails of support from members of the public, but I would question what consultation has been done in preparing to bring the Bill before the House. Perhaps that will be clarified at a later stage.

The House of Commons is the largest lower Chamber of any western democracy. The American House of Representatives, with 435 members, serves a population of 318 million. In Japan, the House of Representatives has 475 members representing 127 million people. It has long been argued that a small legislature is better at holding the Executive to account and at scrutinising legislation. That is why I am happy to support the Conservative manifesto pledge to reduce the number of elected Members. Much has been said this morning about the other place, but I think that we need to take the lead and put our own House in order before we seek to reform elsewhere.

As I have said, I accept that my own constituency of Aldridge-Brownhills must change. I and others in the constituency welcome the boundary commissioners’ decision to keep it intact and to expand it so that Bloxwich East and West are encompassed by the Walsall borough. Streetly is integral to that, and the boundary proposals will bring together the communities of Pelsall and Brownhills, which were previously separated by local government reorganisations.

This House should accept that a boundary review is under way and that the public are being consulted for the second time in five years. It would be wrong to ignore their views. To halt the process again would be unforgiveable. If the Bill is passed, the public could be forgiven for thinking that Members of Parliament were putting their own self-interest before democratic equality and democratic accountability.