Stoke-on-Trent would lose MP in boundary reform
VOTERS in Stoke-on-Trent will lose an MP and Tristram Hunt's seat will disappear under new plans to redraw the region's political landscape.
The Boundary Commission has revealed its final strategy to cut the number of parliamentary constituencies in England from 533 to 502.
But city MPs today branded the reforms a "debacle" – because opposition from within the Government means the £12 million plan is unlikely to ever be approved.
Several disputed plans from the first wave of proposals have been scrapped.
Would you like a professional to review your CV and give you some constructive feedback?
contact BlueSky CVs for an honest review
Terms: 1 per person
Contact: 01538 710408
Valid until: Friday, May 24 2013
They included proposals to divide Paul Farrelly's Newcastle seat between two new constituencies – Newcastle and Stone and Kidsgrove and Tunstall.
Other changes rejected include splitting Burslem between two constituencies.
The commission's final recommendations would cut the number of MPs in Staffordshire from 12 to 11, reducing Stoke-on-Trent to two MPs. Its plans include:
Creating a new West Staffordshire constituency covering southern parts of the city like Trentham, Hanford and Meir with Bill Cash's Stone and western Newcastle;
Carving Tristram Hunt's Stoke-on-Trent Central seat between the two remaining city seats covering the north and south;
Reuniting the Staffordshire Moorlands under a single MP and keeping the Newcastle seat broadly in line with borough council boundaries.
The national reduction in seats, cutting the total number of MPs from 650 to 600, was intended to create constituencies of roughly equal size. It was also expected to hand the Conservatives a 20-seat boost at the 2015 General election. But the plans are already in jeopardy, even though a new two-month consultation only begins today.
The Tories' Coalition partners, the Liberal Democrats, have pledged to vote against the changes when they reach the Commons next year – meaning the changes will not have enough support to become law.
They withdrew support after plans to reform the House of Lords, a Lib-Dem pre-election pledge, collapsed amid a Tory backbench rebellion.
Some Tories are pinning their hopes on winning over the cash-strapped Lib Dems with the promise of party funding reforms, which would boost the amount of public money going to the third biggest party.
Tristram Hunt, whose Stoke-on-Trent Central seat is now at risk, said Labour will study the proposals in depth and submit an alternative. He said: "Creating the seat of West Staffordshire is truly bizarre linking up Meir with rural Staffordshire villages would create a very strange seat.
"It's very difficult to see their reasoning and very difficult to understand how they can swing so totally away from the original proposals they thought were so incredible.
"The proposals have very little respect for cultural or historic boundaries."
Joan Walley, MP for Stoke-on-Trent North, said: "I would always say that anybody who wanted to cut Burslem in half needed their head examining. I welcome the fact that it has been recognised as one. But the whole thing is a fiasco."
The Boundary Commission said it made the changes because "feelings ran high" on its original proposals.
It added: "Stoke-on-Trent is too small to include three whole constituencies and it is clear the boundaries here will have to undergo significant change."
Comments
by Nicky_Davis_
Friday, October 19 2012, 11:50PM
“It's not so much 'Tristram Hunt's' seat disappearing surely. A constituency doesn't belong to an MP. Political parties select candidates and put them where they want. Tristram was parachuted in so he or any of the other current party MPs could be moved elsewhere. The constituencies would cover different areas.
This isn't quite the Boundary Commission's final strategy, these are revised proposals and we're now into further consultation before final recommendations, which may be unchanged but there is the possibility of further changes.
http://tinyurl.com/8qew24v
"The Liberal Democrats, have pledged to vote against the changes when they reach the Commons next year" (since when do we rely on a libdem pledge?). If they do it's a fairly close split
http://tinyurl.com/ca7p6lt
though yes it is most likely to be thrown out. In that sense it is a fiasco and a debacle, to chuck out proposals without regard for what they are, having brought in legislation to generate them, not that I'm a great fan of reducing the number of MPs myself.
It's interesting to follow this consultation though as the review process is in law so we'll proceed with regular reviews anyway. This is a pretty good consultation, they are listening well, to me anyway:
http://tinyurl.com/8pjmbww
and present a well reasoned report for our area:
(page 25-39)
http://tinyurl.com/8txs5js
I don't know why Tristram can't understand it as I think they explain it very well. West Staffordshire is a fairly complex seat but I disagree with Tristram, the constituencies proposed have as much respect for cultural and historic boundaries as is possible within the tight constraints of the legislation. Indeed a priority has been to keep the historic 6 towns in Stoke-on-Trent seats and keep most of historic Newcastle-under-Lyme together. Joan Walley at least recognises this improvement over the initial proposals. It will be interesting to see what Tristram comes up with as an alternative. The problem with the Labour party's submission is it wanted to bring areas such as Biddulph and Werrington into Stoke-on-Trent but people living in those areas vehemently don't want that.
And what of Rob Flello? Rob Flello who didn't submit comments to the consultation or turn up to speak at Stafford. (He is however happy to turn up at Fenton Manor to judge beers!) He tweeted on 16th October "#boundaryreview made a complete dogs' breakfast of Stoke South. Absolutely amazed at the stupidity of those making the changes.#mindless". He does not pin down what he means by the dogs' breakfast. It's not a very constructive comment and he does not say what alternative he would propose to those Assistant Commissioners he accuses of stupidity.
I would congratulate the Assistant Commissioners and the Boundary Commission for taking even ordinary people's views into account, contrary to my initial skepticism, and for their response and vast improvement on their initial proposals.”
by muzzer57
Wednesday, October 17 2012, 5:09PM
“From all the red arrows it looks like some of Tristrams buddies are on here.”
by pottersfreak6
Wednesday, October 17 2012, 3:37PM
“Their is a God after all bye bye Tristram but dont worry Labour will find you another safe seat no doubt !”
by strandedhere
Wednesday, October 17 2012, 3:04PM
“All that effort to construct a parachute out of Peter Mandleson's old silk drawers,and now it looks as though Lord Hunt's son could be shoe horned out.
Tsk.”
by Tabazan
Wednesday, October 17 2012, 2:49PM
“My word, Christmas HAS come early this year, hasn't it?”
by muzzer57
Wednesday, October 17 2012, 1:33PM
“Excellent news one less money grabbing MP in the area and the end of Hunt's short lived political career.”
by BucknallMel
Wednesday, October 17 2012, 12:49PM
“Well, no loss to any of us if it goes through; no MP in this country actually represents anyone but the wealthy and privileged elite. I notice none of these protests were heard when it came to rejigging the council wards to try and reduce the BNP vote... If you set an example by reshuffling boundaries to suit your own political agenda, don't act all shocked when others follow your lead to suit their own desires.”
by mole10
Wednesday, October 17 2012, 10:25AM
“How come nobody has mentioned Josiah Wegwood?
Most annoying.”
by Johntoe
Wednesday, October 17 2012, 10:11AM
“Nick Clegg has said that he and his party definitely will NOT back the boundary changes, after the Tories broke their promise on House of lords reform,
So that means the Tories WILL get their way,”
by GilbertL
Wednesday, October 17 2012, 9:38AM
“It would be nice to lose all MP's, councillors and politicians, but that won't happen any time soon.. shame.”