´óÏó´«Ã½

The same Report:

"The proposed exceptions to the electoral quota requirement make sense but the House may wish to consider further exceptions where there is evidence that voters are prepared to be under-represented to preserve strong local ties. Public consultation on the boundary changes will be vital to the perceived legitimacy of the Boundary Commissions' decisions and we have tabled amendments we believe will enhance that process.".

That would scupper "Devonwall" and hunger strikes.

I think most people would agree.

I think the key-word there is "most",P_Trembath.

I think those that are self-publicists and always craving media attention would be disappointed if the whole protest turned out to be a "damp squib".

"Self-publicists" aside, is it not better to have a "damp squib" of a protest only to discover later that some perceived threat would not happen anyway, than to do nothing, and then watch the "threat" turn into reality?
Anyway, as the "fat lady" has not even entered the stage as yet, let alone started singing, is it not a little early to be talking about "damp squibs".

"Fat lady" P_Trembath?

A little harsh, considering there are folk starving in Cornwall, at this very moment!

Slimslad, so amusing, you should be on the stage.


Sweeping up.

Your little "joke" aside, P_Trembath.
What actual "threat" is there?
That a small amount of people may have a different Member of Parliament in 2013?,("May" being the operative word").
This is what these politicians and minority self-interest groups are campaigning against?

I felt my little "joke" was complimentary to your own.
What is the "threat"?
It is a threat on 2 fronts.
1/ An MP of a cross border constituency will find themselves having to deal with 2 (maybe more) different local authorities, for example Cornwall Council and Plymouth Council, that may well have conflicting agenda on various issues, which could well cause conflict, and leave one part of the constituency feeling disenfranchised. In this case, both Saltash, and Torpoint, have expressed concern regarding their being swallowed up in an ever expanding Plymouth, they would, quite rightly expect their MP to take up their cause, but as the MP would also represent Plymouth, or part of it, he/she would either have to take "sides", or do nothing. A situation that is less than acceptable.
2/ A cross border constituency is an erosion of the border, it is saying that the border is not that important, and can be ignored. this will, in all probability, lead to further erosions of the border until there is no border left. I know that to some the border is not that important, but to others it is, and not just "nats". Whilst today it may just be a cross border constituency, remember that in the early 70's, it was just a Common Market. The threat is that a cross border constituency is just the thin end of the wedge.
It is that wedge that the "politicians and minority self-interest groups are campaigning against".

"1/ An MP of a cross border constituency will find themselves having to deal with 2 (maybe more) different local authorities, for example Cornwall Council and Plymouth Council, that may well have conflicting agenda on various issues, which could well cause conflict, and leave one part of the constituency feeling disenfranchised."

That is complete nonsense,P_Trembath.

You would be hard put to find a Parliamentary Constituency that does not deal with more than one local authority, apart from the major conurbation, and even they may have Municipal Councils.

One constituency can also cover rural, urban and inner-city areas., also different cultural and ethnic and religious divides.

The "border" issue is a red-herring, in my opinion.

Devon and Cornwall are Counties of England. Have been for centuries.

"…The ability of MPs to fulfil their responsibilities to their constituents…"

I always thought once elected, MP's represented big business in a round of "you scratch my back and I will yours" What the MP are supposed to do and what the whips allow them to do are what makes us so undemocratic.

In the end the MP will do as they are told FACT

Slimslad, I am unaware of any constituency that covers 2 councils in the way that is being proposed. I am not talking about district, town, or parish councils, but the county and unitary authorities.

Slimslad wrote:-
"The "border" issue is a red-herring, in my opinion"
The operative words being "in my opinion" many others would disagree.

"Constituencies are generally based on whole or part local authorities unless there is a strong case to straddle boundaries"

(Boundary Commission, 2010)

Your point?

Constituencies have, and do, cross County boundaries.
It does not change the County boundary by as much as an inch,P_Trembath.
But it does give minority groups the chance to "beat the drum", and gain media attention on the backs of others.

The boundary commission will look at local links and the vast majority in Saltash work at the docks in Devonport, shop and spend time in Plymouth. In fact the people in Saltash have more in common with Plymouth than they do the cave dwelling nats bashing rocks in Penwith.

The information from the 2011 Census will be available for the Boundary Commission to peruse, Gaz.
That, more than anything will "swing it", in my opinion.

Slim I know and as a person living in Saltash assure all Saltash has no problem with borders changing, I suspect the time this will take will call the bluff of one hungry person who is not finding the support he thought he would.