Equalising constituencies must mean the end to double registration

August 20, 2010 2:12 pm

Ballot VoteBy Paul Smith

“There will be a consistent approach towards the equalisation of constituencies throughout the nation” Nick Clegg June 7th 2010

I hope that a blog about the mathematics of the forthcoming parliamentary boundary review will not lead to too many readers dozing off. However an important fact has been largely ignored in the discussion of creating constituencies which are broadly equal in numbers. Nick Clegg has talked about equalisation and the value of votes; in the same debate he made the reasonable point:

“That is simply not right. It is the ultimate postcode lottery, whereby the weight of one’s vote depends on where one lives”

However what is forgotten is that some people are counted more than once in determining the total size of the electorate and its size in certain constituencies. A surprisingly large number of voters are registered in more than one constituency, skewing the electoral calculations, in some areas significantly.

Given the numbers involved I estimate this to be equivalent to 15 – 20 constituencies on the coalition stated target of 75,000 population per seat. Not only is this figure quite staggering in absolute terms, if one considers the impact of this number of constituencies on the outcome of an election in a parliament with 600 seats it becomes clearly untenable that some people should be counted twice in calculating constituency size and distribution.

Also there are currently no checks on whether people break the law and vote twice in general elections, with universal access to postal voting this is possible. Surely if we want a fair voting system how can we continue to allow people to be allowed onto the electoral register for two or more constituencies? It is possible to allow people to be registered for local elections without a general election vote as is the case with European citizens. Giving over one million voters the real opportunity to vote twice is unfair and undemocratic.

Second Homes

The number of second homes in England is estimated at 241,000 (source: CLG 2007) in Scotland there were 30,000 at the time of the last census and in Wales estimates around 25,000 Second (and more) home owners are able to register in every local authority in which they live. It is not unreasonable to estimate that this adds around 500,000 voters to the electoral register or around 6-7 (75,000) constituencies. These voters are by definition wealthier residents and the second homes are concentrated almost entirely in Conservative constituencies, with a smattering of Lib Dems. The areas with the highest proportions of second homes are Cornwall, Dorset, North & South Devon, Isle of Wight, West Sussex coast, Central London (the rich bits), East Anglia coast, North Yorkshire Coast and Cumbria. These concentrations help fuel the statistics which suggest Conservative MPs represent larger electorates than Labour MPs.

Students

There are over two million students in higher education in Britain, 60% of these are in full time study and are likely to be living away from home. I think a fair estimate of those living away from home would be around 1.2 million (although I’m happy for someone to post exact numbers) of which around one million will be registered to vote in two constituencies (around thirteeen 75,000 constituencies). Students in higher education are still more likely to be from middle class backgrounds with a huge over representation from non-state schools. This factor therefore also will suggest that Conservative and Liberal Democrat constituencies are over-counted due to this double registration.

Any change in electoral rules and review of boundaries must also end the right of people (mainly wealthy people) to be registered in more than one parliamentary constituency i.e. they must be forced to choose where they register.

This would also remove from the calculations of constituency size around 1.5 million double voters or 3% of the national electoral register.

Fair votes must surely mean only one vote for each citizen.

Related posts:

  1. My voter registration papers have turned up – I just haven’t decided what to do with them yet…

Comments are closed

Latest

  • Comment Why I went from Blue to Red

    Why I went from Blue to Red

    Saturday May 15th 2010 is a day which will stay in my mind for some time. It is the day I joined the Labour Party. You might not think there is anything special in that, but for the previous 6 years I had been a member of the Conservatives. I should have joined Labour much sooner, growing up in a working class household and benefiting as I did from so many of their policies: EMA enabled me to go to [...]

    Read more →
  • Comment Labour needs a prawn cocktail offensive for all businesses, not just small firms

    Labour needs a prawn cocktail offensive for all businesses, not just small firms

    Both Jacqui Smith and Dermot Finch have written in recent days about the need for Labour to embark on a new “prawn cocktail offensive” to charm the business community. I agree with Jacqui and Dermot and I’m optimistic about the reception Labour is likely to receive from the business community, provided we have the courage to engage with all businesses – small firms, mid-caps and large corporates. This doesn’t mean deviating from the responsible capitalism agenda. If business wants more [...]

    Read more →
  • Comment Local Government Why we’re raising council tax

    Why we’re raising council tax

    Nobody wants to pay more tax and I am not a high tax and spend politician, so my administration’s proposed rejection of the government’s council tax funding has not been based on ideological dogma, but a reasoned decision based on financial prudence. I led my group to win control of City of York Council in May 2011. We inherited from the previous Liberal Democrat administration a budget with £21m of in year cuts to make, a number of previously unexposed [...]

    Read more →
  • Local Government News Boris and the 2 billion pound “clerical error”

    Boris and the 2 billion pound “clerical error”

    Earlier today on BBC’s London Politics Show, it was revealed that billions of pounds were inaccurately added to Boris Johnson’s official budget document – a mistake that a spokesperson for the Tory Mayor attempted to dismiss as a “clerical error”. At over £2 billion – that’s some clerical error… A spokesperson for Ken Livingstone said: “Boris Johnson claims anyone arguing for lower fares for Londoners doesn’t understand the transport finances, but now it turns out it’s Boris Johnson’s transport figures [...]

    Read more →
  • Featured The sad truth behind Andrew Lansley’s eyes

    The sad truth behind Andrew Lansley’s eyes

    “Michael,” said the Prime Minister, without looking up from his desk, “I thought you said this would be easy?” “Easy? That what would be easy?” replied the Education Secretary, whose face had occupied a near-permanent state of mild bafflement, which was slowly becoming the kind of ever-present British institution that decades from now will be ruined by ill-thought out reforms, or having a roof built over it in case it rains. “This NHS business. You said it would be easy.” [...]

    Read more →