Labour must continue to fight this Gerrymander

By Sarah Hayward / @sarah_hayward

Last night representatives of CLPs from across London gathered in Victoria Street to find out how the party will approach the boundary changes proposed last week in response to the coalition’s policy of cutting the number of MPs.

The sole purpose of the briefing was to allow CLPs input in to the party’s counter proposals. North London left with North East London going away to do more work but the rest of us, while not exactly happy, probably better than we were.

What was missing from the meeting was any sense about whether the party would continue to fight the reduction in seats per se rather than just the proposals.

While I accept that the immediate matter at hand has to be influencing the Boundary Commission to get better outcomes for our communities, there has to be a longer term plan to get all the measures aimed at hitting voters – and in many cases Labour supporters hardest in future elections.

The proposed boundaries see Labour losing 17 of the 31 seats that go in England. This is likely to be exacerbated when the proposals for Wales and Scotland are announced.

There has been no discussion at any point about what we want our MPs to do and therefore how many there should be. I’ve blogged before about the different challenges MPs face and why a more differential constituency size might actually be the sensible thing to do.

Piled on top of this is the fact that the legislation requires this every parliament. No longer will an MP be able to forge a link over time with their voters. The strict population conditions on seats mean that they will have to be modified for every election. This will affect urban seats more, and particularly central London seats. Or more Labour seats.

While the boundary changes have hogged the limelight in the last couple of weeks, there are two other changes set to hit electoral turn out and likely to hit Labour harder.

It will no longer be compulsory to co-operate with registration officers. Previously it had been and was punishable with a fine. Still around 10 per cent of eligible voters were missing from the register – often more in urban and high turnover areas. Last week the electoral commission told parliament that the subsequent drop off from this measure could be as much as 30 per cent in poorer urban areas. They estimate around 10 per cent in more affluent suburban and rural areas.

Or to put it bluntly, the more likely the seat is to vote Labour the more likely voters will drop off the register.

The strong socio-economic link between voter registration and turnout means this change WILL hit Labour harder than other parties.

The unspoken issue with this last week, is that, with budget being squeezed and voters no longer being obliged to engage with the registration process will Local Authorities continue to prioritise voter registration efforts? You can see why it would be tempting, if the government has downgraded civic participation, for councils to similarly lower the priority they attached to registering and motivating people to vote.

Finally the coalition is introducing individual registration. From a theoretical basis this is hard to argue against. But the practical implications, particularly if councils start attaching less importance to encouraging people to register is that more people will fall off the electoral register.

Like electoral registration per se, individual registration will, in practical terms, make it a little bit more difficult to register. Piled on a lessening incentive for voters to engage or councils to engage potential voters, again there’s likely to be a drop off and again it is likely to disproportionately affect more Labour inclined voters.

The cumulative impact of the three changes could be devastating for Labour and we need to continue to fight for safeguards for individual registration and out and out against the other measures.

There are still opportunities for us to influence and change these policies. But we need to start planning now and we’ll need to be prepared to work with the other parties. Part of our strategy at the public hearings for the proposed boundary changes must be to set this up and start to undermine the entire misadventure, not just get improved boundaries for our communities.