Boundary changes: see you in court?

CAMDEN Labour members don’t know what to make of the boundary changes suggested for the next General Election. Hampstead and Kilburn becomes easier to win for them with the addition of Kentish Town and Gospel Oak to the constituency, while Holborn and St Pancras is splintered into a new Camden and Regent’s Park seat – not such a safe bet for whoever takes on the Frank Dobson role in the south of the borough. Meanwhile, Camden Town Hall itself could end up being located in the constituency of an Islington MP, with Emily Thornberry’s current territory spreading in all directions. Lots to think about.

I was reminded at the Town Hall last night that these are only initial suggestions – and not to get too excited about them. Lots of water to pass under the bridge yet and all that. The person doing the reminding recalled a judicial review brought by Michael Foot, the former Labour Party leader who lived in Hampstead, over boundary changes pushed through in 1983, a case which extended the debate over where the political map should be drawn for many months. Foot and his colleagues lost their appeal (it was over disparities between numbers of voters in different constituencies) and the verdict is now used as a case study to give the Commission more discretion. Still, it shows how long the arguments over these amendments can run and run. And run.

And the person doing the reminding should know all the inside details of that challenge 28 years ago. He was the junior counsel in the Foot case: Julian Fulbrook, now a Camden councillor and head of the housing department.

3 Comments on Boundary changes: see you in court?

  1. Theo Blackwell // September 13, 2011 at 5:03 pm //

    Bet public bodies will spend more than the £12m proportedly saved by reducing the number of MPs appealing some of these boundaries…

  2. Constantine Buhayer // September 14, 2011 at 9:40 am //

    I have read this posting on possible boundary changes 3 or 4 times with a map by my side and still cannot make any sense of the thinking behind the proposals.
    Meanwhile, Gospel Oak Ward has been tossed across constituency boundaries more often than the carcass of a headless goat in a Afghan game of Buzkashi.
    I’ve had quite enough and am now considering calling in the UN.

  3. The number of *VOTERS* in each area is irrelevant, that is entirely down to how many electors get off their arses and bother to go out and vote. What matters is the number of *ELECTORS*, which each constituency has to have as near to the same of as possible.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: