All 1 Gareth Snell contributions to the Parliamentary Constituencies (Amendment) Bill 2017-19

Read Bill Ministerial Extracts

Fri 1st Dec 2017

Parliamentary Constituencies (Amendment) Bill Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate

Parliamentary Constituencies (Amendment) Bill

Gareth Snell Excerpts
2nd reading: House of Commons
Friday 1st December 2017

(6 years, 4 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Parliamentary Constituencies (Amendment) Bill 2017-19 Read Hansard Text
Mark Harper Portrait Mr Harper
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am glad the hon. Gentleman raised that point. It is certainly the case that there are more Members of the House of Lords, because at present, although they can retire, funnily enough when it is suggested to someone who has a life appointment with a considerable income attached to it that they should retire, very few choose to do so—although, to be fair, more of them have been retiring recently than previously. To repeat what I said in my admittedly slightly too long intervention, although there are more Members of the House of Lords, we made an attempt to reform the other place, but Parliament was not completely sold on the idea; and the fact is that the cost of running the House of Lords has fallen since 2010, not increased. It is true that there are more Members of the House of Lords, but the running costs have fallen because of the savings made.

Gareth Snell Portrait Gareth Snell (Stoke-on-Trent Central) (Lab/Co-op)
- Hansard - -

Is the right hon. Gentleman therefore saying that the cost of politics and the number of Members are not linked? His argument that the simple way to cut costs in this place is to reduce the number of MPs is undermined by his own evidence.

Mark Harper Portrait Mr Harper
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Not at all. I have made the point that the other place has managed to reduce its costs, but importantly, its Members do not have any constituents to represent. It has made some savings. I have suggested that we could save costs by reducing the size of this House quite modestly. We would still remain a very large lower House of Parliament compared with many others.

--- Later in debate ---
Mark Harper Portrait Mr Harper
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I recognise that there are complexities due to local government boundaries, but I have to say that Members of Parliament are probably the only people who, when driving around the country, see boundaries in front of us as we cross them. I do not know whether other Members have a similar experience, but as I drive past the various signs on the M4, I think of myself passing through the constituencies of my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister, my right hon. Friend the Member for Wokingham (John Redwood), my hon. Friend the Member for North Swindon (Justin Tomlinson) and my hon. and learned Friend the Member for South Swindon (Robert Buckland). But let us be frank, that is something that only those of us involved in politics do. Normal people—the constituents we represent—do not see the country as a succession of ward and local government boundaries. Perhaps I am doing them a disservice, but I suspect that if I asked my constituents where the local government boundaries were, most of them would be unable to tell me. And, funnily enough, I do not think that that makes their lives any less exciting and fulfilled.

Gareth Snell Portrait Gareth Snell
- Hansard - -

I agree that we are the only people who go around the country getting excited about boundaries, but does the right hon. Gentleman agree that people identify with small towns, villages and other communities, and that a 5% threshold would make alignment very difficult in some places? There are examples in constituencies represented by Members on both sides of the House of small towns, villages and clusters of communities, all of which identify as a community, now being split because of that very tight threshold.

Mark Harper Portrait Mr Harper
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I accept that, but we have to balance these things, which is what the boundary commissions do.