The Rt Hon Paul Murphy MP

Written Evidence from Rt. Hon Paul Murphy MP

I would like to offer the following thoughts on the Government’s proposals on Parliamentary Reform and its implications on Wales.

1. Having served twice as Secretary of State for Wales and as Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, I have, for over a decade, been intimately involved in constitutional changes especially with regard to devolution in Wales and Northern Ireland. During those years, the changes that came about resulted from many months, indeed years, of negotiation and ending up with consensus. The Government is currently attempting to rush through these proposals at the expense of proper scrutiny and with no attempt at consensus, this is a dangerous way to proceed on such important issues, the like of which should not be dealt with in a partisan manner.

2. Consequently, there should have been pre-legislative scrutiny of the Bill, and an attempt to reach consensus (which appears to be the case over House of Lords reform).

3. The reduction of MPs (by 50) is unprecedented. There has only been a 3% increase in MPs since the War, even though there has been a 25% increase in the electorate. An attempt to justify this by pointing to a saving of £12 million is risible. The cutback will lead to a reduction in the quality of parliamentary scrutiny of the Executive, especially if it is not accompanied by a corresponding reduction in the number of ministers. It will also impact on the accessibility of MPs for members of the public and reduce the quality of service MPs are able to offer to constituents.  

4. The creation of very large constituencies, rigidly defined by numbers, will destroy community-based constituencies since it would appear that, to create such constituencies, local ties, geography and tradition are likely to be ignored. This will further distance MPs from their constituents and impact adversely on the service that can be offered to members of the public. This is especially alarming in areas such as the south Wales valleys, where the very landscape necessitates careful consideration regarding constituency boundaries, with historical north-south communities in valleys separated by mountains. Until now, MPs have been able to represent roughly distinct communities, something which these proposals threaten.  

5. The Bill flies in the face of five hundred years of constitutional history, in so far as Wales is concerned. Wales has had a dedicated number of MPs in Parliament since the middle of the sixteenth century. This is to safeguard the rights of a small nation in a United Kingdom. In 1947 Parliament decided that Wales should have at least 35 MPs. It could be that, if primary legislative powers are granted to the Welsh Assembly, after a referendum, then the situation might change. However, I believe that the Union could be jeopardised were we to abolish this important constitutional convention.

6. The abolition of local public inquiries into boundary changes is disgraceful. It robs local people of the opportunity to express their views locally and in person, with the aim of railroading controversial proposals through more quickly. This is one of the most devastating attacks on our democracy that I have known in my political life.

15 September 2010