Peter Luff's anger over boundary review rejection in commons

5:05pm Tuesday 29th January 2013 in News By Tom Edwards

Mid-Worcestershire MP Peter Luff Mid-Worcestershire MP Peter Luff

A WORCESTERSHIRE MP has hit out after attempts to change parliamentary boundaries and cut the number of politicians suffered a death blow in the House of Commons.

MPs have voted by 334 to 292 to delay the changes until 2018 at the earliest.

If the changes were forced through now the West Worcestershire seat held by Harriett Baldwin would have been renamed Malvern and Ledbury, while the Mid-Worcestershire one held by Peter Luff would have been called Evesham at the next General Election.

Malvern Wells would have been included in the Evesham seat to take its population to 77,000 in line with other constituency sizes across the country, and the overall number of MPs nationwide cut from 650 to 600.

The Government’s defeat was largely down to a revolt from Liberal Democrat MPs, who followed the lead of deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg.

The result was announced this afternoon.

Mr Luff said: “It’s disappointing, but not surprising. It sends out the wrong message that politicians can’t be trusted.

“The size of the commons is too big, companies are downsizing and shedding jobs and they would have been expecting us to do the same."

Bill Wiggin, Tory MP for North Herefordshire, said: "I voted for it because we need to reduce the number of MPs - but that's what happens when the Lib Dems vote against something."

The changes, which were aimed at cutting the cost of MPs and levelling out constituency sizes, were likely to have resulted in the Conservatives gaining up to 20 extra seats.

Comments(9)

Lew Smoralz says...
5:58pm Tue 29 Jan 13

With the majority of our political decisions being made by the Brussels government, we simply don't need this ridiculous number of MP's.

Give the Cons their due, they did make an attempt, but the Liberals reneged on their previous deal.

The UK government is now just a regional council for Brussels, and there is not enough work (work?) for this many MP's to do.

No pay rise until they reduce their numbers appropriately!

Report this post »

induby says...
6:34pm Tue 29 Jan 13

whilst in one way I agree we don't need so many MP's, and it would save money, giving any party an advantage by moving the boundaries is not in the public interests, and had it been an advantage to any other party it would not have even been considered, a level playing field is the only acceptable way, and personally considering the absolute mess they are making of this country and how much damage they can do in the remaining 2 years, i would be mortified to think that they would have any kind of upper hand

Report this post »

Mrfade says...
9:16pm Tue 29 Jan 13

Thankfully Peter Luff will be standing down at the next election, and hopefully will not change his mind. Neither he nor Bill Wiggin would be missed if they went tomorrow, nor would any of their mates. They appear to have little interest in the welfare of their constituents. Working people are having to go to food banks to make ends meet. Never mind boundary changes,it’s cuts cuts and more cuts. Luff, Wiggin, Jesse Norman, Garnier, Walker blah blah are happy for their constituents to pay £14,000 pa for University tuition fees, yes the Lib Dems let us down, but it was your idea. Local MPs will not intervene to stop the building of a £1 billon unnecessary PFI incinerator, which all their taxpaying constituents will be funding for 25 years.
So why does Mr Luff suddenly keep popping up? Mr Luffs observation is right we do not trust politicians. You are out of touch with the reality of life for most of us. Rant over... for now.

Report this post »

RobertR says...
9:21pm Tue 29 Jan 13

Who's woken him up?. We never hear anything from him normally. Haven't seen him since he was voted in. Has been totally silent on local flooding issues
At least Spicer took an interest and wasn't a bad MP except for his politics.

Report this post »

RobertR says...
9:24pm Tue 29 Jan 13

Who's woken him up?. We never hear anything from him normally. Haven't seen him since he was voted in. Has been totally silent on local flooding issues
At least Spicer took an interest and wasn't a bad MP except for his politics.

Report this post »

Maggie Would says...
11:38pm Tue 29 Jan 13

I am very pleased that this idea was rejected. I live East of the Severn, North of Worcester city, but under the proposed boundary changes I would have become a part of Malvern constituency. There's no logic in that at all.

Report this post »

brooksider says...
11:32am Wed 30 Jan 13

Maggie Would wrote:
I am very pleased that this idea was rejected. I live East of the Severn, North of Worcester city, but under the proposed boundary changes I would have become a part of Malvern constituency. There's no logic in that at all.
Mr Luff said: “It’s disappointing, but not surprising. It sends out the wrong message that politicians can’t be trusted."

Yes that's right Peter; We don't trust you.

Report this post »

Doogie 46 says...
11:46am Wed 30 Jan 13

If I remember correctly, didn`t New Labour revise the boundaries in their larger solid constituencies, creating two or three safe Labour seats where there was only one - making it virtually impossible for the conservatives ever to gain a working majority.
I think induby missed that little trick by the "pretty straight kind of guy"

Report this post »

DarrenM says...
6:04pm Wed 30 Jan 13

We don't need any of them - Just issue Cameron an EU rubber stamp and he can do it all by himself and save us a fortune.

They are going to be decimated at the next election, the only question is who by? Hopefully not labour!

Report this post »

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree