Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Newton of Braintree (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 9 February 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill on Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill.


Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill

Briefly, I ask my noble friend why, if this river and estuary are to be written into the law in this way, others should not be? We have already had arguments about the Mersey. I live in Essex and the Thames is at least as substantial a division between Essex and Kent, I suspect, as the Tamar is between Devon and Cornwall. One can think of a number of other rivers including the Severn, which is a big division between the south-west and Wales, so why are we going to pick out only one? The problem with most of these rivers—I am afraid I do not know the West Country well enough to know whether it is thus with the Tamar—is that a dividing factor at the mouth, where that is so big, becomes a uniting factor further inland, where towns straddle the same river: the Thames, the Severn or whatever it might be. It is not rational to build this kind of consideration into this kind of legislation.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
725 c260 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Access Disability Boundary commissions Constituency size Constituencies Alternative vote Administration Absent voting Cornwall Inquiries Isles of Scilly Referendums Ministers Polling stations Reviews Ynys Môn South Lanarkshire Brecon and Radnorshire
Legislation
Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill 2010-12
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk