You can explore the proposed boundary changes here
bcereviews.org.uk
We support the principle of equalising boundary sizes, but there should have been more flexibility to help seats reflect actual communities. Allowing up to 10% difference in size between seats would have helped to minimise disruption for voters and MPs.
Reviews should also be based on a more accurate data source than the electoral register, which the Electoral Commission estimated was missing 9.4 million voters. These voters tend to be urban, younger, from lower-income groups, renters, and ethnic minorities.
We recommended using census population statistics, complemented by citizenship information provided by passport data, to build constituencies based on eligible, rather than registered voters

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Electoral Reform Society

Electoral Reform Society Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @electoralreform

7 Jun
Boundary reviews cause so much consternation with MPs as they know, with first past the post, that it is where they fall that will decide whether they win or lose their seat. thetimes.co.uk/article/4d76ba…
We made this graphic a few years ago - but look how control of our fictional town council changes between the reds and the blues as the boundaries move, even though nobody changes their vote.
Thankfully our Independent Boundary Commissions mean the boundaries aren't drawn for partisan advantage, but if we don't want lines on a map to decide our government, we need to abandon the idea that each constituency should elect one MP.
Read 4 tweets
12 Dec 20
One year on: 9 things you need to know about the 2019 General Election electoral-reform.org.uk/9-things-you-n…
1. The Conservatives won a big majority… despite only increasing their vote share by 1.3% on 2017
2. Smaller parties got crushed – as usual. Nearly 900,000 votes for the Green Party across the UK equated to exactly one Green MP.

In contrast, it took just 25,000 or so votes to elect an SNP MP (thankfully, both parties back proportional representation!)
Read 10 tweets
24 Sep 20
Democracy in the Dark – our new report from two of the UK’s leading election finance academics Dr @KateDommett
and Dr @sampower reveals a major rise in online spending during the 2019 general election – with little transparency over how it was used.
electoral-reform.org.uk/ers-reveals-th…
The £19.5 million the Conservatives raised in the six weeks leading up to the election is greater than the sum total of reported donations to all political parties in 2017 during the same period (Chart: Weekly pre-poll donations over £7,500)
2019 saw big donors that were far more willing to part with their cash than in 2017 – the total reported donations in the run up to the vote topped £30.4 million (All parties, donations over £7,500).
Read 7 tweets
8 Sep 20
Hereditary peer by-elections, ludicrous elections where there are sometimes more candidates then voters, were paused during lockdown - peers have now quietly extended the pause hansard.parliament.uk/lords/2020-09-…
Lord Newby: 'Elections were postponed in May and no local council by-elections are being held. If the only election at this point was the hereditary peers by-election in the House of the Lords, it would make us look even more foolish — if that were possible — than we already do'
It's absurd that we guarantee aristocrats seats-for-life in the 21st century. The by-elections must be scrapped as a stepping stone to real reform
Read 4 tweets
20 Aug 20
In the US, Black Americans and voters of color are less likely than whites to hold the required ID to vote and therefore are more burdened by voter ID laws, multiple studies have found.
businessinsider.com/voter-identifi…
Rules started to come in in the mid-2010s and 2020s, with claims that such laws were justified to prevent in-person voter impersonation, a type of voter fraud that multiple comprehensive studies have found is vanishingly rare to the point of being almost non-existent.
A 2014 study from Loyola University Law School professor and elections scholar Justin Levitt, for example, found just 31 credible cases of voter impersonation between 2000 and 2014, a time period during which over one billion votes were cast.
Read 4 tweets
13 Aug 20
An analysis of the many failings of the House of Lords newstatesman.com/politics/uk/20…
There are some shocking stats in this report -since April 2019, one peer only spoke three times - once to suggest invading Zimbabwe and once about a particularly good breakfast. Nevertheless, he signed in 108 times out of the 113 sitting days and collected £30,361
Three life peers claimed more than £29,000 in attendance fees and travel expenses for attending no debates, sitting on no committees and voting in less than half the listed divisions in that period, despite signing in for more than 90 days
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(