Monday, September 12, 2011

Nadine Dorries to lose her seat in the Boundary Review?

In news which will doubtless delight Dr Evan Harris, Chris Bryant MP, and others who seek the even greater liberalisation of the UK's abortion laws, it looks as though Nadine Dorries may lose her seat (Mid Bedfordshire) as part of the review of Parliamentary constituency boundaries by the Boundary Commission for England. The full proposals for the Eastern Region may be found HERE, but the relevant section is reproduced below:
Initial proposals for the Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire sub-region

27. There are currently 17 constituencies in this sub-region, only six of which (Hertford and Stortford, Hitchin and Harpenden, Mid Bedfordshire, North East Bedfordshire, South West Bedfordshire, and South WestHertfordshire) have electorates within 5% of the electoral quota. Of the remaining constituencies, ten are below the 5% limit, and one is above. We propose to reduce the number of constituencies to 16.

28. We considered whether we could leave unchanged any of the six existing constituencies that have an electorate within 5% of the electoral quota. However, in developing proposals in which all the electorates are within the 5% limit, and taking account of the reduction in the number of constituencies in this sub-region, we propose changing all the constituencies.

29. In Luton, in order to increase the electorate of the existing Luton South constituency, we propose the inclusion of the Barnfield and Saints wards of the Borough of Luton, currently in the Luton North constituency. As a consequence of this change, it is necessary to increase the electorate of the Luton North constituency by including the four Central Bedfordshire District wards that contain the town of Dunstable, which have a direct link into the constituency along the A505. To compensate for the loss of Dunstable, the South West Bedfordshire constituency is extended northwards with the inclusion of four Central Bedfordshire wards, including the town of Flitwick, that are in the existing Mid Bedfordshire constituency.

30. We noted that the electorate of the existing Bedford constituency was too small and we propose that it be extended to the west to include the Bromham and Turvey wards of the Borough of Bedford. However, this change requires us to alter the existing North Bedfordshire constituency and we therefore propose that the remainder of the Borough of Bedford be included in our North Bedfordshire constituency, together with seven wards from the District of Central Bedfordshire, including the towns of Ampthill, Biggleswade, and Sandy.

31. The electorate of the existing Hertsmere constituency is too small and we propose to increase its electorate by including the Carpenders Park ward of the District of Three Rivers. Although there is no direct road link within the constituency between the Carpenders Park area and Hertsmere, including this ward allows us not to have to make more significant alterations to the St Albans constituency to the north and the Welwyn Hatfield constituency to the north east.

32. The three Abbots Langley wards to the north of Watford and the Ashridge ward of the Borough of Dacorum are included in our South West Hertfordshire constituency. Five wards from the District of Three Rivers to the south of Watford are included in our Watford constituency, in place of the three Abbots Langley wards. We noted that this would alter the existing South West Hertfordshire constituency, which could have been left unchanged. However, we considered that the five wards from the District of Three Rivers that we propose including in the Watford constituency – Ashridge, Hayling, Moor Park & Eastbury, Northwick, and Oxhey Hall – are close geographically to Watford.

33. The electorate of the existing Hemel Hempstead constituency is too small and, to compensate for the loss of the Ashridge ward mentioned previously, we propose that the South East Bedfordshire ward of the District of Central Bedfordshire, from the existing Luton South constituency, be included in our Hemel Hempstead constituency. The electorate of the existing St Albans constituency also needs to be increased and we propose that the constituency be extended northwards to include two wards of the City of St Albans (Redbourn and Sandridge), both of which are very close to St Albans itself, from the existing Hitchin and Harpenden constituency. As a result, we propose that the existing Hitchin and Harpenden constituency be extended northwards to include three wards from the District of Central Bedfordshire (Langford and Henlow Village, Shefford, and Silsoe and Shillington), which have direct links with the existing Hitchin and Harpenden constituency.

34. Of the remaining five existing constituencies in Hertfordshire, only the Hertford and Stortford constituency has an electorate that is within 5% of the electoral quota. However, we have altered this constituency to accommodate the changes that have to be made to the other four (Broxbourne, North East Hertfordshire, Stevenage, and Welwyn Hatfield) in order for all five to have an electorate within 5% of the electoral quota.

35. We propose that the existing Stevenage constituency be extended to the north to include the Chesfield ward of the District of North Hertfordshire and to the east to include the Walkern ward of the District of East Hertfordshire. In particular, we noted that the Chesfield ward contains an area that links directly into the north of Stevenage.

36. We propose that the existing Broxbourne constituency be extended northwards by including two wards of the District of East Hertfordshire (Great Amwell and Stanstead Abbots). To compensate for the loss of these wards, we propose extending the existing Hertford and Stortford constituency to the north west by including two wards of the District of East Hertfordshire (Little Hadham, and Thundridge & Standon).

37. The existing Welwyn Hatfield constituency is extended eastwards by including three wards from the District of East Hertfordshire (Hertford Rural North, Hertford Rural South, and Watton-at-Stone). To compensate for the loss of these wards, the existing North East Hertfordshire constituency is extended northwards to include two wards from the District of Central Bedfordshire (Potton, and Stotfold and Arlesey). To reflect the change in the composition of the constituency, we propose changing this constituency’s name to Letchworth.
All of which amounts to the effective abolition of the constituency of Mid Bedfordshire. MPs will be competing against one another to secure each new seat, and an awful lot of that process will depend upon how much back-slapping, whip-satisfying and PM-appeasing each MP has demonstrated during their period in office. Mrs Dorries is not likely to be viewed favourably by many of her colleagues, and will certainly not be advanced by CCHQ (who tend to roll their eyes whenever her name is mentioned). On the bright side, it is to be observed that being ejected from Parliament has not diminished the influence of Dr Evan Harris one iota (indeed, it may even have enhanced it). Perhaps Mrs Dorries might learn a thing or two from his strategy.

27 Comments:

Blogger DanJ0 said...

I've warmed a bit to Ms Dorries now she's admitted to being in the pro-death camp. I'd rally around to try to improve her image but if Tim Mongomerie can't manage it despite his best efforts then I don't suppose anything I can do would help. She could probably reinvent herself as one of those politics and social affairs show regulars if she does lose her seat.

12 September 2011 at 19:24  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Your Grace

Can’t really see the point of your post. It’s not as if gerrymandering is involved. Many find their job at risk in these times, it’s somewhat comforting to find MPs are not exempt...

12 September 2011 at 19:30  
Blogger C.Law said...

So, you are objecting to a Conservative governement binning a Conservative seat ? !!

12 September 2011 at 19:32  
Blogger Archbishop Cranmer said...

Mr Office of Inspector General and Mr/Mrs/Miss/Ms C. Law,

His Grace has no objection to a reduction in the number of MPs. Please read the final paragraph, wherein you may discover a clue as to the purpose of the post.

12 September 2011 at 19:35  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Your Grace

Point taken – There was a time when the local party ruled supreme. Then came Central Office imposing John Taylor in Cheltenham of all places. Politics now is a filthy business; who can blame the Inspector from his present (...probably permanent ...) distancing from it all. The honesty and integrity has gone...

12 September 2011 at 19:55  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

I'm with His Grace on this. All her recent notoriety may serve her well in the end. Heck, Diane Abbott has a certain reputation but she was great as a duo with Michael Portillo ... who also had a reputation but has turned out to be rather nice all in all.

12 September 2011 at 20:38  
Blogger C.Law said...

YG,

No honorific is necessary, I am content to be recognized by name alone.

I have re-read your last paragraph and fail to see beyond the first phrase. Are you saying that the Conservative Government is happy to dispense with a safe Conservative seat for the sake of eliminating the good lady in question ? Apart from the issue at hand, with which she is teamed with an Opposition MP, has she flouted the Whip to the extent that her whole constituency needs to be done away with ?

12 September 2011 at 21:00  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

Surely it must be sinking in somewhere that invoking the 'divine' element in to political debate is a lead balloon to the argument and on a par with finding woodworm in a cripple's crutch - in other word it just won't hold up.

'she has said in an interview for a Salvation Army newspaper: "I am not an MP for any reason other than because God wants me to be. There is nothing I did that got me here; it is what God did. There is nothing amazing or special about me, I am just a conduit for God to use'

Ok - ok - I don't mean the use of the word 'cripple' as a pejorative expression, especially in these, so pc times, but simply to perhaps express a point a little colourfully.

Notwithstanding I would go as far as saying I supported her amendment on humanitarian grounds which, if combined with Louise Mensch's contribution would made a much improved and less emotional proposition.

12 September 2011 at 21:15  
Blogger Belsay Bugle said...

I love Nadine Dorries!

She's on the right side and that's good enough for me.

Our Lord separated the sheep from the goats and at the last trump I would like to believe she would be on His right hand on the side of the sheep.

12 September 2011 at 22:11  
Blogger Belsay Bugle said...

And, she's the kind of person you might die for - she has that indefinable quality of goodness that inspires people.
On the other hand I might swing for Dr Death.

12 September 2011 at 22:13  
Blogger The Way of the Dodo said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

12 September 2011 at 23:31  
Blogger The Way of the Dodo said...

Mr Cranmer said ...
"MPs will be competing against one another to secure each new seat, and an awful lot of that process will depend upon how much back-slapping, whip-satisfying and PM-appeasing each MP has demonstrated during their period in office."

Sounds like a normal day at the office in corporate business when career advancement is under consideration. Before Central Office control I guess there were a different set of backs to slap and different people to appease and satisfy.

12 September 2011 at 23:32  
Blogger The Way of the Dodo said...

Dreadnaught

It seems to me it is a great pity more people do not adopt the humility expressed by Mrs Dorries in the interview you have quoted from.

12 September 2011 at 23:35  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Is that humility? From that quote, she thinks she has a particular purpose straight from the creator and sustainer of all the atoms in our entire universe and lord of all things in the spiritual realm. I can think of another more suitable word.

13 September 2011 at 06:35  
Blogger Gnostic said...

Any chance of Witney's MP being lost in the boundary reshuffle, Your Grace?

13 September 2011 at 06:38  
Blogger The Way of the Dodo said...

DanJ0

Jesus loves you and has a plan for your life. It's up to you whether you accept or resist it.

13 September 2011 at 12:57  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dodo, Allah has one for yours too I expect. Don't turn your face away and side with Shaitan.

13 September 2011 at 13:01  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Dodo evangelised 13 September 2011 12:57

Ah sweet bird (Ernst has genuinely softened his heart towards you)
"DanJ0

Jesus loves you and has a plan for your life. It's up to you whether you accept or resist it."

and your concerned object of your kindness replied

"Dodo, Allah has one for yours too I expect. Don't turn your face away and side with Shaitan.

Discernment shows that casting pearls at swine is unprofitable and unbiblical, dear bird, and that some come here determined to stick both fingers up at us and Christ, the object of our great joy and that they actually love Satan/Shaitan and rejoice in his utilitarianism.

Discernment is EVERYTHING!

Ernst, my likkle sweet dickie bird.

13 September 2011 at 14:19  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

"Discernment shows that casting pearls at swine is unprofitable and unbiblical, dear bird, and that some come here determined to stick both fingers up at us and Christ, the object of our great joy and that they actually love Satan/Shaitan and rejoice in his utilitarianism."

I'm not a Utilitarian and you're not a Christian so spare me your bluster. I was merely showing the relative nature of monotheistic religions. Either one or none is correct and I've heard both Christians and Muslims claim their's is the one. I think none. I expect Muslims cast pearls before swine too ... in their way of thinking. But don't be offended, we can be swine together, you and me.

13 September 2011 at 15:10  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

"I'm not a Utilitarian" I am not calling you a Unitarian but a Utilitarian. lol.

You don't even know that your views and arguments define you as one. Hilarious but not unforseen.

"I expect Muslims cast pearls before swine too ... in their way of thinking." ERRm, more like they would csst you off a cliff for your, umm, how shall we say, exotic, hedonistic lifestyle.

Ernst and others merely say, Stop sinning.

"But don't be offended, we can be swine together, you and me."

Ernst was a lost sheep, not an old boar ;-) like your good self.

Think you have already made your lifetime choice, my boy and legion is inside you.

Off you go now, before your nice kind islamist friends in Leicester run you off the cliff.

E S Blofeld, my little oinker.

13 September 2011 at 15:39  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

"You don't even know that your views and arguments define you as one. Hilarious but not unforseen."

Oh for god'sake, you get worse. Is it loneliness?

13 September 2011 at 16:33  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

"DanJO Said"

"Oh for god'sake, you get worse. Is it loneliness?"

Permission to speak, sir.

Was going to open up several google accounts as different characters as DanJO baiting is as easy as fishing except you need no rod, line or bait..Merely saying 'DanJO said' in a comments post here appears to make you jump straight onto the river bank, unaided.

But then I thought' Hmmn, 'narcassistic, atheistic homosexual' and decided against..The poor lad is being tormented enough'!

Ernst, my one dimensional communicant.

or "They don't like it up 'em" as Lance Corporal Jack Jones would say in Dad's Army!
Ooooh err.

13 September 2011 at 16:52  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

"Was going to open up several google accounts as different characters"

Knock yourself out. You have a recorded history of doing that sort of stuff already here when it was much easier to do so. You're now admitting to baiting people too. This Holy Spirit you periodically pretend to have ... it's not great as a concept for you is it? You wipe your 'spiritual' chuff on it almost daily, such is your respect for it.

But anyway. I think you ought to read up on utilitarianism and try to understand its form. In particular, its reliance on a single moral principle. You don't actually know what you're talking about I think. But hey, at least you have the illusion of company when you do it, right?

13 September 2011 at 17:40  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

The character you adopt too. That's because you feel more comfortable engaging when you can pretend to be talking down to people isn't it? You're actually weighed down with an inferiority complex, I'd wager, and you feel you need to adopt the persona to compensate.

13 September 2011 at 17:47  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Ah Bless.
"'DanJO said' "hehehe.

Here likkle fishie.

A couple of paragraphs should suffice,what.

"In particular, its reliance on a single moral principle."
Anything goes..For the common good, of course, yep?

"You don't actually know what you're talking about I think. But hey, at least you have the illusion of company when you do it, right?"

Ernst said previously;

"The poor lad is being tormented enough'!"

You prove my point.

"You're actually weighed down with an inferiority complex"

It ain't heavy, it's my burden!

E S Blofeld, compensating as best he can. AAAAAHHH.

13 September 2011 at 17:59  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

*wipe* *wipe*

13 September 2011 at 18:07  
Blogger G. Tingey said...

Dodo
ESB


BothYeshua an Mahmud are dead, as we all will be, eventually.

Neiter of them has anything really relevant, to say, except historically, now.
The worthwhile parts of the so-called "christian message have a lot in common with stoic and the more enlightened parts of Alexandrine philosophy
No Big Sky Fairy is wanted, necessary or existent.

14 September 2011 at 14:49  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older