HOUSE OF COMMONS (REDISTRIBUTION OF SEATS) ORDER, 1951 (Hansard, 20 February 1951)

§ LORD SHEPHERD

My Lords, although these Orders are believed to be non-contentious, it might be desirable, in 390 view of the titles which have been given to them, for me to give a little information concerning their as they stand. Your Lordships will be aware that until quite recently redistribution of seats in the House of Commons took place only at odd dates and after prolonged intervals. At the conclusion of these undertakings, I think the nation has had a feeling that it has undergone something in the nature of a major operation. Under the House of Commons (Redistribution of Seats) Act, 1949, however, Commissions of a permanent character were appointed for each of four constituent parts of the United Kingdom; and as a result, we shall receive Orders of this description following upon their recommendations for changes, as the need arises. Only a few sentences will be required from me to explain these particular Orders.

The first deals with the City of Leeds. It is concerned with the Parliamentary boundaries in that city, following upon changes in municipal ward boundaries by Order in Council. The Order proposes to bring the constituency boundaries into line with the boundaries of groups of wards as they now exist. Consequently, so far as the Parliamentary change is concerned, it is merely straightening out what otherwise would have been an embarrassment. Orders Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 deal with the extended municipal boundaries of Bootle. Carlisle, Doncaster, Gloucester, Norwich North and South Shields respectively, and bring the new Parliamentary constituency boundaries into line with the municipal boundaries. The last-mentioned order, No. 9, deals with Torrington, and includes therein the Island of Lundy which, through some error, did not come into that constituency at the last general redistribution of seats. It is. proposed that these Orders shall come into operation on April 1 this year, but they will not affect any Parliamentary Election until the next General Election. There are two other points I would mention. First, in not a single locality affected by these Orders has there been any objection raised to the Orders. Secondly, when the Orders went through another place they met with a most friendly reception. In view of that I therefore hope that it will be to the convenience of your Lordships' House if I now move them en bloc. I beg to move.