HL Deb 16 November 1971 vol 325 cc643-6

PARLIAMENTARY CONSTITUENCIES (STOCKPORT) ORDER 1971

PARLIAMENTARY CONSTITUENCIES (LONDON BOROUGH OF BROMLEY) ORDER 1971

PARLIAMENTARY CONSTITUENCIES (RICHMOND UPON THAMES, TWICKENHAM AND ESHER) ORDER 1971

PARLIAMENTARY CONSTITUENCIES (LONDON BOROUGH OF SOUTHWARK) ORDER 1971

PARLIAMENTARY CONSTITUENCIES (HERTFORD AND STEVENAGE AND HITCHIN) ORDER 1971

PARLIAMENTARY CONSTITUENCIES (BOSWORTH AND LOUGHBOROUGH) ORDER 1971

PARLIAMENTARY CONSTITUENCIES (LEICESTER SOUTH AND HARBOROUGH) ORDER 1971

PARLIAMENTARY CONSTITUENCIES (BLYTH AND HEXHAM) ORDER 1971

PARLIAMENTARY CONSTITUENCIES (BROMSGROVE AND REDDITCH AND STRATFORD-ONAVON) ORDER 1971

PARLIAMENTARY CONSTITUENCIES (SWINDON AND DEVIZES) ORDER 1971

6.25 p.m.

THE MINISTER OF STATE, HOME OFFICE (LORD WINDLESHAM)

My Lords, following the Resolution of the House earlier to-day I beg to move that the 11 Parliamentary Constituencies Orders as set out on the Order Paper be approved. It is still open for any of your Lordships to object to my moving these Motions together, and if any noble Lord wishes to speak on a particular Order, I will move that one separately.

My Lords, the Boundary Commission for England's Interim Review Report, which was submitted on October 1, 1971 under Section 2(3) of the House of Commons (Redistribution of Seats) Act 1949, recommends changes in 25 Parliamentary constituencies to take account of alterations to local government boundaries or borough wards which have occurred since January 1, 1969. It has been the practice to group together the constituencies affected by an interim review, and in this case 11 draft Orders have been prepared and are now laid before Parliament for approval.

These changes are on a modest scale. In all, a total of 11,850 electors are affected by the recommendations, spread out over 25 different constituencies. The recommendations are not controversial. No representations were made when they were published as provisional proposals. The only comment I need add is that these recommendations by the Boundary Commission for England do not anticipate local government reorganisation. Most constituencies will be affected by the new local government boundaries, but the alignment of constituency boundaries will depend on the next general review by the Commission. My Lords, I beg to move.

Moved, That the Draft Parliamentary Constituencies (Abingdon and Newbury) Order 1971, laid before the House on November 2, be approved;

That the Draft Parliamentary Constituencies (Stockport) Order 1971, laid before the House on November 2, be approved;

That the Draft Parliamentary Constituencies (London Borough of Bromley) Order 1971, laid before the House on November 2, be approved;

That the Draft Parliamentary Constituencies (Richmond upon Thames, Twickenham and Esher) Order 1971, laid before the House on November 2, be approved;

That the Draft Parliamentary Constituencies (London Borough of Southwark)

Order 1971, laid before the House on November 2, be approved;

That the Draft Parliamentary Constituencies (Hertford and Stevenage and Hitchin) Order 1971, laid before the House on November 2, be approved;

That the Draft Parliamentary Constituencies (Bosworth and Loughborough) Order 1971, laid before the House on November 2, be approved;

That the Draft Parliamentary Constituencies (Leicester South and Harborough) Order 1971, laid before the House on November 2, be approved;

That the Draft Parliamentary Constiuencies (Blyth and Hexham) Order 1971, laid before the House on November 2, be approved;

That the Draft Parliamentary Constituencies (Bromsgrove and Redditch and Stratford-on-Avon) Order 1971, laid before the House on November 2, be approved;

That the Draft Parliamentary Constituencies (Swindon and Devizes) Order 1971, laid before the House on November 2, be approved.—(Lord Windlesham.)

6.27 p.m.

LORD BESWICK

My Lords, in moving these Motions en bloc the noble Lord, Lord Windlesham, referred to what was said earlier. He reopened the issue whether it was possible to challenge one or more of the 11. I say again that there seems to be so much doubt about what is the correct procedure and what is intended by the Procedure Committee that I am sure that, through the usual channels, this matter should be clarified and we should get a proper understanding of it. On the merits of the Orders, we have no reason to challege any one of them, and we support what the noble Lord has proposed.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER (LORD GRENFELL)

My Lords, in pursuance of the recommendation of the Procedure Committee made in their Report of February 3 last, which was agreed to by the House on March 2 last, a single Question on a number of Motions relating to Special Orders may be put only with the unanimous leave of the House. If any noble Lord objects, separate Questions are put as is necessary to meet his objection. If, therefore, there is no objection from any noble Lord, I shall put the one single Question as follows: That the Parliamentary Constituencies Orders as listed on the Order Paper and laid before the House on November 2 last be approved.

On Question, Motion agreed to.