Parliamentary Constituencies (Scotland) Order 1995 (Hansard, 27 March 1995)

§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey
You cannot change it now!

§ Lord Rodger of Earlsferry
My Lords, my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Scotland received the fourth periodical report of the Boundary Commission for Scotland on 15th December 1994. The report recommended changes to parliamentary constituency boundaries in Scotland. I wish, at the outset, to thank the commission under its deputy chairman, Lord Davidson, for all the work it undertook. Again, the commission was presented with a challenging timetable. It fulfilled the task with admirable speed.
When my right honourable friend the Secretary of State received the report, he gave careful consideration to its recommendations. He decided to lay the draft Order in Council which is before the House today without making any modification to the commission's recommendations. The order has been considered by the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments and was approved in another place. If the draft order is approved by your Lordships today, my right honourable friend the Secretary of state will submit it to Her Majesty in Council.
The new constituencies will take effect at the next general election. Any by-election in the intervening period will not be affected by the new arrangements and will be held on the existing boundaries. Since the last review was completed in 1983, as I said a few moments ago the Boundary Commission Act 1992 has been passed. That set a deadline of 31st December 1994 for the completion of the review. The review has been completed in time. The 1992 Act also reduced the length of time between each review in Scotland from between 10 to 15 years to between eight to 12 years, as in Wales.
1436 This will allow general elections to be held using constituencies which are based on—as far as possible—up-to-date electorates.
The Act also had a further implication in Scotland with the commission having to consider local authority boundaries which were in place on 1st June 1994. This meant that the commission could not take into account the effects of reorganisation of local government in Scotland. The commission decided at the outset of its review that Scotland was adequately represented with 72 constituencies. It therefore did not propose to increase the number of seats. As is required by statute, the commission calculated that the electoral quota for Scotland for the purposes of the review was 54,569. That was a total electorate in Scotland on 16th February 1992—the date the commission gave notice of its intention to proceed—divided by the current number of constituencies.
To maintain separate constituencies for the islands areas and also to retain Scotland's representation of 72 constituencies with constituencies of roughly equal electorates, the commission decided to cross regional boundaries. The commission decided to pair Lothian and Border regions together and Central and Tayside regions together. To ensure full consideration was given to all the commission's proposals, in mainland Scotland local inquiries were held in each region, or combination of regions, and with one exception they were all conducted by sheriffs principal who were appointed by the Secretary of State. Most of the recommendations made by the assistant commissioners were accepted by the commission.
Much criticism has been directed at the commission's decision to use regional electoral divisions as its building blocks for the constituencies. In its report the commission explains that these were the only up-to-date electoral arrangements available to it. The commission declined to use a mixture of the old district wards and the new electoral divisions as these could not be used universally because they often did not fit with one another. The commission has recommended a reduction of one parliamentary constituency in Strathclyde and an increase of one in Grampian. A reduction has taken place in the City of Glasgow owing to the decline in the electorate there.
I am glad that the commission has recognised that the existing range in electorate is wholly unacceptable. Discounting for the time being the islands areas—the commission correctly considers that there are strong geographical reasons why they should be considered separately—the electorates range from 84,000 in Gordon to just over 31,000 in Caithness and Sutherland constituency. Under the proposals recommended by the commission this range of electorate has been reduced to between 67,000 and 42,000. The commission's recommendations will also mean that 69 per cent. of the constituencies, compared with 42 per cent. at present, will fall within 10 per cent. of the 1992 electoral quota. Some people have said that too much emphasis has been placed on numbers. However, had the commission paid more attention to numbers, the range in the electorate would have been even closer.
1437 As with all reviews of this nature, criticisms will always be made. We must acknowledge, however, the difficulty faced by the commission in applying the rules for redistribution of seats which contain sometimes conflicting requirements. Under the current statute the commission is able, should it so wish, to undertake interim reviews. I am sure that the commission will give some thought to the contrast which will arise between the recommended constituencies and the new local authority councils. A decision on whether or not to conduct any future interim review is, however, a matter for the commission. The boundary commission is an independent body which has conducted its review with full public consultation. For this reason I commend the draft Order in Council to your Lordships. I beg to move.

§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey
My Lords, the noble and learned Lord the Lord Advocate has fallen straight into my trap. He did not repeat the speech made in another place. Instead he is guilty of what Fowler's Modern English Usage calls elegant variation. He cannot win whatever he does. As with the previous order, we commend the arrangements whereby the independence of the boundary commissions is secure. As I should have done in relation to the previous order, we congratulate the boundary commissions for both Wales and Scotland on the way they have carried out their work which has met with widespread approval from those particularly in another place who are most concerned with the recommendations.
But, again, the position in Scotland is that we have an order which will be shortlived. It will apply for the next election but it is most unlikely to apply without modification for any further election. The noble and learned Lord the Lord Advocate told the House that the Boundary Commission for Scotland had greater freedom with regard to crossing boundaries than the boundary commissions for England and Wales. But although it has taken the opportunity to cross regional boundaries in two cases by combining Lothian and Borders on the one hand and Central and Tayside on the other, it has taken the decision—which it need not have taken—to stick to regional electoral divisions. That may not matter too much in most of Scotland where the electoral divisions are relatively small—say 3,000 or 4,000—but in Strathclyde, for reasons that I do not fully understand (although I am sure my noble friends on the Front Bench understand them very well) these divisions are very large. Often they comprise 17,000 or 18,000. That certainly has led to anomalies. It has led to a particular anomaly as between Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley on the one hand and Ayr on the other hand. The Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley constituency, which is 10 times the size in area of the Ayr constituency, also has a very much larger electorate because the electoral district next to Ayr, which includes Alloway, is so large at 17,000 that if it were transferred to Ayr from the other constituency the imbalance in population would be even 1438 greater. The boundary commission did not feel that it was able to take Alloway away from the rest of that electoral division.
Therefore, there are anomalies still in the way these matters are considered. Of course, as with Wales, the ongoing reform—if that is the right word—of local government in Scotland will affect regional boundaries and boundaries of individual districts and will make it necessary to have the interim orders which the noble and learned Lord referred to in his speech. But, again, as regards the principle of these orders and as regards the independence with which the boundary commission has carried out its duties, we have no quarrel.

The Earl of Balfour
My Lords, I hope I may be permitted to ask my noble and learned friend one question. Assuming that this order in respect of Scotland is accepted, will the boundaries be on an Ordnance Survey map of the area? That is quite important to people who are trying to find out exactly where the boundaries lie. I know they appeared in the much older maps. I am perhaps asking an unfair question, not having given my noble and learned friend any notice of this, but I would like to have an answer at some time.

§ Lord Rodger of Earlsferry
My Lords, I do not think I can say that my noble friend's question is unfair. It is challenging and it is not one I can answer. I just do not know whether it is the intention to put the boundaries on the Ordnance Survey. I shall certainly find out and write to my noble friend while taking this opportunity to say that I am sure all noble Lords are happy to see him back in his place after his recent illness.
The noble Lord, Lord McIntosh, while welcoming the order, made points again about the particular problems which arise. I acknowledge that in particular in Scotland, with its regional electoral divisions, there have been anomalies. Indeed, as he knows, there were two judicial reviews brought, one arising out of Ayr in particular. But in the end the decision of the boundary commission was upheld. I think it recognises that the solutions are not ideal, but they partly arose because the local government boundary commission had not yet finished its work on the district wards. For that reason in future it will be open to the boundary commission to undertake further interim reviews of such scope as it considers appropriate. In the meantime, I commend the order to the House.