tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6274602978151973604.post4603223640761243321..comments2024-01-07T06:24:51.616+00:00Comments on the widow's world: In Which I Agree with the @Conservatives...oneexwidowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06574357521257043728noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6274602978151973604.post-32515932232842407612013-01-30T19:35:04.988+00:002013-01-30T19:35:04.988+00:00I just don't understand why you think a reduct...I just don't understand why you think a reduction in the number of MPs would be a good thing - either with or without other reforms.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6274602978151973604.post-63128864855575082232013-01-30T13:04:47.205+00:002013-01-30T13:04:47.205+00:00@ Anonymous
I've edited and amended the post ...@ Anonymous<br /><br />I've edited and amended the post slightly to make my position clearer - but I wasn't really setting to argue specifically for a reduction in the size - more that this could be achieved but without other reforms it would be counter-productive.<br /><br />For example: I argue that reducing the number of MPs increases the number of electors per MP - the opposite of increasing Local Accountability. But, if those electors also elect members of a Second Chamber, then this is nullified as an issue.oneexwidowhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06574357521257043728noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6274602978151973604.post-18052993963969164592013-01-30T10:28:34.864+00:002013-01-30T10:28:34.864+00:00What a strange article.
It puts the case against ...What a strange article.<br /><br />It puts the case against reducing the number of MPs quite cogently, and doesn't (as far as I can see) mention any arguments in favour of doing that, except the one of cost, which is dismissed as spurious. Then it carries blithely on with <i>"So I whole-heartedly agree with the Conservatives that we should reduce the size of the House of Commons."</i><br /><br />Why?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com