Fewer lines, less interference

 

Given everything else the readers of this fine paper are currently contending with, the subject of lines on maps might seem a little, well, curious.

I would normally agree. However, in this case, those lines will determine who represents us in the House of Commons from the next general election onwards. This in turn will influence the quantity and quality of legislation designed, in most cases, to restrict the rights of the individual to think and act for themselves.

In June, the Boundary Commission for England (BCE) published its initial proposals for new constituency boundaries.

At first sight, it looks as if there's good news for Suffolk in that we'll gain an extra voice in Parliament as the number of MPs representing communities in the county notches up to eight from the current seven.

There are only minor changes to Ipswich, Suffolk Coastal and Waveney, but wholesale shifts for the centre, north and west of the county. It is proposed that Haverhill will be combined with Halstead in Essex to create a rare cross-county boundary seat. 

There will also be a vast, arguably an unwieldy, North Suffolk constituency – stretching from Bungay and the villages to the north of Saxmundham to the east of Thurston and as far west as Bardwell!

For political armchair generals, this is manna from Heaven: months and months of argument and debate are on offer about the relative merits of these proposals and the various alternatives offered up by others.

To be honest, for me, as a believer in small government and the primacy of the individual, this represents a massive deckchair reordering exercise, although I am in full agreement with the entirely fair aim of levelling-up the number of voters in each constituency nationwide.

The key issues which determine achieving the minimal amount of state control and interference in our lives are both beyond the remit of the Boundary Commission and beyond the self-interest of the state itself.

Firstly, the principle of 'no taxation without representation' remains totally neglected. Businesses are taxed at both the national and local level to the tune of many, many billions each year. Yet businesses have no vote and, therefore, democratically no voice.

This is especially true of small and medium-sized enterprises that cannot afford the lobbying heft of the corporates. I'd like to see every business registered at Companies House being given the vote on an ascending scale depending upon the number of employees they have.

Secondly, it's no exaggeration to state that we are over governed in this country. The quantity of elected representatives is, beyond a certain point, rarely proportionally related to the quality of legislation.

During the last Parliament, there was a vague proposal to reduce the number of constituencies, but inevitably the special pleading by the parties scotched that effort.

MPs' salaries aside, the cost of democracy in this country as funded by you, the taxpayers, is eye wateringly high. 

Through a range of mechanisms, including 'Short Money' and policy development grants, opposition parties receive tens of millions of pounds per year for, in effect, doing what they were elected for - ie opposing Government policies.

Surely that's what monies raised by party supporters should be used for?

Not surprisingly, proposals in the 2015 spending review to reduce Short Money grants allocation by 19% failed and have never been resurrected.

At the same time, there needs to be a cleaning out of the tiers of government sitting underneath Parliament. The state loves complexity as that undermines accountability, allows inefficiencies and patronage to fester and makes comprehensive reform intimidating for all but the most determined administration.

Although recent changes have resulted in the number of borough and districts being reduced, there is still much more winnowing to do. In a recent speech, the prime minister hinted that devolution might be on the agenda once again.

I'd ideally like to see the County, Boroughs and Districts scrapped and replaced with  a single  unitary authority covering all of Suffolk. 

And that would mean far fewer councillors and a reduced cost of running the councils as a result. What's not to like?

In short, lines on maps do matter - as long as they serve to shrink the interfering and ineffective state and liberate citizens and businesses to take on more responsibilities. 

 

First published on Friday, August 6, 2021 - my latest piece for www.suffolkfreepress.co.uk & www.dissexpress.co.uk