Representative democracy?: Geography and the British electoral system

Members of parliament in the United Kingdom are elected to represent geographic constituencies, but how are these defined and what are the consequences for representative democracy? Following the Conservative party’s large majority in the 2019 general election, some have suggested that drastic changes to Britain’s constituency boundaries could be afoot, affecting every corner of the UK. As populations grow and move, it is commonly accepted that changes are necessary, but these are fraught with difficulty, and the political consequences may be drastic. This major new survey reveals how constituency mapping has changed since 1832. Tackling issues such as the evolution of an independent procedure, first introduced in 1944, and the new rules for redistributions introduced in 2011, it illustrates how election results have favoured some political parties over others. Is our electoral system and the way it is mapped fit for purpose?\nFrom the Back Cover\nMembers of Parliament in the United Kingdom are elected to represent geographic constituencies; but how are these defined and what are the consequences for democracy?
Tracing the UK's system of parliamentary representation from its origins in the thirteenth century right through to the present, this comprehensive new survey reveals how a system initially designed to restrain the power of monarchs gradually evolved to serve their interests, then those of political parties before the twentieth century 'settlement' of an independent process for revising the constituency map.
That settlement is now under pressure, with the traditional pattern of constituencies representing communities about to be replaced by one which elevates numbers above community. Advanced under the slogan of 'making votes equal', this new regime promises fairness yet, as the authors show, is destined to fail to address the disproportional and biased election results that have long been a feature of UK politics.
Concluding with a detailed consideration of the ways in which various parts of the UK have embraced alternatives to first-past-the-post over the last two decades, this book serves as a timely reminder that the needs of political parties do not always coincide with those of us, the electors.