<

Election outcome	New boundaries	Old boundaries
LAB MAJORITY	LAB LEAD 4.3%	LAB LEAD 3%
LAB MOST SEATS	CON LEAD below 2.2%	CON LEAD below 4%
CON MOST SEATS	CON LEAD above 2.2%	CON LEAD 4%
CON MAJORITY	CON LEAD above 7.4%	CON LEAD 11%

The LDs are MORE likely to vote for the boundary changes

One massive issue festering in the background at Westminster is the change to the boundaries which according to the projections from YouGov’s Anthony Wells at UKPR bring in a revised set of notional outcomes, see table above, linked to the GB vote share secured by the main two parties.

The CON objective in pushing for equal size seats, fewer MPs overall and a speeded up boundary review process was to try to redress some of what the party saw as the bias against it in the electoral system.

In 2005 Tony Blair won a comfortable LAB majority with 36.2% of the GB vote and a lead over CON of 3%. In 2010 Cameron’s party secured 37% of the vote with a lead over LAB of 6.3% and were 19 seats short of an overall majority.

The big number for CON from the changes is the reduction from an 11% lead requirement for an overall majority to 7.4%. LAB on the other hand would need a 4.3% margin for a majority rather than 3%.

LAB continue to do better because of the average lower turnouts in its heartlands. The changes can only be implemented by a motion being passed by the house of commons – something that’s likely to happen from October next year onwards.

The question is whether the yellows will vote for them and leading Lib Dem figures have warned that any backs-sliding on Lords reform could lead to the LDs voting against. The coalition agreement talked about the structure not the detailed proposals that come from the boundary commissioners.

I have good news for the blues. If the reds still have general election majority winning poll leads at the time of the vote it will be in the strategic interest of the LDs to make it harder for Labour.

Voting for the changes will achieve that.

Clearly Clegg’s party benefits from another hung parliament.

Mike Smithson @MikeSmithsonOGH