I RESPOND to Austin Murphy’s letter (Sept 30) relating to the proposed changes to current the parliamentary boundaries.
The whole content of the letter read as if it had been drafted by the Labour Party central office, for existing sitting Labour MPs affected by the proposed new parliamentary constituencies, worded to play upon the elector’s emotions by suggesting that there will be adverse affects on “communities”.
Communities are not synonymous with parliamentary boundaries: until twenty to thirty years ago, communities developed and centred on the old traditional industries eg mining, steel, car manufacturers, farming, fishing etc, and since the demise of these previously vast industries, the wards of metropolitan and local authorities have been the focal point of current communities. Parliamentary constituency boundaries have never been the embryo of current English communities.
As a person living in Sandal, my parliamentary constituency is that of Hemsworth, to which I have no community allegiance whatsoever. My sense of community is centred on the south ward of Wakefield Council (Sandal and Agbrigg).
I suggest that Mr Murphy reads Chris Mullins’s (retired Labour MP for Sunderland) diaries, where he will read of the waste, hypocrisy and overstaffing of government departments with under-utilised parliamentary under secretaries, which provides some fuel for the need to reduce the number of members. I believe 600 MPs is still too many.