After strong criticism from the Conservative Group and having already burned up about £10,000, the 'no money' Council has agreed not to spend a six figure sum of Cornwall's money on a hopeless legal battle to fight sharing an MP with Devon.
However, it will still press on to attend meetings of the Boundary
Commission in Devon and Cornwall next week to complain about this.
Unfortunately, this is also a waste of Cornwall's money as the
Boundary Commission has already explained to the Council. The
Boundary Commission has no power to
address this issue.
To continue to protest about this, the Council needs to decide
whether it is better to have only 5 rather than 6 MPs representing
our interests at Westminster. This would make a Cornish vote worth
about 17% less than votes in English counties, never mind other parts
of the UK.
This is the plan the Council has currently been working on. Has
it got a mandate to do this? It could also have some pretty strange
effects on constituency borders within Cornwall.
Or, does it tell the Government that it cannot reduce the cost of
politics by cutting MPs from 650 to 600, so that Cornwall can keep 6
MPs? Has it a mandate for what would only be a short term fix for
Would it be better to use the political influence of Cornish MPs
to campaign for more money (or powers) for Cornwall rather than
pleading a special case that Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly (total
voters about 394,000) should have 6 MPs when we are only 1600 voters
over the limit for 5?
So far, perhaps recognising the difficulty, the Council has not
discussed it with the people of Cornwall. Consequently the Council
has no mandate but is just having a general shout – at the wrong
people; because The Boundary Commission has no power to address