Boundary battle

After all, the Commission is only having to rush through plans to cut the number of MPs by 50 to honour a deal brokered by David Cameron when he allowed the Lib Dems a referendum on electoral reform.

This is why there are anomalies such as the new-look North West Leeds seat, a predominantly urban constituency, stretching out to the upper reaches of the Nidd Valley near Pateley Bridge.

However the hamlets in one of the finest parts of the Yorkshire Dales have little affinity with the suburbs of one of Britain’s largest cities and are likely to be ignored by a future MP who will prioritise those areas where there are the most voters to be courted.

It is just one of many examples that prompted the Dewsbury peer’s outburst.

Once again, Baroness Warsi’s criticisms miss two fundamental points. Firstly, the proposal to reduce the number of MPs was a knee-jerk response to the expenses crisis rather than part of a wider plan to improve the governance of Britain nationally and locally.

Second, the proposals will involve considerable upheaval for little financial gain at a time when the economy, and policies to stimulate growth, should be the most pressing priority.

This is not going to happen if MPs, and their respective parties, are squabbling over boundary changes which bear little relation to those town, city and county borders that help determine the performance of an area, and the distribution of future funding.

As such, it is time that Baroness Warsi used her influence to question the viability of changes which will not bring politicians closer to the people they purport to serve.