Unequal parliamentary constituencies

Nature

Legislative seats which are apportioned according to population and administrative districts may give unequal representation. Where candidates from different parties contest an election within the limits of a constituency, minority interests may suffer, never winning an election, but having a considerable proportion of votes overall. Unequal distribution of legislative seats may lead to political conflict as a result of exploitation, or to apathy and alienation. In certain countries this problem is countered by a system of proportional representation.

Background

The issue of unequal parliamentary constituencies gained prominence in the 19th and 20th centuries as expanding suffrage and demographic shifts exposed disparities in representation. Landmark cases, such as the UK’s “rotten boroughs” and the U.S. Supreme Court’s “one person, one vote” rulings, highlighted the global prevalence of malapportionment. Ongoing urbanization and population changes have since intensified scrutiny, prompting international debates and reforms to address persistent imbalances in legislative representation.

Incidence

In the UK, for example, the Ulster Unionist party (whose members are concentrated in one region, Northern Ireland) have virtually the same number of seats in the House of Commons as have the Liberal and Social Democratic parties combined (with votes approaching those of the main Conservative and Socialist parties, but with a wide regional distribution of members).

Claim

Unequal parliamentary constituencies are a grave threat to democracy, undermining the principle of “one person, one vote.” When some constituencies have far more voters than others, it gives disproportionate power to a select few and silences millions. This blatant inequality distorts representation, breeds public distrust, and perpetuates injustice. Addressing this issue is not just important—it is absolutely essential for fair, legitimate, and effective governance. Anything less is a betrayal of democratic values.

Counter-claim

The fuss over unequal parliamentary constituencies is vastly overblown. Minor differences in constituency sizes have little real impact on election outcomes or democratic fairness. Far more pressing issues—like voter turnout, campaign finance, and political accountability—deserve our attention. Obsessing over constituency boundaries is a distraction from genuine reforms. In reality, unequal constituencies are a technicality, not a crisis, and certainly not a problem worth the energy and resources currently devoted to it.