Fewer MPs?

David Cameron thinks so, apparently.

I myself have long favoured a system whereby the country was divided into one hundred constituencies, with as near as possible to equally sized electorates, and with their boundaries straddling the United Kingdom’s internal borders wherever possible. Each constituency would elect six MPs, with each voter voting for one candidate by means of an X, and with the six highest-scoring candidates declared elected at the end. Each part with at least one sixth of seats would be entitled to at least one sixth of Ministerial positions generally, at least one sixth of Cabinet positions specifically, at least one sixth of (greatly more powerful) Select Committee seats generally, and at least one sixth of Select Committee Chairmanships specifically. The deposit would be replaced with a requirement of nomination by five per cent of registered voters, also applicable to other elections. And the House of Commons would have a fixed term of four years.

At the same time, there would be a new and powerful second chamber, the Senate, taking over the existing powers of the House of Lords, and also exercising the same revising powers in relation to devolved bodies. The Senate would have an absolute veto over any Bill passed by the House of Commons (or any devolved body) without a vote, including any EU legislation passed by negative resolution of the House of Commons. And the Senate would have the power to require a referendum on any Bill already designated as constitutional for the purposes of the procedures of the House of Commons.

Each of the English ceremonial counties, Scottish lieutenancy areas, Welsh preserved counties and Northern Irish counties (99 units in all) would elect six Senators, who would have to have been registered voters there throughout the previous five years, with each voter voting for one candidate by means of an X, and with the six highest-scoring candidates declared elected at the end. The whole country would elect a further six Crossbenchers by the same means. The Senate would have a fixed term of six years, and Senators would have the same remuneration and expenses as MPs.

Furthermore, in the course of each Parliament, each party would submit a shortlist of the two candidates nominated by the most branches (including those of affiliated organisations where applicable) to a binding ballot of the whole electorate at constituency level for the Prospective Parliamentary Candidate, at county level for the Senate Candidate, and at national level for the Leader. All the ballots for Prospective Parliamentary Candidate would be held on the same day, all the ballots for Senate Candidate would be held on the same day, and all the ballots for Leader would be held on the same day. Each of those ballots would be held at public expense at the request of five per cent or more of registered voters in the constituency, the county, or the country, as appropriate.

Each candidate in each of these ballots to have a tax-free campaigning allowance out of public funds, conditional upon matching funding by resolution of a membership organisation. The name of that organisation would appear on the ballot paper after that of the candidate. There would be ban on all other campaign funding, and on all campaign spending above twice that allowance.

In the course of each Parliament, each party would submit to a binding ballot of the whole electorate the ten policies proposed by the most branches (including those of affiliated organisations where applicable), with voters entitled to vote for up to two, and with the highest-scoring seven guaranteed inclusion in the next General Election Manifesto. All of those ballots would be held on the same day, and each of them would be held at public expense at the request of five per cent or more of registered voters in the country. The official campaign for each policy would have a tax-free campaign allowance, conditional upon matching funding by resolution of a membership organisation. The name of that organisation would appear on the ballot paper after that of the policy. There would be ban on all other campaign funding, and on all campaign spending above twice that allowance.

And a ballot line system would be introduced, such that voters would be able to indicate that they were voting for a given candidate specifically as endorsed by a smaller party or other campaigning organisation, with the number of votes by ballot line recorded and published separately.

None of which, I expect, is what Cameron has in mind.

Meanwhile, if Brown really is as ruthlessly anti-Tory as is often suggested, then here are a couple of things that he might do in the 18 months or so before the next General Election.

One is simply to legislate for each of Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and the nine English regions to have an equal number of MPs, divisible by three. In Scotland, Wales, the three Northern regions and London, these would continue to be elected by First Past The Post. But in Northern Ireland, the three Southern regions and the two Midland regions, they would "experimentally" be elected by each voter voting for one candidate and top three being declared elected at the end. Once in place, this could never be brought to an end.

The other is slightly subtler. Three hundred constituencies with equally-sized electorates would elect three hundred MPs by means of First Past The Post. Each of the English ceremonial counties, Scottish lieutenancy areas, Welsh preserved counties and Northern Irish counties (99 units in all) would elect a further three MPs by each voter voting for one candidate and top three being declared elected at the end. And each of Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and the nine English regions would elect a further five MPs by each voter voting for one candidate and top five being declared elected at the end. This gives a grand total of 657 MPs, in perpetuity. In view of the extreme safety of many of the county and regional seats (including all 195 in England) while the use of First Past The Post for the others kept the present party formations in existence, county and regional seats might reasonably be restricted to those who had been registered voters in that county or region throughout the previous five years.

The Lib Dems and others would undoubtedly vote for either of these, in view of the massively increased advantage that either would give them.

Don't put it past him.