`  : So really, your problem is not so much with the Parliamentary boundaries, but it is anti-Scottish and anti-Welsh bias. Wales and Scotland between them have over 15% of the population - about 1 in 7. This is hardly ``tiny``.   :We are a United Kingdom - not every power is devolved to Scotland and Wales, and so they are entitled to equal representation. There is some merit in ``English Votes for English Laws`` though I wouldn't support exactly what the Conservatives are proposing, but Scotland and Wales (an NI for that matter) are entitled to send MPs to Westminster, and that's as it should be, until one or more of those countries votes to leave the Union.   :How do you work out your ``ten-point advantage``? My guess is it's just a figure plucked from thin air. The facts are: 1. Scotland and Wales collectively are over-represented by about 13 seats compared to England 2. The vast majority of English and Scottish seats are within about 10% of the average 3. The average Labour seat is 5% smaller than the average Conservative seat 4. The majority of Labour seats have a lower turnout than the majority of Conservative seats, so a safe Labour seat contributes fewer votes to the national total of Labour votes than a safe Conservative seat contributes to the national total of Conservative votes.   :I hardly see that this gives Labour a 10% advantage. Can you provide some facts to back up your arguments as I have provided to back up mine? Or perhaps give some examples of which seats have been ``rigged`` and how they should be drawn more fairly to help reach this apparent 100-seat Conservative majority that we should now have?`