Let the great boundary rejig commence

[jimrtex]

despite what you said above about faster population changes in the states, I do think we should do the reviews every ten years based on census data rather than the electoral roll,

You could do 'em once a year, strictly speaking, revising only those areas now violating some tolerance threshold (though this makes little sense if you want to keep the size of parliament fixed.) In the US - unlike the UK, might I add - every ten years is really far too late.

Australia does this without any problem, and they even have an elected upper house of Parliament.

[jimrtex]

Australia does this without any problem.

Australia has no intermediate units of the approximate relative size, traditional importance, or even (even though it's nothing to write home about in Britain either) political power of British Counties. Redistribute seats constantly to fairly even populations, with a fixed number of seats, and you'll be breaching these boundaries a lot.

The British Parliament has delegated its local authority for Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland for the most part, and that for England is practiced at a general level.  There is unlikely to be such a distinct local interest for most matters that is considered by Parliament.
England does have local government entities for local matters.

You could apportion seats among the 9 English regions, Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland on a continuing basis as is done in Australia, which would trigger a regional redistribution, and also trigger whenever a certain share of the constituencies within a region were outside perhaps 10% bounds.   Alternatively, you could simply weight an MPs votes by his electorate.