Scottish Parliament and the AV Referendum

Written evidence from Helen S E Parker and Frank Geogeghan-Quinn (AV 13))

This submission is made on behalf of Take Back Parliament Edinburgh (Fairer Votes Edinburgh), one of the local action groups that form part of the UK-wide Take Back Parliament campaign. This campaign, which has no party political affiliation , brings together a coalition of different groups and organisations concerned with electoral reform such as Unlock Democracy, Electoral Reform Society, Friends of the Earth, NUS and Ekklesia, and aims to change the voting system for UK elections so that all parties have representation in Parliament according to the number of votes they receive. We believe that the Alternative Vote would be a much improved system to the current one and are therefore campaigning for a 'Yes' Vote in the forthcoming referendum. Since Take Back Parliament emphasises the importance of electoral reform being led by the people, we are also calling for a Citizens’ Convention to decide on future political reforms, including a decision on whether the UK should move to a proportional system in the longer term. Around 200 people participated in a Take Back Parliament demonstration in Edinburgh on May 15, and approximately 50 people have registered their interest in our action group since we held the first meeting in July.

On the question as to whether people in Scotland have been adequately consulted on the issue of the Scottish Parliament elections and a referendum being held on the same day, we wish to raise the following points:

· Any consultation with people in Scotland that may have taken place before the referendum date was announced was certainly not very visible: we understand from media reports that there was little or no formal consultation with our representatives in the Scottish Parliament, and we are definitely not aware of any attempts to consult more widely at this stage. When May 5 2011 was first mooted as a likely date, we noted a strong public perception, reinforced by the media, that holding the referendum on this date would show disrespect to the Scottish electorate because it w ould deflect attention from the parliamentary elections . We are extremely concerned that the lack of conspicuous consultation may have had an adverse influence on the voters’ attitude to the referendum (irrespective of their voting intentions).

· It is not apparent whether the recommendations of the Gould report to avoid multiple elections on the same day were taken into account and rejected – for example, because of other evidence, disagreement with the premise that this would diminish voter confusion or because the referendum was regarded as different from election of representatives - or whether they were simply disregarded. We consider this unfortunate and would welcome further explanation.

The referendum date was one of the main topics discussed at Take Back Parliament Edinburgh’s first meeting on 14 July 2010. Participants expressed a variety of views both for and against holding the referendum to coincide with the parliamentary elections. Points made in favour included the reduced costs to taxpayers and indeed to campaign groups; the likelihood of a higher turnout (this was seen as important in itself but also to counteract attempts to bring in a threshold for a percentage of eligible electors, to which we are strongly opposed) and the juxtaposition of different voting systems with a referendum on a change of voting system encouraging voters to think about what aspects of voting systems they value. Many felt that holding the parliamentary elections and referendum on the same day would be unlikely to cause voters any particular confusion: examples of countries such as the US where different types of election are often on the same day were quoted. Points made against included contravention of the recommendation of the Gould report and the risk that less attention would be paid to Scotland’s parliamentary elections because of the tendency for media coverage to be biased towards UK issues. These points are summarized here for information; however, it is now our foremost concern to ensure that the referendum goes ahead smoothly. We are aware of a large number of other issues that may hold up proceedings and d o not think debate about the referendum date is sufficiently pressing that it should contribute to this potential delay .

Several Take Back Parliament Edinburgh supporters have indicated that they find the area on which we are invited to give views overly specific and would value the opportunity to make representation to the Scottish Affairs Committee on other issues relating to the AV referendum and its implications. For example, views about matters such as the substance and wording of the referendum itself, what should happen about boundary reviews, and the timetable for elections in 2015 are equally relevant to informing debate during the Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill Committee stage in the House of Commons. We should therefore welcome information and advice on how to register these .

Thank you very much for inviting and considering our opinions.

Helen S E Parker and Frank Geogeghan-Quinn

On behalf of Take Back Parliament Edinburgh (Fairer Votes Edinburgh)

4 October 2010