Plaid Cymru

Written Evidence from Plaid Cymru

Date of alternative vote referendum

Plaid Cymru believe that a referendum on the parliamentary voting system should be held on a day on which no other Parliamentary or Assembly election takes place.

This position has been reached after studying the reports by Gould and Arbuthnott, with the former specifically noting the dangers of hosting multiple elections on the same day and recommending that elections should not be combined.

Concerns include:

· the number of ballot papers and confusion amongst the general public;

· difficulties in having a full and clear debate on each issue to be voted upon;

· administration difficulties for electoral services departments in councils; and

· the ability to process electors at busy polling stations during peak periods.

We reject the suggestion by the Deputy Prime Minister that cost savings should be the over-riding consideration in organising a referendum date.

However, if cost is to be the over-riding consideration, then it makes no sense for Welsh electors to go to the polls more than once in Spring 2011 and the proposed three votes in Wales (referendum on further powers for the Welsh Assembly, Assembly elections, Westminster voting reform) should take place on the same day.

Voting Method

Plaid Cymru believe that the Single Transferable Vote (STV), with multi-member constituencies, is the most appropriate method for elections. This ensures a greater proportion of votes are used to elect a Member, and fewer are ‘wasted’ or unused to elect a representative.

Research by the Electoral Reform Society suggests that the final results under an Alternative Vote would be little different to those achieved under First Past the Post.

Although the Alternative Vote would be a more acceptable system, it is not the fairest or most proportional electoral system.

It is a false choice to suggest that these are the only two options that should be made available to electors.

We recommend a multiple choice ballot paper, including ‘alternative vote’, ‘first past the post’ and ‘single transferable vote’ options, with electors using the alternative vote, marking their first, second and third preferences to determine which electoral system should be employed.

This would give electors a clear and distinctive choice between electoral systems, rather than a limited choice, as at present.

We support the use of Single Transferable Vote in elections where it produces the most proportional result.

Reduction in constituencies and equal votes

We do not believe that the case has been well made for a reduction of constituencies and MPs in the United Kingdom Parliament from 650 to 600.

We believe it is misleading to conflate a reduction of Members of Parliament with discussion regarding fair or equal weighted votes.

The introduction of a UK-wide principle of all constituencies being of a size within 5% of the UK electoral quota will have a negative impact upon Welsh representation in the UK Parliament, with the likelihood of 10 fewer constituency seats at the time of the next election.

We are a party which firmly believes in democracy and practice a ‘one-member, one-vote’ system for all internal elections.

We do not believe that attempts to equalise the number of electors in each constituency necessarily ensures fairness and equality of votes.

There are difficulties in both principle and practice.

It is likely that areas of generally low socio-economic status will have fewer residents per head of population upon the electoral roll. Those absent from the electoral register will therefore become ‘non-people’, and will mean that MPs may have the same official number of electors but a vastly different electorate and, possibly, caseload, defeating the object of the exercise.

Ensuring that constituencies remain within these very small parameters will be a major task and will require more regularly updated population figures, often across local authority boundaries, and regular updates, leading to confusion and a lack of identification with their constituency, which may change on an election by election basis.

This introduction of constituency boundaries based firstly on population, rather than geography, history or practical issues will very probably merge un-related areas as super-constituencies across local authority boundaries.

The principle of equal votes has not been discussed in sufficient detail.

Firstly, the maintenance of a single elected member constituency will still lead to significant numbers of ‘wasted’ votes.

Secondly there is the concept of equality. The think-tank Demos recently published a ‘power map’ of the United Kingdom illustrating in which areas individual votes held most sway. Unsurprisingly, it was generally the case that more affluent parts of the UK were also the most powerful under these criteria. Although each eligible adult in the UK may have a vote, those votes are not necessarily equal in their outcome.

We recommend that the current percentage of seats allotted to each constituent part of the United Kingdom be retained and that any change to the number of MPs, either in an upward or downward manner, be reflected equally.

The executive and the legislature

A decrease in the number of Members of Parliament without a proportional decrease in the number of MPs on the payroll will mean a greater influence upon the activities of the House of Commons by the executive.

The governing parties cannot argue that they are giving MPs a greater freedom through, for example, the Backbench Business Committee, whilst increasing the percentage of the payroll vote.

The effect of further devolution upon Welsh representation at Westminster

We hope that there will be a successful referendum on the transfer of Part IV powers of the Government of Wales Act 2006 from Westminster to the National Assembly for Wales in spring 2011.

There has been no explicit link between the plans to reduce representation in Parliament, either from a Welsh or UK level, and the powers residing in the devolved administrations.

We believe that while significant powers are held at Westminster which impact upon Wales, including defence, international affairs and macro-economic fiscal powers then representation of Wales at Westminster should not be further curtailed.

Preserved constituencies

We would like to recommend that the island of Ynys Mon/Anglesey should be added to the list of preserved constituencies in the Parliamentary Voting and Constituencies Bill, noting its traditional separation from mainland communities.

Decoupling of Westminster and Assembly constituencies

The proposed changes in the number of Welsh constituencies and MPs in the House of Commons made it essential to de-couple those from the National Assembly for Wales constituencies, as it was originally set out in the Government of Wales Act 2006.

We welcome this change because this connection would mean that fewer Members of Parliament elected from Wales would have reduced the number of Assembly Members. This reduction would have had a consequential negative effect upon the ability of the National Assembly to scrutinise legislation and the executive.

However, we draw attention to the possibility of widespread confusion in 2015 should the number of Westminster constituencies in Wales decrease.

This would lead to three election ballot papers for electors upon the same day for three different electoral areas (Assembly constituency, Assembly regional list and Westminster constituency) for two different legislatures and perhaps using three different electoral systems.

We believe that these elections should not be held upon the same day.

This may also lead to confusion and additional administrative work for electoral services departments at local authorities and the need to find a significantly higher number of candidates for multiple elections, due to election rules regarding standing for regional lists and constituency seats and the presumed end of members being elected to two parliaments.

Government of Wales Act 2006

The proposed changes to the Government of Wales Act 2006 illustrate that, even apart from Part III and Part IV (which relate to the transfer of powers to the National Assembly for Wales), other issues in the Act should be addressed.

We specifically draw attention to the rules restricting candidates standing for an Assembly constituency and on Assembly regional lists, and the ability of the National Assembly for Wales, not the Secretary of State, to vary the date of Assembly elections.

Fixed term parliaments

We welcome the notion of fixed term parliaments, which would bring the UK Parliament in line with other elected bodies, such as the European Parliament, the National Assembly for Wales and local councils.

However, the case has not yet been made for why the House of Commons should be elected on five year intervals.

Previously the UK Government has been given up to five years to govern before calling a new general election, but the common expectation has been that the electoral cycle (as evidenced in the devolved administrations and many local authorities) is a four year period.

The UK Government should reconsider proposals for a five year House of Commons to bring this into line with the devolved administrations, or, alternatively, change the lifespan of devolved administrations to fit with this new ‘norm’.

Failing to establish a coherent short-term cycle for elections will lead to different issues and outcomes being decided in the cycle, possibly impacting strongly upon representation in the institutions being elected. This will lead to a distortion of politics.

As previously noted, the Gould Report into the elections in Scotland in 2007 recommended that, although there were arguments about the importance of voter turn-out, elections should not be combined.

Professor Robert Hazell of the Constitutional Unit at University College London has suggested that the fixed date for UK General Elections should be in Autumn so as to avoid timetable clashes with other elections. Consideration should be given to this suggestion.

September 2010