|
Post by Penddu on Sept 18, 2021 9:33:53 GMT
As I understand it: 1. None of the parties want seperate constituencies at Senedd and Westminster so a change in Senedd voting arrangements is inevitable.. 2. Most parties want to increase the number of seats in Senedd from 60 to 80-90, so a change in voting system is likely 3. Labour and Plaid have a super-majority to push through changes to voting system In my opinion the most likely outcome will be 16 x 5 member STV seats based on pairs of Westminster constituencies but with some variations possible. For example, seat containing Ynys Môn to have only 4 members. 16 x 6 = 96 is a possibility but maybe that many extra politicians will be unpopular. Pairing North Wales 8 seats =>4 looks easy, as does pairing Dyfed 4=>2; but the South would depend on who to pair Brecon & Tawe with . It could follow the Usk and join with Monmouthshire, or follow the Tawe and join with Neath. It could possibly even cross the Beacons and join Merthyr. Once that is decided the other pairings are straight forward
|
|
johng
Labour
Posts: 4,493
|
Post by johng on Sept 18, 2021 12:54:01 GMT
In my opinion the most likely outcome will be 16 x 5 member STV seats based on pairs of Westminster constituencies but with some variations possible. For example, seat containing Ynys Môn to have only 4 members. 16 x 6 = 96 is a possibility but maybe that many extra politicians will be unpopular.
This is certainly not 'most likely' as you have been told before. It would be hugely disadvantageous for Labour vs. the current system which isn't exactly friendly to us either. This is the outcome that you want. Wanting something doesn't make it most likely.
It could go either way on if there is any change. There is certainly the desire and the numbers are there to push it through. It also doesn't make sense for Westminster and Senedd constituencies to be decoupled or for the Senedd ones to be based on old boundaries.
If STV is indeed chosen, having 31x3 member seats with Ynys Mon as a 2 member seat is more likely. 95 is really pushing it though in terms of the increase in size and 80 is more realistic. Splitting each new Westminster constituency in two and retaining the 20 regional members isn't exactly unlikely either.
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Sept 18, 2021 13:47:28 GMT
As I understand it: 2. Most parties want to increase the number of seats in Senedd from 60 to 80-90, so a change in voting system is likely That doesn't follow at all. It would be really, really easy to increase the number of Senedd seats to 80, 85, or 90 without changing the voting system.
|
|
nyx
Non-Aligned
Posts: 573
Member is Online
|
Post by nyx on Sept 18, 2021 13:58:58 GMT
If STV is indeed chosen, having 31x3 member seats with Ynys Mon as a 2 member seat is more likely. 95 is really pushing it though in terms of the increase in size and 80 is more realistic. Splitting each new Westminster constituency in two and retaining the 20 regional members isn't exactly unlikely either.
20 regional members wouldn’t be enough for 64 constituency seats. You’d probably be looking at something like 36 regional members, making a 100-seat Senedd. Which is a bit big.
|
|
johng
Labour
Posts: 4,493
|
Post by johng on Sept 18, 2021 14:29:59 GMT
If STV is indeed chosen, having 31x3 member seats with Ynys Mon as a 2 member seat is more likely. 95 is really pushing it though in terms of the increase in size and 80 is more realistic. Splitting each new Westminster constituency in two and retaining the 20 regional members isn't exactly unlikely either.
20 regional members wouldn’t be enough for 64 constituency seats. You’d probably be looking at something like 36 regional members, making a 100-seat Senedd. Which is a bit big. Wouldn't be enough for what? Remember to think real world too.
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Sept 18, 2021 15:14:44 GMT
In my opinion the most likely outcome will be 16 x 5 member STV seats based on pairs of Westminster constituencies but with some variations possible. For example, seat containing Ynys Môn to have only 4 members. 16 x 6 = 96 is a possibility but maybe that many extra politicians will be unpopular.
This is certainly not 'most likely' as you have been told before. It would be hugely disadvantageous for Labour vs. the current system Quite. Okay, you lost me there.
|
|
johng
Labour
Posts: 4,493
|
Post by johng on Sept 18, 2021 15:46:45 GMT
This is certainly not 'most likely' as you have been told before. It would be hugely disadvantageous for Labour vs. the current system Quite.Okay, you lost me there. Straight FPTP would have seen Labour majorities in every election for the Assembly/ Senedd. As it is, we never have won one (though have got 30/60 in three elections). How can it be lost on you that the AMS is not exactly friendly for Labour? At the end of the day, like it or loathe it, no reform is going to get passed without Labour taking the lead.
|
|
|
Post by Penddu on Sept 18, 2021 15:57:27 GMT
In my opinion the most likely outcome will be 16 x 5 member STV seats based on pairs of Westminster constituencies but with some variations possible. For example, seat containing Ynys Môn to have only 4 members. 16 x 6 = 96 is a possibility but maybe that many extra politicians will be unpopular.
This is certainly not 'most likely' as you have been told before. It would be hugely disadvantageous for Labour vs. the current system which isn't exactly friendly to us either. This is the outcome that you want. Wanting something doesn't make it most likely.
It could go either way on if there is any change. There is certainly the desire and the numbers are there to push it through. It also doesn't make sense for Westminster and Senedd constituencies to be decoupled or for the Senedd ones to be based on old boundaries.
If STV is indeed chosen, having 31x3 member seats with Ynys Mon as a 2 member seat is more likely. 95 is really pushing it though in terms of the increase in size and 80 is more realistic. Splitting each new Westminster constituency in two and retaining the 20 regional members isn't exactly unlikely either.
I believe - and it is my personal view and not an outcome I neccessarily want - that this is the most likely outcome. Any change will require a supermajority and this will not happen if the change is less proportionate than before. I could see 31x3 STV happening but less likely. However I can not see 62 +20 AMS happening.
|
|
|
Post by No Offence Alan on Sept 18, 2021 16:05:20 GMT
This is certainly not 'most likely' as you have been told before. It would be hugely disadvantageous for Labour vs. the current system which isn't exactly friendly to us either. This is the outcome that you want. Wanting something doesn't make it most likely. It could go either way on if there is any change. There is certainly the desire and the numbers are there to push it through. It also doesn't make sense for Westminster and Senedd constituencies to be decoupled or for the Senedd ones to be based on old boundaries.
If STV is indeed chosen, having 31x3 member seats with Ynys Mon as a 2 member seat is more likely. 95 is really pushing it though in terms of the increase in size and 80 is more realistic. Splitting each new Westminster constituency in two and retaining the 20 regional members isn't exactly unlikely either.
I believe - and it is my personal view and not an outcome I neccessarily want - that this is the most likely outcome. Any change will require a supermajority and this will not happen if the change is less proportionate than before. I could see 31x3 STV happening but less likely. However I can not see 62 +20 AMS happening. I'll join the bidding with a 32+40 compromise AMS.
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Sept 18, 2021 16:23:42 GMT
Quite.Okay, you lost me there. Straight FPTP would have seen Labour majorities in every election for the Assembly/ Senedd. As it is, we never have won one (though have got 30/60 in three elections). How can it be lost on you that the AMS is not exactly friendly for Labour? At the end of the day, like it or loathe it, no reform is going to get passed without Labour taking the lead. Labour have never won as much as 3/8th of the vote!* fptp is no point of comparison in civilized discourse. Compare, for instance, the percentages needed for half the seats in Scotland. I'm not disagreeing with you on the last part - though nothing whatsoever is going to get passed if that is Labour's attitude. *regional vote
|
|
johng
Labour
Posts: 4,493
|
Post by johng on Sept 18, 2021 17:07:20 GMT
Straight FPTP would have seen Labour majorities in every election for the Assembly/ Senedd. As it is, we never have won one (though have got 30/60 in three elections). How can it be lost on you that the AMS is not exactly friendly for Labour? At the end of the day, like it or loathe it, no reform is going to get passed without Labour taking the lead. Labour have never won as much as 3/8th of the vote!* fptp is no point of comparison in civilized discourse. Compare, for instance, the percentages needed for half the seats in Scotland. I'm not disagreeing with you on the last part - though nothing whatsoever is going to get passed if that is Labour's attitude. *regional vote How often in the UK are majority governments elected with a majority of the vote? Even in 1997, a landslide year, the election was won with barely over 40% of the vote.
The regional ballot is total nonsense too. If AMS has to be retained, that part of it should be consigned to history. Instead the total vote in each region for each party on the constituency ballot should be counted.
I believe - and it is my personal view and not an outcome I neccessarily want - that this is the most likely outcome. Any change will require a supermajority and this will not happen if the change is less proportionate than before. I could see 31x3 STV happening but less likely. However I can not see 62 +20 AMS happening. I'll join the bidding with a 32+40 compromise AMS. God no. The worst of every world. Though it does make five-member STV sound more palatable. Luckily nobody is going to go for it.
|
|
|
Post by Penddu on Sept 18, 2021 17:12:07 GMT
I believe - and it is my personal view and not an outcome I neccessarily want - that this is the most likely outcome. Any change will require a supermajority and this will not happen if the change is less proportionate than before. I could see 31x3 STV happening but less likely. However I can not see 62 +20 AMS happening. I'll join the bidding with a 32+40 compromise AMS. hmmm - I dont think that will get past Labour as it would reduce their built in advantage (ie increase democratic representation) too much - and it would exaggerate the lack of accountability of regional list members
|
|
Harry Hayfield
Green
Cavalier Gentleman (as in 17th century Cavalier)
Posts: 2,761
|
Post by Harry Hayfield on Sept 19, 2021 9:38:05 GMT
Welsh Electorate (as of March 2020): 2,312,204 Average electorate for a 90 member Senedd: 25,691 Electorate per constituency per elected member: Ninety single member constituencies: 25,691 Forty five dual member constituencies: 51,382 Thirty three membered constituencies: 77,073 (current Westminster average) Eighteen five membered constituencies: 128,456 Fifteen six membered constituencies: 154,147 Ten nine membered constituencies: 231,220 Nine ten membered constituencies: 256,912 Six fifteen membered constituencies: 385,367 Five eighteen membered constituencies: 462,441 (current regional list average)
Based on those calculations I believe that a fair suggestion is halfway between the Westminster average and the regional list average, therefore I would be in favour of a 90 member Senedd with ten constituencies each electing nine members with each constituency having an electorate of 231,220 (without any forced margin of error calculations as we have seen in Westminster)
|
|
nyx
Non-Aligned
Posts: 573
Member is Online
|
Post by nyx on Sept 19, 2021 14:01:22 GMT
So it occurs to me there's a slightly different way of doing a multiple-member STV system if they did head in that direction. It's possible to do it in a way that the constituencies are the same as the principal area authorities. To minimize population deviation you'd want to have 98 Senedd members in total, with the seats ranging from 2-member seats to an 11-member seat in Cardiff. Population per Senedd member here would range from 29301 (Conwy) to 36348 (Ceredigion), or around 10% deviation from the median, which isn't ideal but still much better than the current situation. (I did it by total population thanks to not managing to find a list of principal areas by electorate size) Have attached a map of how many Senedd members each principal area would have. Naturally this wouldn't be the best for Labour given they're advantaged by the current MMP system, but if they're wanting to go for a setup that's most representative of local interests, something like this could be ideal.
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Sept 19, 2021 14:11:50 GMT
Quite agreed in principle, though an 11-member constituency (or even 8) would presumably be divided. What's the formula for finding the seat number with the smallest deviation (within set parameters - otherwise the solution is obvioudly to give everybody a Senedd seat har har)? Or did you just use trial and error?
|
|
|
Post by Penddu on Sept 19, 2021 15:23:26 GMT
I could be persuaded to base Senedd seats on County boundaries, but only following a rationalisation of Counties to 12-15 - losing the likes of Ynys Môn, Merthyr and Blaenau Gwent.
|
|
|
Post by Penddu on Sept 19, 2021 15:28:23 GMT
The regional ballot is total nonsense too. If AMS has to be retained, that part of it should be consigned to history. Instead the total vote in each region for each party on the constituency ballot should be counted.
This bit I agree with. No extra regional vote needed - just use total constituency vote. And no party selected list order - use votes cast for each individual to determine position on list.
|
|
nyx
Non-Aligned
Posts: 573
Member is Online
|
Post by nyx on Sept 19, 2021 15:30:11 GMT
Quite agreed in principle, though an 11-member constituency (or even 8) would presumably be divided. What's the formula for finding the seat number with the smallest deviation (within set parameters - otherwise the solution is obvioudly to give everybody a Senedd seat har har)? Or did you just use trial and error? Trial and error, I made a spreadsheet which gives me deviation given population. The best options after 98 seats (10.73% deviation) are 140 seats (9.30% deviation), 168 seats (7.03% deviation), 222 seats (5.82% deviation), 268 seats (3.55% deviation), etc. If you go below 98 it becomes rapidly less accurate: 90 seats (12.86% deviation), 88 seats (16.33% deviation), 55 seats (21.49% deviation). So really 98 is the only viable size without being far too inaccurate or far too large.
|
|
johng
Labour
Posts: 4,493
|
Post by johng on Sept 19, 2021 18:00:14 GMT
I could be persuaded to base Senedd seats on County boundaries, but only following a rationalisation of Counties to 12-15 - losing the likes of Ynys Môn, Merthyr and Blaenau Gwent. I'm not too sure on it, but even so, I don't think seats based on local authorities is going to get much traction.
Sadly, despite Welsh local authorities really needing rationalisation, that is even less likely.
That we have tiny unitary councils that really aren't that different to their neighbours with populations of less than 75,000 is truly unnecessary and wasteful. Local authorities should ideally be at least twice that size
It's actually very simple in most parts of the country.
The north is easiest. Wrexham and Flintshire, Conwy and Denbighshire, and Gwynedd and Ynys Mon. Job done.
It's not too bad in the south.
Merthyr and RCT, Caerphilly and Blaenau Gwent, Cardiff and Vale, and Neath Port Talbot and Bridgend seem obvious pairings.
Cardiff (Nantgarw/ Taff's Well) and Newport (Risca) snipping off the bits of nearby authorities that really would be better placed in their city's council area wouldn't be a bad idea.
Some are a bit tougher. Torfaen needs to be placed somewhere. Perhaps all with Monmouthshire. Perhaps Cwmbran and New Inn in Monmouthshire and Pontypool to Blaenavon in Caerphilly.
Then you get to Mid and West Wales which is a lot more difficult. Only Carmarthenshire, which is of decent enough size, and Powys, both too large to expand and doesn't naturally expand to the rest of the region, are potential keepers. What to do though? A 'New Dyfed' would be too big, but a Pemrokeshire and Ceredigion council would be bizarre.
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Sept 20, 2021 10:16:57 GMT
They should just have 80 members for the whole of Wales, elected in one national STV constituency. Or a national list system with allocation by D’Hondt divisors and no threshold. Or FPTP with 80 seats in a single constituency.
|
|