|
Post by Wisconsin on May 30, 2022 11:46:39 GMT
The section on voting systems shows Jane Dodds (Lib Dem) opposing closed lists and pushing for STV. Siรขn Gwenllian (PC) shared her preferences, but decided to compromise.
|
|
|
Post by LDCaerdydd on May 30, 2022 13:20:06 GMT
Editorial criticising the proposed system and querying why the recommendation of the expert panel was dropped:
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on May 30, 2022 13:25:45 GMT
Editorial criticising the proposed system and querying why the recommendation of the expert panel was dropped: I always thought the point of appointing an expert panel was to ignore its recommendations.
Seems that way.
|
|
ilerda
Conservative
Posts: 1,025
|
Post by ilerda on May 30, 2022 13:51:14 GMT
Editorial criticising the proposed system and querying why the recommendation of the expert panel was dropped: I always thought the point of appointing an expert panel was to ignore its recommendations.
Seems that way.
Which is ironic given that most expert panels are deliberately chosen with the understanding in advance of what their conclusions will be.
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on May 30, 2022 13:55:10 GMT
I always thought the point of appointing an expert panel was to ignore its recommendations.
Seems that way.
Which is ironic given that most expert panels are deliberately chosen with the understanding in advance of what their conclusions will be. Has a nice circular feel to it.
|
|
CatholicLeft
Labour
2032 posts until I was "accidentally" deleted.
Posts: 6,245
|
Post by CatholicLeft on May 30, 2022 18:17:14 GMT
Which is ironic given that most expert panels are deliberately chosen with the understanding in advance of what their conclusions will be. Has a nice circular feel to it. I still get invited to take part in Ministry of Justice panels but realise that when I express an opinion that shows up the lack of knowledge of those in charge of the committees, they just smile, nod, thank me warmly, and ignore me.
|
|
|
Post by ๐ดโโ ๏ธ Neath West ๐ดโโ ๏ธ on Jun 2, 2022 10:00:14 GMT
Huw Irranca-Davies admits the gender quota bollocks is liable to be chucked out by the Supreme Court and that if they're not careful they'll lose the rest of their proposals with it: www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-61664266
|
|
cibwr
Plaid Cymru
Posts: 3,558
|
Post by cibwr on Jun 2, 2022 13:57:14 GMT
The likelyhood is 2 bills, one on the general principles of the scheme and a second one for zipping the lists to achieve gender balance.
|
|
Harry Hayfield
Green
Cavalier Gentleman (as in 17th century Cavalier)
Posts: 2,758
|
Post by Harry Hayfield on Jun 8, 2022 18:31:16 GMT
On a motion proposed by Huw Iranca Davies MS (Lab, Ogmore) that "This Senedd agrees with the report of the Senedd Reform Committee", the Senedd voted: YES 40, Abstain 0, NO 14, therefore the motion is carried.
The next Senedd election in 2026 will elect 96 members from 16 constituencies (the 32 constituencies being created by the Welsh Boundary Commission which will be paired by the Welsh Local Government Boundary Commission) with six members in each constituency elected by d'Hondt PR.
|
|
|
Post by LDCaerdydd on Jun 19, 2022 17:31:30 GMT
Welsh Labour not 100% behind the govtโs plans
Special Conf 2nd July to discuss.
|
|
johng
Labour
Posts: 4,491
|
Post by johng on Jun 20, 2022 10:32:12 GMT
Welsh Labour not 100% behind the govtโs plans I think the plan came as a shock to quite a few people.
|
|
|
Post by aargauer on Jun 20, 2022 11:22:06 GMT
Huw Irranca-Davies admits the gender quota bollocks is liable to be chucked out by the Supreme Court and that if they're not careful they'll lose the rest of their proposals with it: www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-61664266That's the first time I have read about this proposal. Absolutely insane and totally undemocratic. If the women's equality party get traction would they have to have an equal number of men as women? And with the justice for men or whatever they are called? It surely has to be up to the electorate who is elected.
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Jun 20, 2022 11:38:23 GMT
Huw Irranca-Davies admits the gender quota bollocks is liable to be chucked out by the Supreme Court and that if they're not careful they'll lose the rest of their proposals with it: www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-61664266That's the first time I have read about this proposal. Absolutely insane and totally undemocratic. If the women's equality party get traction would they have to have an equal number of men as women? And with the justice for men or whatever they are called? It surely has to be up to the electorate who is elected. I think if the parties wish to enable this via the construction of their candidate lists, then fine, but I'm no fan of STV in any case, and this would just make it even more confusing purely at a practical level. It certainly shouldn't be compulsory as a means of achieving better balance of representation.
|
|
|
Post by stb12 on Jun 20, 2022 12:03:54 GMT
That's the first time I have read about this proposal. Absolutely insane and totally undemocratic. If the women's equality party get traction would they have to have an equal number of men as women? And with the justice for men or whatever they are called? It surely has to be up to the electorate who is elected. I think if the parties wish to enable this via the construction of their candidate lists, then fine, but I'm no fan of STV in any case, and this would just make it even more confusing purely at a practical level. It certainly shouldn't be compulsory as a means of achieving better balance of representation. Indeed, I don't have an issue with parties using gender balancing methods for their own internal selections even if I'm personally unconvinced of the merits at times. But making it comulsory electoral law just seems ridiculous. What if parties genuinely can't get enough women to choose to stand for somewhere, do they just have to force people?
|
|
ricmk
Lib Dem
Posts: 2,282
|
Post by ricmk on Jun 20, 2022 12:28:05 GMT
Like many attempts at electoral reform it's easy to agree on big principles and at a high level, but when it comes down to getting cross-party majorities on legal detail, it all becomes a minefield (see coalition House of Lords reform, Canadian electoral reform etc)
In this case there are 3 specific issues which will make thrashing out the detail tricky: 1) They commissioned an expert panel to come up with recommendations, who didn't just say 'do this' but reported with a series of options they thought were viable. The system now agreed goes against all of these. So anyone who either preferred those options, or simply thinks we shouldn't ignore all the experts, has reason and excuse not to support this. 2) Reading through the report, they have ducked a lot of the tricky issues (the recommendation reads 'the Executive should think how to address X') Most notably there is no agreement over how to handle vacancies / by-elections, and no way they can fudge this - that would have to be set clearly in law as part of the revised system. Get ready for big arguments in the areas not settled. 3) Anyone in a local area of strength surrounded by poor areas for their party has self-interest as a reason not to support, and I can see plenty of examples in the possible paired constituencies.
Personally I think this will be hard enough to get through, even without the dodgy gender rules and they would be wiser focussing on getting the core though, and putting those gender rules into a later 'Phase II' now. They've rightly picked up the gender aspect is likely to go to the Supreme Court so should be a separate bill if they want to push that through. Likely to be easier to do once the new system is in place and one electoral cycle has been run.
Although I don't think it's a brilliant proposal they have ended up with, it's better than what they have right now in my view, and I want to believe it is possible to make significant electoral reform happen. So I am following with interest.
|
|
|
Post by ๐ดโโ ๏ธ Neath West ๐ดโโ ๏ธ on Jun 20, 2022 14:16:12 GMT
2) Reading through the report, they have ducked a lot of the tricky issues (the recommendation reads 'the Executive should think how to address X') Most notably there is no agreement over how to handle vacancies / by-elections, and no way they can fudge this - that would have to be set clearly in law as part of the revised system. Get ready for big arguments in the areas not settled. This actually surprises me. Seeing as they're basically proposing using their existing regional list system with more regions and zero constituencies, there's an obvious do-nothing option here.
|
|
|
Post by greatkingrat on Jun 20, 2022 14:43:26 GMT
Another potential issue with the gender rules is that a party might have two female incumbents in one constituency and two male incumbents in another constituency. So either people will have to swap around, or one of the incumbents will have to be 3rd on the list, potentially not getting elected.
|
|
|
Post by aargauer on Jun 20, 2022 15:29:43 GMT
All the way back to 1999, at least 24 (and as high as 31) of the 60 members of the Welsh Parliament have been women, so its not like there has been a huge gender imbalance anyway.
|
|
|
Post by ๐ดโโ ๏ธ Neath West ๐ดโโ ๏ธ on Jun 21, 2022 9:11:07 GMT
Another potential issue with the gender rules is that a party might have two female incumbents in one constituency and two male incumbents in another constituency. So either people will have to swap around, or one of the incumbents will have to be 3rd on the list, potentially not getting elected. Indeed, one might speculate that this plays a part in Buffy Williams being quite so upset. Presuming that she's drawn the same map as everyone else, it's her versus Jane Hutt.
|
|
ricmk
Lib Dem
Posts: 2,282
|
Post by ricmk on Jun 21, 2022 9:34:46 GMT
Quick list of all the areas not agreed in the outline report. I was wrong yesterday that filling vacancies was on the 'not agreed' list - it was how to handle a MS who changes party mid-term. Some of these are trivial, but some sound tricky, especially as the committee has failed to reach a clear position.
Recommendation 4. Should the size of the Welsh Government increase with more assembly members? Recommendation 5. Should there be more deputy presiding officers with a larger Senedd? Recommendation 6. Should there be more than four Members of the Senedd Commission with a larger Senedd? Recommendation 10. What should be the consequences of a Member changing their political party if elected through a closed proportional list system? Recommendation 13. Should we enable election on the basis of job sharing? Recommendation 14. Should two Members be allowed to job share a particular role such as a Committee Chair? Recommendation 15. Should legislative diversity quotas be introduced beyond gender? (e.g. ethnicity, disability)
|
|