Unlock Democracy backs campaign to engage with Modernisation Committee to clean up politics

Unlock Democracy has backed my motion to engage with the Modernisation Committee on issues including second job restrictions for MPs and creating job descriptions for parliamentarians.

The Modernisation wants to hear from people about what additional ideas they have for work it could take forward, covering the strategic aims of: driving up standards; improving culture and working practices; and reforming Parliamentary procedures to make the House of Commons more effective.

Policy Motion 1: Working with the Modernisation Committee

Proposer: Richard Wood

Seconder: Rebecca Warren

The AGM notes:

The Government has revived the House of Commons Modernisation Committee. This is a cross-party committee of MPs that will consider ‘reforms to House of Commons procedures, standards, and working practices’.

The Committee’s remit overlaps with aspects of Unlock Democracy’s ‘Cleaning Up Politics’ campaign, such as setting limits on MPs’ second jobs and establishing a job description for MPs. Cleaning up politics was ranked as Unlock Democracy’s second most important campaign by supporters in the 2023 Annual Survey.

Unlock Democracy has started establishing a relationship with the Committee. Director Tom Brake questioned the Committee’s chair, Lucy Powell MP, at the Labour Party Conference about the Committee’s work on MPs’ second jobs.

The Committee has agreed to circulate our paper on MPs second jobs, and has invited us to respond to their call for views from stakeholders later in the year.

The AGM welcomes that:

Unlock Democracy has identified this Committee as important for achieving many of our campaign goals

Unlock Democracy has begun building a relationship with the Committee

Unlock Democracy has compiled a list of campaign asks for the Modernisation Committee to consider

The AGM calls on Unlock Democracy:

To respond to the Committee’s consultation with stakeholders

To get in touch with MPs on the Committee with suggestions for improving the House of Commons’ procedures and standards

To involve Unlock Democracy’s members and supporters in efforts to influence the Committee

To work with other organisations in the democracy sector, where beneficial, to influence the Committee.

What does the Electoral Reform Society say about dual mandates in Scotland?

By Richard Wood

Dual mandates are back in the spotlight again with two sitting SNP MPs, Stephen Flynn and Stephen Gethins, preparing possible bids for joining the Scottish Parliament as MSPs.

Both Douglas Ross (Conservative) and Katy Clark (Labour) have held dual mandates in this parliamentary session at Holyrood.

Double jobbing is bad for representative democracy as the roles of MSP and MP are full-time jobs in and of themselves. Constituents ultimately deserve full-time representatives not part-timers.

Momentum is shifting on the issue with the Scottish Parliament’s Standards, Procedures and Appointments Committee discussing the matter only last week in relation to the Scottish Elections (Representation and Reform) Bill: Stage 2. The Modernisation Committee in Westminster also has scope for discussing the issue in its remit on outside employment.

What do the Electoral Reform Society say on the issue?

The Electoral Reform Society, formed in 1884, campaigns for democratic rights and a democracy fit for the 21st century.

The organisation submitted the below response to a request from the Scottish Parliament’s petitions committee in 2023.

Being a councillor and an MP or MSP seems reasonable over a
temporary transition period. However, we are concerned that given the limitations in the capacity of MSPs, ‘double jobbing’ adds an extra strain. Therefore we would like to see the legislation here brought into line with The Senedd where the rules are that when a member is elected and holds a dual mandate they either have eight days to resign as a sitting MP, or they have to take a leave of absence from a seat they hold in the Lords, or if a Regional Councillor they can remain in post provided the expected day of the next Regional Election is within 372 days.

Having a full-time paid job in the Lords, Commons or Holyrood should be mutually exclusive, and we would advise against MSPs being allowed to hold a dual mandate. There are no clear advantages to voters or to the
operation of democratic institutions and one big disadvantage – the
capacity of an individual to fulfil the responsibilities of both roles. Such
an allowance seems to be in the interests of politicians rather than those they represent.

The Electoral Reform Society is right to support abolishing dual mandates. It also recognises the need for a short grace period for MPs or MSPs to pick where they wish to represent their constituents before being removed from the parliament they reject.

Image free via Pixabay

Stephen Flynn MSP-MP in 2026? A dual mandates ban is overdue

By Richard Wood

Westminster leader Stephen Flynn plans to stand to become an MSP at the 2026 Holyrood elections. Flynn intends to remain an MP, if he wins the Scottish Parliament seat of Aberdeenshire South and North Kincardine, implying he would hold a dual mandate by representing seats in both Holyrood and Westminster until 2029.

Dual mandates – no matter which party holds them, and Scotland’s four main party’s have held them at one time or another – are bad for representative democracy.

Being an MSP or and MP is a full-time job. Constituents deserve representatives working full-time for them, not juggling multiple mandates and travelling across the country all the time. No matter which party they come from, whether it is the Conservatives’ Douglas Ross, the SNP’s Stephen Flynn or any of the former Labour and Lib Dem dual mandates holders at Holyrood.

https://twitter.com/StephenFlynnSNP/status/1856235419936931843?t=NDBCzeng2IdW042lMN0olg&s=19

Westminster has rightly banned MPs from holding elected office in the Northern Irish Assembly. And there is an effective ban of MP-MSs for Wales with exceptions in the case of an impending Senedd election.

More widely, dual mandates are banned in many democracies across the world. Even France, long known for its representatives holding dual mandates – and even triple mandates – has clamped down on the practice in recent years.

Members of the European Parliament are also forbidden from holding roles in their national parliament alongside their MEP roles.

Stephen Flynn MP has every right to stand for the Scottish Parliament. But it’s surprising he’s made the decision to do so while explicitly saying he’s remain an MP if he were to be elected.

Westminster’s Modernisation Committee has an opportunity here to recommend preventing MPs from holding seats in the Scottish Parliament concurrently.

In the meantime, Stephen Flynn MP should reconsider his intentions to hold his Westminster seat if elected to Holyrood.

Image by Roger Harris (This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported license)

Talk of term limits for list MSPs is nonsense – reform Holyrood’s voting system instead

By Richard Wood

Every now and again someone suggests introducing term limits for list MSPs. The argument being that lost MSPs are supposedly not elected by voters unlike their constituency counterparts.

However, list systems are normal in the democratic world and it is valid for someone to be elected as part of a list. When someone votes on the party list, they aren’t just blindly voting for said party, they are backing a slate of candidates.

That said, while term limits aren’t the answer, AMS lists aren’t perfect.

The real problem with the list element at Holyrood is two-fold.

First of all lists are closed, meaning voters have no say over what order candidates are ranked in. Tinkering with AMS is one option to improve Holyrood by introducing an open list element as part of the voting process. This is is used in Bavaria’s similar MMP system to empower voters at the ballot box.

But that only takes you so far. The second problem is the two-tier nature of MSPs. Having constituency and list MSPs creates a two-tier system. While in theory the two types of MSPs have the same jobs, this isn’t always the case in practice. Furthermore, it ends up creating attitudes that list MSPs aren’t real MSPs.

Instead of tinkering with AMS, although opening up lists would be a welcome step, Holyrood’s electoral system needs a major overhaul.

AMS provides broadly proportional parliaments but there is significant room for improvement. Switching to the Single Transferable Vote would end the two-tired element, strengthen proportionality (if designed fairly), and empower voters to rank candidates. An open list system where parties are ranked preferentially, and voters can vote for individual candidates within parties is also an alternative.

The Scottish Parliament is now over a quarter of a century old. AMS has done well to ensure that what happens in the ballot box leads to representative outcomes but there are fairer alternatives. The next Scottish Government and Parliament should address the democratic deficits at Holyrood to upgrade Scottish democracy for the next 25 Years and beyond.

STV in local government: the latest from Wales

By Richard Wood

The previous Welsh government, an effective coalition between Labour, the Liberal Democrats and an independent, introduced legislation that gives Welsh local councils the opportunity to switch from First Past the Post to the Single Transferable Vote ahead of the 2027 elections. The deadline for councils to change to Proportional Representation is fast approaching: 15 November 2024.

The Local Government and Elections (Wales) Act 2021, which enables councils to make changes, was a great step forward as it allows the opportunity for significant upgrades to Welsh local democracy. However, unlike when Scottish councils were upgraded to use STV from 2007, there is no automatic switchover in Wales. While this is an imperfect process to reform and reformers are fighting an uphill battle, there is a route to change.

Of the three councils to hold consultations for making the switch, all three consultations show majority support for reform. But what’s next? And are any of the councils actually saying goodbye to First Past the Post?

What happened in Gwynned?

Over 70% of residents who completed the consultation supported switching to the Single Transferable Vote in this Plaid Cymru majority council. A vote followed, and while a majority of councillors backed change, STV will not be adopted in Gwynned as a two-thirds majority was required.

Campaigners have done fantastic work engaging communities and growing support for STV but on this occasion the Gwynned council will not be switching to STV.

And what about Powys?

The Lib Dem-Labour-Green run council of Powys has parallels with Gwynned. Over 60% of residents said they favoured STV in the council’s consultation. This should come as no surprise due to the considerable failings of FPTP in the area. However, as in Gwynned, councillors voted to retain the status-quo. A total of 21 voted for STV while 33 backed FPTP.

Ceredigion: the last hope for STV in Wales?

In Ceredigon, 67% of respondents to the consultation backed the Single Transferable Vote. What’s clear is that when people are asked if they want a fair voting system, majorities in Wales are supportive of reform but the bar for reform) change is set very high – a two-thirds majority of councillors elected by a system that favours them.

The Electoral Reform Society reports that Ceredigion councillors will be voting on their electoral system on Thursday 14 November.

UPDATE (14 November 2024): while a majority of councillors backed the motion (18 to 17), the two-thirds majority was not met, meaning that all Welsh councils will use FPTP in 2027).

The Plaid Cymru Council has a chance of becoming the only one of 22 Welsh councils to use STV in the 2027 local elections.

Let’s hope the efforts of electoral reform campaigners in Wales pay off and Ceredigon leads the way for further change across Wales.

Political make up of Ceredigion council:

🟢 PLAID CYMRU 21

⚪ INDEPENDENTS 9

🟠 LIB DEMS 7

⚫ GWLAD 1

Total councillors: 38

Threshold required to switch to STV: 26

Nationally, both the Liberal Democrats and Plaid Cymru support STV as a matter of policy but local factors will also play a role. If all Plaid and Lib Dem councillors back change then STV would be used for the 2027 elections in Ceredigon.

Ireland’s snap election: should Scotland use the Irish voting system?

By Richard Wood

Ireland is going to the polls later this year, highlighting its Single Transferable Vote system which could be used to elect Members of the Scottish Parliament.

STV is a preferential system where voters rank candidates in order or preference in multi-member constituencies. The system is already used to elect Scottish councillors, as well as various electoral chambers in Northern Ireland, Malta and Australia, and can have better outcomes than Holyrood’s Additional System when it comes to voter choice and proportionality (depending on the exact parameters of the STV system used).

The system has been used in the Republic of Ireland since the country’s independence from the United Kingdom. Two attempts have been made to revert to First Past the Post, however, the people of Ireland voted against these in referendums in 1958 and 1968, ensuring the continued use of STV to this day. The upcoming election shows an alternative future to Westminster’s First Past the Post and Holyrood’s broadly proportional, albeit flawed, Additional Member System.

Will 2031 be the first Scottish election to use STV?

Wales is changing its voting system. Why not Scotland? 2026 will be the first Welsh election not held under AMS. instead MSs will be elected via the more proportional, but less voter empowering, Closed List PR system.

The current Scottish Government has no plans to ditch AMS, meaning a change ahead of 2026 elections is unlikely. But change might be possible next parliament as political winds shift. Two-thirds of MSPs would have to support reform for a change in voting system to be enacted.

Ireland offers an alternative the Scotland’s Additional Member System, however, the Irish system isn’t perfect as constituency sizes range from three to five members, limiting overall proportionality. A Scottish system should account for this and introduce larger multi-member constituencies, similar to Northern Ireland instead.

STV offers an opportunity to strengthen Holyrood’s representation. The next election offers Scotland an opportunity learn from our neighbours and to seize reform.

Westminster’s Modernisation Committee should consider MSP-MP dual mandates ban

By Richard Wood

The newly formed Modernisation Committee in the House of Commons should consider recommending banning MSP-MP dual mandates as part of its remit concerning MPs’ outside employment.

Labour formed the government on the back of a manifesto pledge to clamp down on paid advisory and consultancy roles. However, the new committee has an opportunity to take those proposals further and tighten restrictions on second jobs more broadly.

Dual mandates, where an individual holds two full-time parliamentary positions at the same time, are bad for representative democracies. This includes MSP-MPs and MSPs-Lords. The phenomenon results in representatives not fully dedicated to their constituents in one clear capacity.

A ban on the practice is long overdue, with the most prominent example in recent years being Douglas Ross being an MP, and MSP and taking on further employment at the same time. That said, this is an issue something all main parties have been of guilty of, especially in the early days of the Scottish Parliament.

The Modernisation Committee should consider the issue as part of their remit.

What did Labour’s 2024 manifesto say?

“Labour will establish a new Modernisation Committee tasked with reforming House of Commons procedures, driving up standards, and improving working practices. The absence of rules on second jobs also means some constituents end up with MPs who spend more time on their second job, or lobbying for outside interests, than on representing them. Therefore, as an initial step,Labour will support an immediate ban on MPs from taking up paid advisory or consultancy roles. We will task the Modernisation Committee to take forward urgent work on the restrictions that need to be put in place to prevent MPs from taking up roles that stop them serving their constituents and the
country.”

Who is on the Modernisation Committee?

The Committee, chaired by Lucy Powell MP, is made up of nine Labour MPs, three Conservatives MPs and two Lib Dem MPs:

🔴Rt Hon Lucy Powell MP

🔴 Mike Amesbury MP

🔴 Alex Barros-Curtis MP

🔴 Markus Campbell-Savours MP

🟠 Wendy Chamberlain MP

🔵 Sir Christopher Chope MP

🔴 Sarah Coombes MP

🔴 Chris Elmore MP

🔴 Kirith Entwistle MP

🟠 Marie Goldman MP

🔴 Paulette Hamilton MP

🔵Joy Morrissey MP

🔵 Chris Philp MP

🔴 Jo Platt MP

Scottish Conservative leadership election exposes voting systems inconsistency

By Richard Wood

The Scottish Conservatives are using the Alternative Vote to elect their new leader, following the departure of Douglas Ross from the top job. The Alternative Vote is a preferential system for single-seat positions, allowing voters to rank candidates in order of preference to ensure the winner receives a broad base of support.

There’s no denying this system is fairer and more representative than First Past the Post. Indeed with at least six candidates standing to replace Douglas Ross, under FPTP the winner could in theory have been elected with less than 17% of the total vote. However, AV negates this possibility.

The Scottish Conservatives ultimately recognise the absurdity of FPTP hence their use of AV to elect their leaders. Furthermore, the party benefits significantly from the broadly proportional Additional Member System used to elect MSPs. If the Scottish Parliament used, First Past the, the SNP would likely have completely dominated at the 2021 election.

Yet the Conservatives continue to back First Past the Post for Westminster elections. If preferential voting is good enough for internal elections, it begs the question why not support the Single Transferable Vote for Westminster votes?

In fairness at least one leadership candidate has previously voiced support for STV. Back in 2021 Murdo Fraser outlined his arguments in favour of replacing AMS with STV at Holyrood in an article for the Scotsman.

Of course, the way we elect representatives isn’t going to take centre stage in this election. But it’s worth flagging the mismatch between Conservative support for First Past the Post at Westminster with their rejection of it to elect their own leaders.

Conservatives should consider that when ranking candidates one to six in the coming weeks rather than marking an “x” in the box.

Scottish Conservative leadership contest 2024

As of Tuesday 7 August six candidates are standing to replace Douglas Ross as Scottish Conservative leader:

Russell Findlay
Brian Whittle
Meghan Gallacher
Liam Kerr
Jamie Greene
Murdo Fraser

The contest will conclude in September ahead of the UK Conservative contest finishing in November.

Labour’s false “supermajority” and widespread tactical voting expose the flaws of FPTP

The UK’s new Prime Minister Keir Starmer

By Richard Wood

The 2024 UK General Election has exposed the flaws of Westminster’s First Past the Post once again.

The 4 July vote shows just how much the voting system used to elect MPs distorts how people vote at the ballot box. While Labour did well, Keir Starmer’s party won 63% of seats on just 34% of the vote.

This is a staggering mismatch between seats and votes, exposing the absurd unfairness of our electoral system once again.

Meanwhile, Reform secured 14% of the vote. Under a proportional voting system they would have roughly 14% seats but in the end they only scraped five seats. Similarly, the Greens only managed four seats on 7% of the vote.

The Lib Dems won 72 seats (11% of those available) on 12% vote, by coincidence broadly in line with their share of the vote. While the Conservatives – champions of our regressive system – suffered at its hands by winning 19% of seats on 24% of the vote.

The election has been called the most unrepresentative in British political history. In fact, the Gallagher index (a measure of electoral proportionality) was 24 (the highest ever in a UK election), backing these claims.

Some discussion of the Gallagher Index in the last few days, but the alternative Sainte-Laguë index paints an even worse picture – giving a disproportionality score of 48.8, a solid 49% more skewed than the second least proportional election (2015). pic.twitter.com/yoUHGrIEls
— Dylan Difford (@Dylan_Difford) July 6, 2024

Of course, anti-Consevative tactical voting likely widened the disparity between seats and votes – with Lib Dem votes piling up in areas they could win and Labour in areas they could take. But that’s no excuse for the reality where we have a system in which, forgetting all motivations for why people vote a particular way, the total number of votes per party doesn’t result in result in matching seat shares. Tactical voting is a symptom of First Past the Post, showing the need for electoral reform. And at the end of the day, people deserve to vote for their favoured candidates without the fear that their vote won’t count. You should be able to vote for something, rather than forced into voting against something else.

What next for the electoral reform movement?

First Past the Post has once again been exposed as a failed system. But with this comes opportunity for change.

While Labour’s leadership oppose a change in voting system, the massive mismatch is cutting through to citizens. There’s an opportunity here to stress this mismatch and make the case for Proportional Representation and continue the fight for reform.

It’s time to redouble our efforts to secure electoral reform. It’s time for Proportional Representation.

How you can help

The below organisations are fighting for fair votes. Learn more and join them below:

Image source: House of Commons (CC 3.0 License)

Douglas Ross’ decision to stand again exposes dual mandates as wrong

By Richard Wood

The Leader of the Scottish Conservative party Douglas Ross is seeking election to the constituency of Aberdeenshire North and Moray East after originally not planning to stand for Westminster. His decision came just hours before the close of nominations.

His original decision not to stand would have put an end to his dual mandate of being an MP and MSP. However, while his return to Westminster is far from certain, if he wins he will simultaneously sit in both parliament yet again.

When a politician holds two elected roles, they have a dual mandate.

These dual mandates are unfair on constituents who deserve full-time parliamentarians. Not part-timers. They are also highly impractical.

It may emerge that Ross plans on stepping down from his Holyrood role after the election but that remains to be seen. For now, it seems he is intent on maintaining his dual mandate.

Let’s not forget that we’ve been here before. A 2021 Panelbase poll even asked voters for their views on Ross’ intentions if he won seat at Holyrood (which he went on to do). It found that 67% of Scots think the MP for Moray should give up at least one of his numerous positions if elected to the Scottish Parliament in 2021. This suggested most Scots oppose dual mandates, as well as second jobs.

Douglas Ross’ decision ultimately exposes the absurdity of dual mandates in Scotland. It’s time to ban them once and for all.

(Image Source: Douglas Ross MP (by David Woolfall • CC BY 3.0))