HL Deb 06 June 1978 vol 392 cc1072-84

3.10 p.m.

The LORD CHANCELLOR (Lord Elwyn-Jones)

My Lords, I beg to move that the House do now resolve itself into Committee on this Bill.

Moved, that the House do now resolve itself into Committee.—(The Lord Chancellor.)

On Question, Motion agreed to.

House in Committee accordingly.

[The LORD ABERDARE in the Chair.]

Clause 1 [The Welsh Assembly]:

Lord HARLECH moved Amendment No. 1: Page 1, line 8, at end insert ("the members of which shall be elected by that system of proportional voting specified under this Act.").

The noble Lord said: I beg to move the Amendment standing in my name, those of the noble and learned Lord, Lord Kilbrandon, and the noble Lord, Lord Lloyd of Kilgerran. In all essentials, this is the same Amendment as was moved by the noble and learned Lord, Lord Kilbrandon, on the Committee stage of the Scotland Bill on 4th April and to which your Lordships agreed by an overwhelming majority. It is designed to ensure that elections to the Welsh Assembly take place on a basis of proportional representation.

The issue is a simple one. Whatever merits or demerits there are to a proportional representation system for voting for the Westminster Parliament, opinion outside this House and inside this House sees the strongest possible reasons why this system of voting should be applied in the case of the devolved Assemblies—in this case, the Welsh Assembly. This was the unanimous view of the distinguished Royal Commission on the Constitution presided over by the noble and Learned Lord, Lord Kilbrandon. This was an all-Party Commission, and a non-Party Commission.

The fundamental reason for this was, and is, that such an Assembly should represent as nearly as possible opinion throughout the Principality as a whole, including minority opinion, and that it should generally act upon the consensus of a majority of the electorate. The first-past-the-post system which is enshrined in this Bill will not ensure that. Indeed, it must almost inevitably give a majority in the Assembly to one Party even though it has polled a minority of the votes. Only through the purest fluke could an election under that system represent the true division of opinion in Wales.

What this Amendment and its related Amendments will do is as follows: they will provide for 50 constituency Members elected by the first-past-the-post system. These will be joined in the Assembly by 25 additional Members to bring the Parties up to overall proportionality. The constituency Members will be elected for the first election on the basis of one per the 22 smallest Parliamentary constituencies, and two per the largest 14 constitutencies, making a total of 50 in all. This is to obviate the necessity of the Boundary Commission redrawing the constituencies, with consequent delay, and it employs the same principle of quota as has been adopted by the Government in this Bill.

Next, the 25 additional Members will be allocated to bring each Party with more than 5 per cent. of the popular vote up to as nearly as possible overall proportionality. This is achieved by the use of the largest average formula described in the Schedule to the Amendment, with additional Members allocated by region. The additional Members, under this Amendment and its related Amendments, would be drawn from a priority list, democratically drawn up, published by each Party in each region in Wales.

Each voter has two votes or, in the case of a two-Member constituency, three votes, as is the case under the system which operates in Western Germany. That is to say, you can vote for the single candidate, or the two candidates of your choice in two-Member constituencies, and then you have a further vote which you give to the Party of your choice. It is this vote—the Party preference vote—which is counted towards the total for the allocation of the additional Member seats.

During the debate on the similar Amendments to the Scottish Bill my noble friend Lord Drumalbyn attempted, in my view very bravely, to describe the method by which the calculation is made for the allocation of additional Member seats. I do not think that he was too confident that all the Members of your Lordships' House had clearly got the gist of it because he suggested that his speech be read in Hansard on the following day. If reading that speech also does not make it totally clear how the method operates, I would advise noble Lords to read Appendix 2 to the Hansard Society Commission's Report—presided over, remember, by the noble Lord, Lord Blake—in which the system of counting is set out. I followed it closely—and my mathematics are pretty rusty—and I came out with the right answer. I would not quite say that a child of six could do it, but I would suggest that a child of nine could.

However, I should like to emphasise here that, so far as the voter is concerned, the marking of the ballot paper is simplicity itself. As I have indicated, you vote for the one candidate, or the two candidates of your choice in a two-Member constituency, and then you have an additional vote which you give to the Party of your choice. I have gone into some detail about the voting system because it is sometimes suggested by opponents of proportional representation that it would confuse voters. I shall come back to this in a moment.

Supporters through thick and thin of the first-past-the-post system advance as their main argument that it provides a clear majority for a single Party, which, in turn, provides strong and stable Government. Recalling recent circumstances in this country I suppose that that argument sounds almost laughable today, and on another occasion and in a different context I should be prepared to demonstrate that it produces exactly the opposite effect. But there is no need to deploy this particular defence on this Amendment because we are not here talking about the formation of a sovereign Government. We are talking about electing Members to an Assembly with severely limited powers; fewer even than under the Scotland Bill. So much for that objection.

The second argument sometimes used is the "thin end of the wedge" argument, but, in my view, the case for proportional representation for the Welsh Assembly must, and I think can, stand on its own merits. If it seems the correct method for a devolved Assembly, as was unanimously concluded by Lord Kilbrandon's Royal Commission, and as was overwhelmingly concluded by a majority in your Lordships' House on the Scottish Bill, then it should be adopted. If it is the wrong method for electing MPs to Westminster, then it should be rejected for that purpose. Each must be judged on its merits.

I know there is a body, I hope a very small one, of conservative opinion which thinks that all change is bad—that the thing to do is to stick to old methods come hell and high water—but that is not my view; indeed, I think that is a recipe for political extinction. If clearly, in new circumstances, a new system should be adopted, so be it. It was a Conservative Government who introduced the principle of proportional representation for certain elections in Northern Ireland and it was a Labour Government who followed that example; it seemed to both of them that it was the best system to apply in Northern Ireland in those circumstances, although it could have been argued at the time that it was a new system and—a phrase I have heard from time to time—an unfamiliar one; but they thought it was the right system. We believe that the system proposed here is the right one for a Welsh Assembly and I hope it will receive your Lordships' wholehearted support. I reject the thin end of the wedge argument.

I return to the objection that the system is unfamiliar and confusing to the electorate. I have always regarded that argument as rather insulting to the intelligence of the English and Scottish people and, in this case, the Welsh people. Proportional representation was introduced into Northern Ireland and the people had no difficulty in understanding or operating it. A system of proportional representation is used in all Scandinavian countries, and they have no difficulty. It is used in Holland and Belgium, and they have no difficulty. It is used in the Irish Republic—I do not intend to make any jokes about that—and they have had no difficulty in understanding or operating it. It is used in Germany, Italy, Malta and Israel, and they have no difficulty.

More significantly, perhaps, it is the method that has been introduced for elections in those three countries which have recently emerged from dictatorships and have become democracies; namely, Portugal, Spain and Greece. Evidently the Governments of those countries did not think their voters were incapable of understanding it. We should therefore reject with a measure of contempt the argument that the people of Wales are so ill-educated and stupid that they would not be able to understand this system of elections.

A final word on the merits of proportional representation in the context of this Bill. It has the tremendous advantage of making every vote count. We all I think recognise that in the context of General Elections in the United Kingdom the complexion of the Government is decided in about 100 marginal seats; vast majorities piled up by the Conservative Party in South-East England, or by the Labour Party in, say, Durham, have not the slightest effect on the result of the Election. Similarly, Labour voters in a minority in the South-East of England or Conservative voters in Durham know that their vote will have not the slightest bearing on the number of MPs sent to Westminster.

If we adopt this proportional representation system for the Welsh Assembly, every voter in Wales will help to determine the result of the election and the composition of the Assembly. That, in my view, would be a great gain for political participation and true democracy. I therefore urge your Lordships to support this Amendment and its related Amendments.

3.25 p.m.

Lord LLOYD of KILGERRAN

As the third signatory to the Amendment, I intervene at this stage to support it. Its object has been clearly explained by the noble Lord, Lord Harlech; the object is to change the electoral system of voting for a unique Welsh elected Assembly, the first that Wales has ever had in its long history, and so to obtain in a Welsh context a more accurate reflection of the wishes of the Welsh electorate than the present first-past-the-post system can do in that country.

I should perhaps at this stage apologise for not being present for the Second Reading of this very important Bill. As the noble Lord, Lord Banks, explained, I was abroad for some months prior to the fixing of the date for the Second Reading of the Wales Bill. I had been committed to forsake temporarily the modern problems of my country to study further the ancient and modern problems of Greece, Israel and Egypt.

As noble Lords will be aware, there are several proportional representation systems, though in this Bill we from these Benches support the added member system. It is, in our view, infinitely preferable to the first-past-the-post system, but I do not propose to deal with the system in any detail in view of the many discussions about the same kind of system before your Lordships during the past weeks in relation to the Scotland Bill. However, it may be interesting to noble Lords to note the unfair position which arose at the last election in Wales arising out of the first-past-the-post system, and if the Committee will bear with me I will recite a few statistics. The Labour Party received 49.5 per cent. of the votes in Wales and secured 23 seats; the Conservative Party had 23.9 per cent. of the votes and secured eight seats; the Liberal Party secured 15.5 per cent. and got two seats; and Plaid Cymru had l0.7 per cent. and obtained three seats.

The unfairness of the first-past-the-post system is reflected in those figures; the whole picture in Wales is distorted. Over 50 per cent. of Welsh voters voted for the Conservatives, the Liberals and Plaid Cymru, yet altogether they received well under 50 per cent. of the seats. Of course this anomalous position was even more acute in 1906 when the Liberal Party had all the MPs from Wales except for one, Keir Hardy, and there were no Conservative Members at all. Under the proposed system, the proportion of seats will be related to the number of votes and thus produce a more accurate and fair reflection of Welsh public opinion. As I have indicated, similar Amendments were passed by your Lordships when we debated the Scotland Bill. The proposed Amendments to the voting system are, in my view, even more appropriate for Wales, in the special circumstances in Wales, than indeed they are for Scotland.

I should like to try to take the matter a little further and endeavour to enlist the sympathy of the Government, and particularly of the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor, who I see in his place on the Government Front Bench, for making at least some concession in a Welsh context. The characteristics of the Welsh and the history of Wales were reiterated by many noble Lords on Second Reading of this Bill. I have read with admiration the brilliant and moving speech of the noble and learned Lord, Lord Morris of Borth-y-Gest, who has himself made such a splendid contribution to the life of the Welsh people. I endorse the observations of another of our great Welshmen, the Lord Chancellor, when he said that he could not over-praise that great speech of the noble and learned Lord, Lord Morris of Borth-y-Gest, in support of this modest Bill. I have also read and admire the exciting and happy speech—if I may so refer to it—of the noble Lord, Lord Parry, steeped as he is in Welsh culture and history.

In the light, therefore, of the reception of these speeches about Wales may I presume to try and press the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor to accept some concession, because these concessions will reflect to so many people in Wales what they recognise as fairness in the voting system. There is a real fear in Wales that this Welsh elected Assembly, the first that Wales has had in its history, may be dominated by one Party. These fears were expressed in strong terms and in detail by Welsh Members of Parliament at the recent Welsh Grand Committee, and again in the course of a debate on the Wales Bill in another place. It was felt by them that the first-past-the-post system of voting in Wales could be unfair.

The Welsh have a word which is usually translated into English as "fair play". It is the word chwarateg—a word very difficult to translate into English. It has a more domestic, more cultural, more persuasive significance in Welsh life than the rather stilted translation "fair play". A change in emphasis in parts of the Welsh word, a change in the euphony or the cadences in the pronunciation of part of this Welsh word introduce a different meaning and a sensitivity of language which cannot be obtained by the use of the English words "fair play". Fair play, in this sense, in Welsh, embodies a basic philosophy, and fair play for minorities has been a basic quality of Welsh life throughout its history.

May I also add this. Wales is a small community with only one-twenty-fifth of the population of the United Kingdom. In any small community kinship and friendship and family ties can play a large part in local and national Government, and where a community such as Wales may become dominated by one Party in a unique and new Assembly then the problems of kinship and friendship can appear more sinister. Minorities in the country can become increasingly restless unless they are recognised in some way in the voting system of the Welsh community. In my view, this can be done only by having a system of proportional representation. In my view, fair play in the voting system for Wales means a great deal to the Welsh community. As the noble Lord, Lord Harlech, pointed out, the Crowther and Kilbrandon Commissions were unanimous, after hearing all the evidence, that proportional representation was the most suitable system for a Welsh Assembly. I hope that the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor can see his way to make at least a concession in the unique circumstances pertaining to Wales in relation to this Amendment.

Lord HOUGHTON of SOWERBY

I want very briefly to support this Amendment. In recent weeks I have been in Canada, and anyone who studies the situation there about the future of the Province of Quebec will understand how dangerous a situation can develop with a system of first-past-the-post elections where constitutional issues, even including separatism, divide the political Parties very acutely indeed. Although a Party with separatist intentions may not feel strong enough to carry separation through its Parliament, it feels strong enough to prepare for it. Coming into office with a Parliamentary strength out of proportion to its electoral support one finds that the governing Party, while promising a referendum on the subject of separatism of Quebec from the Confederation, begins to prepare for that step to be taken. The first thing it feels able to do is to draft and pass through its provincial Parliament the referendum Bill, which is not intended to make it more difficult to get a vote for separation—as we are doing in the case of Scotland—but rather less difficult.

I think that in any situation where separatist tendencies are part of the politics of the region concerned the case for proportional representation is much stronger than elsewhere. That is why, while being firmly in support of a change in our electoral system, I believe that the case for it in Scotland and in Wales for the new Assemblies to be created is far stronger than in the case of the Westminster Parliament. I believe that it is only by providing some entrenched interest in Parliamentary government in areas of that kind that efforts of a separatist Party can be curbed, which otherwise are given fairly free rein by the system of first-past-the-post election. I do not want to add to that. I was on the Kilbrandon Commission, not right to the end but long enough to associate myself with the comments that have been quoted by the two noble Lords who have spoken before me regarding proportional representation in the regional Assemblies. Therefore, as in the case of Scotland for which this House voted for a form of proportional representation, I believe that in the case of Wales it is justified too.

My concluding words are these. I believe that certainly in the case of Scotland, and probably in the case of Wales, even though we begin with a first-past-the-post system, in the end we shall come to some form of proportional representation. There are some situations —Northern Ireland's is certainly one—where I believe it is highly dangerous to have a first-past-the-post system; political Parties are divided so deeply on the future constitutional position of the area concerned that there is no reconciliation to be found in the ordinary course of first-past-the-post. It can be either that a Government Party not supported by a majority of the votes of the electors forces the matter ahead and provides grounds for serious internal unrest, or alternatively, there is a failure, complete deadlock in Parliament, to achieve any worthwhile result. I support this Amendment.

3.39 p.m.

Lord PARRY

It seems to me that, in his peroration, the noble Lord, Lord Harlech, undermined the strength of what was a positive and balanced argument in support of proportional representation. Your Lordships will remember that he said that every voter in Wales will help to determine the issue, arguing that proportional representation automatically ensures that every voter in the nation where this system is introduced in fact takes part in the ensuing elections. I have made very careful inquiries from the Proportional Representation Society and other sources, and I find no evidence from anywhere where proportional representation has been introduced that the total number of people voting increases after the introduction of proportional representation. Indeed, what happens is much more nearly what my kindly and gracious friend the noble Lord, Lord Lloyd of Kilgerran, said; that is, that a more accurate reflection of the views of the Welsh people who actually vote might follow from the introduction of proportional representation.

It seems to me that the real dilemma of democracy in Wales, in Britain, in the world, is a question of getting all the people in the democracy to involve themselves with their Government and involve themselves in the support of, or opposition to, the policies of that Government. What we are arguing about in introducing separate Assemblies for Wales and Scotland is precisely that—to give more government to the people at the level where it can be most effective. If, in fact, one is only sharing out in a different way the votes that are actually being cast, one can end up, as has happened in some of the cases of the nations quoted with rhetoric and truth by the noble Lord, Lord Harlech, with a situation in which the vote is in itself stalemated, and in which there is a weakened democracy, and that in itself makes way for some other form of Government which is not acceptable to any of the democratic Parties previously taking part in the elections.

So, while there is considerable strength in the last words we have heard, relating as they do to a province with some similarities to Wales, I believe that if all the voters of Wales were to take part in an election, the voters of that nation are demonstrably so intelligent in the Government and in the Parties that they have so long supported—radical Governments in the past—that we would not be worrying at all about an Assembly for Wales. We are trying to establish from the beginning a policy supported by all those people who are interested enough, and sufficiently motivated, to vote. I could give a great many figures for the various constituencies of Wales which show that the third largest element in every constituency is that group of voters who do not vote at all. It seems to me that it is precisely these people whom we are wishing to involve by taking government closer to the people through a devolved Assembly, and to argue that we should have proportional representation from the beginning is, in my mind, begging that question.

Lord HARLECH

I wonder whether the noble Lord would allow me to intervene for a few moments. I do not know from where he got his statistics about the number of people who vote under a proportional representation system going down, while under a first-past-the-post system the number goes up, but in fact the direct opposite is the case. If one looks at the elections that have taken place in West Germany over the past 20 years, one sees that the number of people voting under a proportional representation system has consistently gone up, while in this country it has gone down.

Lord DAVIES of LEEK

I shall be brief. It is rather pathetic that we are trying to apply logic to politics. Just look at your Lordships' House. Just look at the system of Government that Britain has had over the last couple of centuries. It has been the most stable system of Government in the civilised world. It has made mistakes. It uses reason instead of logic. If noble Lords cannot follow the nuances of the difference between logic and reason, I must say that I cannot in this brief speech expand on the difference. Economists have made the same mistake. They have tried to make economics a science by introducing fractions, or binomial theorems and the calculus, but it does not make any difference. We are not dealing in a science, and this baby, this Assembly, is the wrong place for the neophiliacs. If noble Lords are worried about my use of the word "neophiliacs", I should say that a neophiliac is a lover of anything new; or to put the matter in a colloquialism, I should say that such a person "knocks" something because it is old.

We know that under the Bill there is to be a referendum and the Assembly will come into existence, but it seems that in this brief Bill we are trying to introduce a massive reform. I believe that one should wait if one wants to get proportional representation. Irrespective of the statistics, and of the broad canvas of the speech of my noble friend who has just spoken, I want to point out that proportional representation, and indeed all voting, applies only to the people who take the trouble to vote. Whether new people will be brought in under what is proposed is a moot point, and I believe that we should be very careful here. This type of Bill is the wrong place to try to introduce proportional representation. I believe that before we enter into that we should pay a tribute to the Hansard Society, and others, and have a full-dress debate on the issue of proportional representation, rather than try to slip it in at this juncture. This is the wrong moment to introduce it. Despite the three muskateers, and the noble Lord from the house of Harlech whose song led us into the Zulu wars, with the awards of Victoria Crosses, I shall go into the Lobby against the Amendment.

Lord STRABOLGI

My Lords, in order to hear the Statement at present being made in another place, I beg to move that the House do now resume.

Moved accordingly, and, on Question, Motion agreed to.

House resumed.