DOCSLIB.ORG

Inquiry Into Boundaries, Voting & Representation in Scotland

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Inquiry Into Boundaries, Voting & Representation in Scotland -2 NORTH LANARKSHIRE COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM No. -..-- L...... REPORT To: POLICY AND RESOURCES Subject: INQUIRY INTO BOUNDARIES, COMMITTEE VOTING AND REPRESENTATION IN SCOTLAND -CONSULTATION - THE ARBUTHNOTT COMMISSION From: DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATION Date: 18 August 2005 Ref: JOHIJAFIIL 1. Purpose of Report 1.I The Policy and Resources Committee at its meeting on 8 February 2005 considered a report (1) outlining the remit of the Commission on Boundary Differences and Voting Systems (the Arbuthnott Commission) set up by the Secretary of State for Scotland in July 2004; (2) ’ advising of a consultation received from the Commission inviting comments by 15 April 2005 on various matters in relation to boundaries and voting systems and (3) proposing that the MemberlOfficer Group on Local Governance prepare a detailed response for submission to the next meeting of the Policy and Resources Committee. 1.2 As a result, consideration was given to the consultation paper at the meeting of the MernbedOfficer Group held on 7 April 2005, at which time the Working Group formulated responses to the questions posed in the Commission’s consultation, those responses being as attached in Appendix 1 to this report. 1.3 The responses prepared by way of the Working Group were endorsed at the Policy and Resources Committee meeting on 19 April 2005. 2. Request for Meeting 2.1 In addition, the Policy and Resources Committee agreed in April that the MembedOfficer Working Group on Local Governance, representing the Council, should seek a meeting with representatives of the Arbuthnott Commission. 2.2 A response has now been received from the Commission dated 30 June 2005 and a copy is attached as Appendix 2 to this report. It will be noted that the Commission (I) does not see its remit as extending to revisiting the debate which led to the Scottish e Parliament deciding that an STV voting system was appropriate for local government elections and (2) that the Commission, having received the Council’s written response, is not sure that a meeting with the Commission would be necessary. 2.3 In light of the contents of that response, the Member/Officer Working Group on Local Governance agreed to recommend that the Council no longer pursue a meeting with representatives of the Arbuthnott Commission. Arbuthnott Commission response.doc 2 3. Recommendation 3.1. That the Council no longer pursue a meeting with representatives of the Arbuthnott Commission. Directorv f Administfati "v n Members seeking further information on the contents of this report are asked to contact John O'Hagan, Director of Administration on Extension 2345. Arbuthnon Commission response.doc APPENDIX 1 e Question: How important do you think it will be, either in voting or for dealing with your political representatives to have common boundaries for Scottish Parliament and Westminster constituencies? Proposed Response: Within North Lanarkshire the situation envisaged by the proposed CQSLA response - that it will be confusing for merqbers of the public where the constituencies for MSPs and MPs have the same name but cover different areas - pertains in only two constituencies - Airdrie and Shotts and Motherwell and Wishaw. It has to be said that while some degree of confusion will be inevitable, it is impossible to completely avoid it if the current level of MSPs are to be retained. It should be noted that separate questions are posed' as to methods of electing members of the Scottish Parliament. Question: Do you currently experience difficulty in identifying who to approach - Local Councillor; Constituency MSP; Regional MSPs; MP or MEPs - to deal with a particular issue? If so, what changes might make this easier? Proposed Response: It is noted that COSLA take the view that this is likely to be an issue where Councillors' roles are being confused with those of MSPs, but is more likely to arise from confusion over competency for each sphere of governance, rather than being an issue arising from physical boundaries to wards and constituencies. It is considered that the main thrust of COSLAs response merits support: it is submitted that there is a requirement for a clear protocol whereby Members of the Scottish Parliament, both Regional and Constituency, Members of Parliament and Members of the European Parliament, when approached regarding a matter which is the responsibility of local government, confine their response to referring the matter to the appropriate member of the Council. This issue goes beyond the question of jurisdiction of elected representatives and impacts on the treatment of local government as a tier of government. Clear role descriptions and a protocol on jurisdiction are required. e Question: If it is decided to keep the same boundaries, or a system of common ones, for Westminster and Scottish Parliament constituencies, what structure (such as in the examples listed below) would provide the best way of achieving this? 0 2 MSPs for each new Westminster constituency (2 x 59) with a top up of 11 MSPs from a national list 0 60 constituency members and 69 (or 60) list members from either regions or a national list 0 Grouping the new Westminster constituencies to form larger Holyrood multi-member constituencies 0. Hybrid system, with rural constituencies the same as for Westminster and rnulti-member seats in the cities and urban areas Proposed Response: It is noted that the CQSLA accept the need to balance the memberlwardlconstituency link - which is a long-standing policy of CQSLA - with the confusion that multiple voting systems are likely to contribute which may put off voters. It is noted, also, that CQSLA reached the view that STV is the best voting system for MSPs Document3 2 because of its consistency with a new 2007 arrangement for Councillors. It is, however, noted, also, that the Commission would expect to receive representations, formulate a view and make recommendations on the advisability of the introduction of the Single Transferable Voting System to local government elections. It is the view of North Lanarkshire Council that, whatever the nature of the electoral system chosen for local government, the primary objective must be to ensure that the memberlward link is not weakened and the Council take the view that the STV system, as proposed, which provides for larger wards each of which will have three or four members, will fundamentally and adversely alter the current individual relationship between a Councillor and the ward he or she represents. Against that background North Lanarkshire Council do not support the introduction of STV either for local government elections or for elections to the Scottish Parliament. o Question: How important is it to have close identification 'between elected representatives and specific areas? If this is significant, what is the maximum size and population for effective representation? Proposed Response: It is the view of the Council that, in considering the response to this question, the primary factors must be the importance of memberlward links and governance issues as well as issues regarding service delivery. Against the basic backdrop of the issue of subsidiarity and of decisions being devolved to the lowest appropriate tier of government, the Council is of the view that, while the establishment of the Scottish Parliament has gone a long way to dealing with issues of national identity and decision making, the temptation to retain decision making at that national level requires to be resisted. e Question: Would it be useful if other public bodies, such as Health Boards, also fitted within constituency and ward boundaries? Proposed Response: In light of the Council's experience of operation of the community leadership role and of community planning, it is the submission of North Lanarkshire Council that there is no fundamental requirement for other public bodies, such as Health Boards, to fit within constituency and ward buundaries. e Question: What impact do you think having four different systems of electing representatives will have on voters, and on how effectively constituents are represented? Proposed Response: It is the view of the Council that any requirement for the electorate to vote, on the one day, using three entirely different voting systems will inevitably lead to electorate confusion and will make it virtually certain that there will be a significant increase in the number of votes spoiled through confusion as to the three electoral systems. That, in the view of the Council, will be extremely harmful to the democratic process. For that reason it is the recommendation of the Council that the Commission recommend to both the Secretary of State for Scotland and the Scottish Parliament that there should not be a requirement in 2007 for the electorate to vote, on the one day, using three entirely different voting systems. (9 Question: What is your view on the operation of the voting systems used for elections to the Scottish Parliament and the European Parliament? Proposed Response: It is the view of the Council that the operation of the voting systems used for elections to the Scottish Parliament and European Parliament underline the impo dance of membe rlconstituency links. @ uestion: Do you think electors will be confused by having to vote using the new Single Transferable Vote system for local government elections on the same day as using the additional member system for the Scottish Parliament elections? Proposed Response: As advised above, it is the view of the Council that any requirement on the electorate to vote, on day, using three entirely different voting systems will result in electorate confusion leading to a significant increase in the number of votes spoiled and harm to the democratic process. It is, also the view of the Council that no clear justification has been advanced for the difference between the voting systems being adopted for each tier of government.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Evidence Submission to the Independent Review Into the 2007
    Evidence submission to the Independent Review into the 2007 Scottish Elections from the Electoral Reform Society 1. Introduction The Electoral Reform Society welcomes this independent inquiry into the Scottish elections of 3 May 2007. We hope that the Inquiry will be able to throw light on: What went wrong in the conduct of these elections; What needs to be done to reduce the risk of the same problems arising in future elections; What other changes should be made to our electoral arrangements. Although in many ways the elections of 3 May were a step forwards for Scottish democracy, serious problems were nevertheless encountered. If with hindsight it is concluded that there were deficiencies in the planning and preparation for the elections, we hope the focus will be on the changes that need to be made before the next round of elections and not on the apportionment of blame. In our work in Scotland over the past year, we have not encountered a single person with responsibility for the elections not totally committed to making the elections a success and not entirely professional in their approach. The Society has already contributed materials to this Inquiry, including research notes on ballot rejection in: • Rejected ballots in UK General Elections • Rejected ballots in Welsh and Scottish elections • Rejected ballots in London elections. We draw on these in this submission, and attach copies of the research notes for ease of reference. We would be delighted to provide further copies of any other Society publications on request: many are available in both electronic format and as hard copies.
    [Show full text]
  • The Sewel Convention: the Westminster Perspective
    House of Commons Scottish Affairs Committee The Sewel Convention: the Westminster perspective Fourth Report of Session 2005–06 Report, together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence Ordered by The House of Commons to be printed 6 June 2006 HC 983 Published on 19 June 2006 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £13.50 The Scottish Affairs Committee The Scottish Affairs Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Scotland Office (including (i) relations with the Scottish Parliament and (ii) administration and expenditure of the office of the Advocate General for Scotland (but excluding individual cases and advice given within government by the Advocate General)). Current membership Mr Mohammad Sarwar MP (Labour, Glasgow Central) (Chairman) Danny Alexander MP, (Liberal Democrat, Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch & Strathspey) Gordon Banks MP, (Labour, Ochil & South Perthshire) Ms Katy Clark MP, (Labour, North Ayrshire & Arran) Mr Ian Davidson MP, (Labour, Glasgow South West) Mr John MacDougall MP, (Labour, Glenrothes) Mr Jim McGovern MP, (Labour, Dundee West) Mr Angus MacNeil MP, (SNP, Na h-Eileanan An Iar) David Mundell MP, (Conservative, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale) Mr Charles Walker MP, (Conservative, Broxbourne) Mr Ben Wallace MP, (Conservative, Lancaster & Wyre) Powers The committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk. Publications The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House.
    [Show full text]
  • Future Electoral Arrangements for the Assembly
    Future electoral arrangements for the Assembly June 2012 This research paper summarises the options and proposals contained in the UK Government’s Green Paper on changes to the electoral arrangements for the Assembly. It also provides background information and initial reactions to those proposals and provides an overview of the situation in Scotland where UK and Scottish parliamentary boundaries have been decoupled since 2004. The National Assembly for Wales is the democratically elected body that represents the interests of Wales and its people, makes laws for Wales and holds the Welsh Government to account. The Research Service provides expert and impartial research and information to support Assembly Members and committees in fulfilling the scrutiny, legislative and representative functions of the National Assembly for Wales. Research Service briefings are compiled for the benefit of Assembly Members and their support staff. Authors are available to discuss the contents of these papers with Members and their staff but cannot advise members of the general public. We welcome comments on our briefings; please post or email to the addresses below. An electronic version of this paper can be found on the National Assembly’s website at: www.assemblywales.org/research Further hard copies of this paper can be obtained from: Research Service National Assembly for Wales Cardi. Bay CF99 1NA Email: [email protected] Twitter: @NAWResearch © National Assembly for Wales Commission Copyright 2012 The text of this document may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium providing that it is reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading or derogatory context.
    [Show full text]
  • Putting Citizens First: Boundaries, Voting and Representation in Scotland Commission on Boundary Differences and Voting Systems
    Putting Citizens First: Boundaries, Voting and Representation in Scotland Commission on Boundary Differences and Voting Systems Putting Citizens First: Boundaries, Voting and Representation in Scotland Commission on Boundary Differences and Voting Systems January 2006 Edinburgh: The Stationery Office £15.00 i 0 10 888179 2 ii Contents Chapter Page 1 Background 1 2 Overview 3 3 Boundaries 9 4 Voting 29 5 Representation 57 6 Looking Forward 69 7 Summary of Recommendations 73 Annex A – Membership 76 Annex B – Remit 77 Annex C – Ways of Working 78 Annex D – Meetings and Evidence 81 iii Inquiry into Boundaries, Voting and Representation in Scotland iv Secretary of State for Scotland First Minister I am pleased to submit this report “Putting Citizens First: Boundaries, Voting and Representation in Scotland” on behalf of the Commission on Boundary Differences and Voting Systems. Over the past 18 months, the Commission has consulted widely, has had dialogue with elected representatives and has received wide ranging evidence. Our work has been independent and open throughout, with consultation responses and evidence lodged on our website. There have been numerous public meetings and a number of issues have surfaced through, and been debated in, the media. By its very nature our work has been multi-faceted, combining to produce almost a “cat’s cradle” of closely interlinked issues. No matter the varied nature of our task, we have adhered throughout to a clear set of principles and have tested all the evidence against these. Pre-eminent has been our desire to ensure that Scotland’s system of elected representation ensures service and equality for all its citizens.
    [Show full text]
  • The Arbuthnott Report and Scottish Elections
    The Arbuthnott report and Scottish elections Standard Note: SN/PC/03918 Last updated: 21 May 2007 Author: Isobel White Parliament and Constitution Centre The Commission on Boundary Differences and Voting Systems was established to look into the consequences of having four different voting systems in Scotland, and different boundaries between Westminster and Holyrood. The Commission was chaired by Sir John Arbuthnott and published its report on 19 January 2006. This Note examines the Commission’s recommendations and subsequent consideration of the report by the House of Commons. Details of the Government’s response to the report are also given. Local elections and Scottish Parliament elections were held on 3 May 2007 and there have been reports of large numbers of spoiled ballot papers; the final sections of the Note give a brief review of the press reports about the elections and explain the procedure for challenging an election in Scotland. Contents A. Background 3 B. The Report 4 1. Boundaries 5 2. Voting 6 3. Representation 9 4. Reaction to the report 10 C. Consideration of the report by the Scottish Affairs Committee 12 D. Westminster Hall debate on the report on 20 July 2006 14 E. The Government’s response to the Arbuthnott report 17 F. The Scottish Executive’s response to the Arbuthnott report 19 G. Local and Scottish Parliament elections on 3 May 2007 21 1. Statement by the Secretary of State for Scotland 23 2. Electoral Commission review of the Scottish elections 25 H. Election petitions 26 Standard Notes are compiled for the benefit of Members of Parliament and their personal staff.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2005
    Scotland Office and Office of the Advocate General for Scotland Annual Report 2005 This is part of a series of departmental reports which, along with the Main Estimates, the document Public Expenditure: Statistical Analyses 2005, and the Supply Estimates 2005-06: Supplementary Budgetary Information, present the Government's expenditure plans for 2005-2008. If you have any general comments or queries about this report, please forward them to Ian Allen, Head of Business Support at the Scotland Office, 1 Melville Crescent, Edinburgh EH3 7HW (Tel: 0131-244-9050 or e-mail at [email protected]. Further information can also be obtained at our website: www.scottishsecretary.gov.uk. Scotland Office and Office of the Advocate General for Scotland Annual Report 2005 Presented to Parliament by the Secretary of State for Scotland and by the Chief Secretary to the Treasury by Command of Her Majesty June 2005 Cm 6544 Edinburgh: The Stationery Office £14.00 Crown Copyright 2004 The text in this document (excluding the Royal Arms and departmental logos) may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium providing that it is reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledged as Crown copyright and the title of the document specified. Any enquiries relating to the copyright in this document should be addressed to The Licensing Division, HMSO, St Clements House 2-16 Colegate, Norwich, NR3 1BQ. Fax: 01603 723000 or e-mail: [email protected] Scotland Office and Office of the Advocate General for Scotland Annual Report 2005 and Office Scotland Office 0 10 165442 1 ii Contents Page Foreword by the Secretary of State for Scotland v 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Counting Votes: Essays on Electoral Reform
    Copyright ©2016 by the Fraser Institute. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any manner whatsoever without written permis- sion except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical articles and reviews. As the researchers have worked independently, the views and conclusions expressed in this paper do not necessarily reflect those of the Board of Direc- tors of the Fraser Institute, the staff, or supporters. Date of issue: October 2016. Printed and bound in Canada. Cover design and artwork: Bart Allen Fraser Institute d www.fraserinstitute.org Counting Votes: Essays on Electoral Reform Lydia Miljan, editor FRASER I N S T I T U T E Fraser Institute d www.fraserinstitute.org Contents Preface ............................................... i Chapter 1: First-Past-the-Post: Empowered Voters, Accountable Government John Pepall ...................................... 1 Chapter 2: Electoral Rules and Fiscal Policy Outcomes Jason Clemens, Taylor Jackson, Steve LaFleur, and Joel Emes ...................................... 21 Chapter 3: The Consequences of the Alternative Vote Lydia Miljan and Taylor Jackson .................... 45 Chapter 4: The Imperative of a Referendum Patrice Dutil ........................................ 81 Publishing information .................... 104 Purpose, funding, and independence ....... 105 About the Fraser Institute .................. 105 Editorial Advisory Board ................... 106 www.fraserinstitute.org d Fraser Institute Preface In its December Speech from the Throne, Justin Trudeau’s government reaffirmed the Liberal party’s campaign promise that 2015 would be the last election held under first-past-the-post (FPTP). While the government has no preference as to what should replace the 150-year-old FPTP system, it has ruled out holding a referendum to help guide the choice.
    [Show full text]
  • The Best of Both Worlds? MMP Electoral Reform and Constitutional Development in Scotland and Wales Jonathan Bradbury
    © New Zealand Centre for Public Law and contributors Faculty of Law Victoria University of Wellington PO Box 600 Wellington New Zealand June 2009 The mode of citation of this journal is: (2009) 7 NZJPIL (page) The previous issue of this journal is volume 6 number 2, December 2008 ISSN 1176­3930 Printed by Geon, Brebner Print, Palmerston North Cover photo: Robert Cross, VUW ITS Image Services CONTENTS SPECIAL CONFERENCE ISSUE: MMP AND THE CONSTITUTION Foreword Dean R Knight...........................................................................................................................vii "Who's the Boss?": Executive–Legislature Relations in New Zealand under MMP Ryan Malone............................................................................................................................... 1 The Legal Status of Political Parties under MMP Andrew Geddis.......................................................................................................................... 21 Experiments in Executive Government under MMP in New Zealand: Contrasting Approaches to Multi­Party Governance Jonathan Boston and David Bullock........................................................................................... 39 MMP, Minority Governments and Parliamentary Opposition André Kaiser............................................................................................................................. 77 Public Attitudes towards MMP and Coalition Government Raymond Miller and Jack Vowles..............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Local Government Elections 2017
    SPICe Briefing Pàipear-ullachaidh SPICe Local Government Elections 2017 Andrew Aiton and Anouk Berthier This briefing looks at the 2017 local government elections including turnout, results, the gender balance of the candidates and councillors, as well as the make-up of the administration of the elections. The political composition of the councils has not yet been decided and will be covered in a separate briefing. 19 May 2017 SB 17/35 Local Government Elections 2017, SB 17/35 Contents Executive Summary _____________________________________________________3 Candidates _____________________________________________________________4 Results ________________________________________________________________5 Candidates, votes and seats won __________________________________________5 Number and share of seats won ___________________________________________6 Share of first preference votes_____________________________________________9 Electorate and Turnout _________________________________________________12 Rejected ballots _______________________________________________________15 Single Transferable Vote_________________________________________________16 Timing of local elections_________________________________________________18 Gender balance of councillors and candidates ______________________________19 Administration of the elections ___________________________________________20 Administrative bodies __________________________________________________20 Vote counting _________________________________________________________20 The EU Referendum
    [Show full text]
  • AGENDA ITEM No. D.Ah>
    NORTH LANARKSHIRE COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM No. d.ah>.. REPORT To: POLICY AND RESOURCES Subject: INQUIRY INTO BOUNDARIES, COMMITTEE 1 VOTING AND REPRESENTATION IN SCOTLAND - CONSULTATION From: DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATION I Date: 13 April 2005 Ref: JAFllL 1. Purpose of Report 1.I The report refers to the decision of the Committee to remit to the MemberlOfficer Group on Local Governance the consultation document issued by the Commission on Boundary Differences and Voting Systems (the Arbuthnott Commission) and submits, for consideration, a draft response. 2. Background 2.1 The Committee, at its meeting on 8 February, having considered a report of 24 January by the Director of Administration including, as an appendix, the consultation document issued by the Arbuthnott Commission, agreed that detailed consideration be given to that document by the MemberlOfficer Group on Local Governance with a view to the formulation of a draft response. 2.2 The MemberlOfficer Group on Local Governance have now considered that document and have agreed that a draft response, as detailed in the appendix to this report, be formulated. 2.3 The Working Group had regard to the draft response considered on behalf of COSLA. The Working Group had regard, also, to the public meeting held in Glasgow in the course of which representatives of the Arbuthnott Commission indicated that the Commission is particularly interested in the integrity of the electoral system with regard to the organisation of elections; the Commission is prepared to meet with individual local authorities; 0 the Commission anticipates receiving views on the advisability of the introduction of the Single Transferable Voting System to local government elections and anticipates a requirement to form a view on this prior to reporting to both the Scottish Parliament and the Secretary of State for Scotland.
    [Show full text]
  • David Mundell MP Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland Chairman of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party 83 Princes Street Edinburgh EH2 2ER
    David Mundell MP Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland Chairman of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party 83 Princes Street Edinburgh EH2 2ER 31st July 2007 Mr Ron Gould Scottish Elections Review 93 George Street Edinburgh EH2 3ES Dear Ron Please find attached the Scottish Conservative Party’s submission to the Scottish Elections Review. I trust that the points we make in respect to the various aspects of the review will be given due consideration. I welcome your appointment to lead the Scottish Elections Review and hope that with your guidance and expertise, together with colleagues, we will be able to establish why there was such a high incidence of rejected ballots and why so many voters were disenfranchised from voting in the recent Scottish Elections held in May 2007. I look forward to your report and considering any recommendations you may make to ensure that we restore public trust and integrity within our electoral system in Scotland and throughout the United Kingdom. Yours sincerely David Mundell MP SUBMISSION TO SCOTTISH ELECTIONS REVIEW The Scottish Conservative Party welcomes the opportunity to comment on the current Electoral Commission Statutory Review of the conduct of the Scottish elections held in May 2007 and recognises the appointment of Ron Gould as an independent chairman of this review. However, we still remain concerned that a full and complete inquiry should be undertaken which is independent of all stakeholders, including the Electoral Commission which was involved in the setting out of recommendations for the design of the single ballot paper used for the Scottish Parliamentary election, commissioned Cragg Ross Dawson to undertake research on the final design of the ballot paper, and is responsible for increasing participation in elections.
    [Show full text]
  • Vote STV Elections Not Single-Member Exclusions
    Vote STV elections not single-member exclusions. STV elections, not single member exclusions nor list appointments. Summary. The consensus of the Ontario Citizens Assembly was for a proportional count, as seems to be the case among submissions so far. Then, the key question is: do all the voters get a preference vote (as with Single Transferable Vote, STV) or is a preference vote granted only to the privileged, who rank candidates on Party Lists, including in the Mixed Member Proportional system, MMP? I agree with the British Columbia Citizens Assembly recommendation of the Single Transferable Vote for proportional representation with its democratic preference voting, that can rank choice of candidates from the same and different parties, to transcend divisions for a desired degree and kind of national unity. If the Citizens Assembly decides STV is the best system for Ontario, its less sparse population, than in BC, might justify a marginly more proportional representation. References, to this Guidelined Submission, link to my original submission, on the web page, Citizens Assemblies of Canada choose a voting system. To sugar the pill, that review has appropriate color paintings and monochrome engravings of pioneer Canada! Questions from Assembly members are welcome. (E-mail: [email protected]) Contents: ● The mandate ● Order and proportion are essential to electoral system. ● Principled recommendation: STV. ● The official briefs paradox that no one right method is the one right method. ● The fallacy of pre-emptive voting methods. ● Farewell. ● Appendix 1: on some mistakes in the brief. ● Appendix 2: on a further unconstitutional veto effected by the double-60 referendum threshold ● References.
    [Show full text]