DOCSLIB.ORG

Parliament's Watchdogs

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Parliament's Watchdogs Parliament’s Watchdogs: At The Crossroads edited by Oonagh Gay & Barry K Winetrobe UK Study of Parliament Group ISBN: 978-1-903903-49-0 Published by The Constitution Unit Department of Political Science UCL (University College London) 29-30 Tavistock Square London WC1H 9QU Tel: 020 7679 4977 Fax: 020 7679 4978 Email: [email protected] Web: www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit/ © The Constitution Unit, UCL 2008 This report is sold subject to the condition that it shall not, by way of trade or otherwise, be lent, hired out or otherwise circulated without the publisher’s prior consent in any form of binding or cover other than that in which it is published and without a similar condition including this condition being imposed on the subsequent purchaser. First published December 2008 2 Table of Contents Foreword……………………………………………………………………… 5 Dr Tony Wright MP Note on Contributors……………………………………………………….. 7 Preface………………………………………………………………………… 9 Oonagh Gay & Barry K Winetrobe Chapter 1: Introduction - Watchdogs in Need of Support…………… 11 Oonagh Gay & Barry K Winetrobe Chapter 2: The UK Perspective: Ad Hocery at the Centre……........... 17 Oonagh Gay Chapter 3: Scotland’s Parliamentary Commissioners: An Unplanned Experiment……………………………………………………….. 33 Barry K Winetrobe Chapter 4: ‘Parliamentary Officers’ in Wales: Evolving Roles........... 47 Alys Thomas Chapter 5: An Overview of Northern Ireland's Constitutional Watchdogs……………………………………………………………………. 59 Ruth Barry & Zoe Robinson Chapter 6: Commonwealth Experience I – Federal Accountability and Beyond in Canada……………………………………………………… 71 Elise Hurtubise-Loranger Chapter 7: Commonwealth Experience II – Officers of Parliament in Australia and New Zealand: Building a Working Model……………... 81 Robert Buchanan Chapter 8: The Parliamentary Ombudsman: a Classical Watchdog……………………………………………………………………... 93 Philip Giddings Chapter 9: New Watchdogs: Public Appointments Commissioners………………………………………………………………. 105 Robert Pyper Chapter 10: Conclusion - Parliamentary Watchdogs: Time for Decision……………………………………………………………………….. 115 Barry K Winetrobe 3 4 Foreword Dr Tony Wright MP I welcome the publication of this important and timely report. Important, in that it deals with the organisation and conduct of key institutions for Government and Parliament, for example, the Comptroller and Auditor General and the Electoral Commission. Timely, in that we at Westminster, and elsewhere in the UK, are currently grappling with just these issues. The decisions we take about them will have profound consequences for their governance and accountability. The House of Commons Public Administration Select Committee, which I chair, has been examining these issues over recent years, both in the context of specific constitutional reforms – to public appointments, ombudsmen, ministerial conduct and so on – and directly in a recent inquiry and report, Ethics and Standards: the Regulation of Conduct in Public Life. That inquiry, which had the two editors of this Report and Professor Robert Hazell of the Constitution Unit as its special advisers, looked at many of the questions that this Report examines, and, like it, did so in a comparative and principled way. While we made a number of concrete proposals, we also set out basic principles and issues for further research which are essential to the construction of an effective and accountable system of ethical regulation of democratic government, in place of the ad hocery we have at present. I am pleased that this new Report takes our Committee’s work forward, and I hope that academics, parliaments and governments will maintain this momentum. This report is especially useful as it is the synthesis of the work of both senior parliamentary officials and of expert academics. Both the Study of Parliament Group and the Constitution Unit have long and enviable track records in bringing forward sensible and practical constitutional and parliamentary reforms. This Report is a fine example of that tradition. Contrary to what is sometimes suggested, these are not just dry, technical ‘process’ issues for political anoraks and insiders. How we regulate effectively and ethically the way we are governed is not a second-order matter. And the extent to which this regulation is anchored firmly in the representative institution of a parliament will be a measure of its democratic accountability. 5 6 Contributors Ruth Barry is a research officer within the Research and Library Service for the Northern Ireland Assembly specialising in legislation and criminal justice. She completed her LL.B with Politics (Hons) at Queen’s University, Belfast in 2005 and in 2007 her Bar Vocational Course at the University of the West of England. She was called to the Bar of England and Wales at Lincoln’s Inn, London in March 2008, and is currently completing a MSc in Criminal Justice at Queen’s University, Belfast. Robert Buchanan is a public law specialist based in Wellington, New Zealand. He worked for the Office of the Ombudsman in the 1980s, was Director of the New Zealand Law Commission in the 1990s, and served for 8 years as an Assistant Auditor-General until 2006. He now has his own legal practice, working in the public law field both within New Zealand and internationally. Oonagh Gay is Head of the Parliament and Constitution Centre in the House of Commons Library and has written widely on constitutional matters, including Conduct Unbecoming: The Regulation of Parliamentary Behaviour, the product of research by the Study of Parliament Group in 2004. Philip Giddings is Head of the School of Politics and International Relations at the University of Reading. His publications include The Ombudsman, the Citizen and Parliament (edited with Roy Gregory, Politico's, 2002) and Righting Wrongs: the Ombudsman in Six Continents (edited with Roy Gregory, IOS Press, 2000). With Michael Rush he is editor of Palgrave's Annual Review of British Politics. Elise Hurtubise-Loranger is an analyst with the Parliamentary Information and Research Service of the Library of Parliament in Ottawa, Canada. She pursued bilingual studies in Civil Law and Common Law at the University of Ottawa and articled with the Legal Services of the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages before joining the Library after her call to the Bar in 2005. She practices mainly in the fields of Constitutional Law and Public Law. Robert Pyper is Professor of Government and Public Management, and Head of the Division of Public Policy, at Glasgow Caledonian University. Zoe Robinson is a research officer in the Northern Ireland Assembly, specialising in the areas of equality, human rights and justice. She holds an LLB (Hons) Degree in Law from the University of Dundee and a Masters (LL.M) in Human Rights and Criminal Justice from Queen’s University, Belfast. Prior to working in the Assembly’s Research Service, she was an assistant editor in the Office of the Official Report (Hansard). Alys Thomas is a Senior Research Officer in the Members' Research Service of the National Assembly for Wales. Previously she lectured in government and 7 politics at the University of Glamorgan and has published on the subjects of government and politics in Wales and devolution. Barry Winetrobe was, until 2007, Reader in Law at Napier University, Edinburgh, and is now a parliamentary and constitutional consultant. He has published on constitutional reform and devolution, including the Scottish Parliament. Tony Wright has been a Labour MP since 1992, and, since 1999, has chaired the House of Commons Public Administration Select Committee. Dr Wright was Parliamentary Private Secretary to the Lord Chancellor 1997-98. He lectured in politics at Birmingham University, where he is now an Honorary Professor; writes widely on political and constitutional issues in academic books and journals, and is co-editor of The Political Quarterly. 8 Preface Oonagh Gay & Barry K Winetrobe This Report has its origins in the research we published with the Constitution Unit in 2003, Officers of Parliament: Transforming the Role. This was the first detailed attempt to map out which offices could be described as constitutional watchdogs, in particular those which are, or could be regarded as, ‘Officers of Parliament’. The report considered the accountability and independence arrangements for each such office, explained how the term ‘Officer of Parliament’ had developed from the designation given to senior parliamentary officers, such as the Speaker and the Clerk, and examined the interaction of each watchdog with Parliament, and the value or otherwise of the Officer of Parliament designation. As this topic gradually became ever more salient in British constitutional and political governance, our interest in this subject was maintained through the establishment and operation of a study group of the UK Study of Parliament Group (SPG). The SPG comprises academics with a particular interest in Parliament, and serving parliamentary officials. The aim is to improve understanding of the problems faced in operating an effective parliamentary democracy. This particular study group, on which we acted as co-conveners, contained a broad range of senior officials from the UK’s various parliaments and assemblies, and academics with expertise in political science, public law and public administration. Over the past few years, the study group operated mainly by regular monitoring of developments both within the various territories and at the Centre, and by reference to particular types of watchdog (ombudsmen, auditors
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Scottish Parliament Report
    European Committee 3rd Report, 2002 Report on the Inquiry into the Future of Cohesion Policy and Structural Funds post 2006 SP Paper 618 £13.30 Session 1 (2002) Parliamentary copyright. Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body 2002. Applications for reproduction should be made in writing to the Copyright Unit, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, St Clements House, 2-16 Colegate, Norwich NR3 1BQ Fax 01603 723000, which is administering the copyright on behalf of the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body. Produced and published in Scotland on behalf of the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body by The Stationery Office Ltd. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office is independent of and separate from the company now trading as The Stationery Office Ltd, which is responsible for printing and publishing Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body publications. European Committee 3rd Report, 2002 Report on the Inquiry into the Future of Cohesion Policy and Structural Funds post 2006 European Committee Remit and membership Remit: 1. The remit of the European Committee is to consider and report on- (a) proposals for European Communities legislation; (b) the implementation of European Communities legislation; and (c) any European Communities or European Union issue. 2. The Committee may refer matters to the Parliamentary Bureau or other committees where it considers it appropriate to do so. 3. The convener of the Committee shall not be the convener of any other committee whose remit is, in the opinion of the Parliamentary Bureau, relevant to that of the Committee. 4. The Parliamentary Bureau shall normally propose a person to be a member of the Committee only if he or she is a member of another committee whose remit is, in the opinion of the Parliamentary Bureau, relevant to that of the Committee.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Services Ombudsmen. This Consultation
    The Law Commission Consultation Paper No 196 PUBLIC SERVICES OMBUDSMEN A Consultation Paper ii THE LAW COMMISSION – HOW WE CONSULT About the Law Commission The Law Commission was set up by section 1 of the Law Commissions Act 1965 for the purpose of promoting the reform of the law. The Law Commissioners are: The Rt Hon Lord Justice Munby (Chairman), Professor Elizabeth Cooke, Mr David Hertzell, Professor David Ormerod1 and Miss Frances Patterson QC. The Chief Executive is: Mr Mark Ormerod CB. Topic of this consultation This consultation paper deals with the public services ombudsmen. Impact assessment An impact assessment is included in Appendix A. Scope of this consultation The purpose of this consultation is to generate responses to our provisional proposals. Duration of the consultation We invite responses from 2 September 2010 to 3 December 2010. How to respond By email to: [email protected] By post to: Public Law Team, Law Commission, Steel House, 11 Tothill Street, London, SW1H 9LJ Tel: 020-3334-0262 / Fax: 020-3334-0201 If you send your comments by post, it would be helpful if, wherever possible, you could send them to us electronically as well (for example, on CD or by email to the above address, in any commonly used format. After the consultation In the light of the responses we receive, we will decide our final recommendations and we will present them to Parliament. It will be for Parliament to decide whether to approve any changes to the law. Code of Practice We are a signatory to the Government’s Code of Practice on Consultation and carry out our consultations in accordance with the Code criteria (set out on the next page).
    [Show full text]
  • Stagecoach Group out in Front for 10-Year Tram Contract Responsible for Operating Tram Services on the New Lines to Oldham, Rochdale, Droylsden and Chorlton
    AquaBus New alliance Meet the Sightseeing ready to forged for megabus.com tours' bumper set sail rail bid A-Team launch The newspaper of Stagecoach Group Issue 66 Spring 07 By Steven Stewart tagecoach Group has been Sselected as the preferred bidder to operate and maintain the Manchester Metrolink tram Metrolink bid network. The announcement from Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive (GMPTE) will see Stagecoach Metrolink taking over the 37km system and the associated infrastructure. The contract will run for 10 years and is expected to begin within the next three months. right on track It will include managing a number of special projects sponsored by GMPTE to improve the trams and infrastructure to benefit passengers. Stagecoach Metrolink will also be Stagecoach Group out in front for 10-year tram contract responsible for operating tram services on the new lines to Oldham, Rochdale, Droylsden and Chorlton. Nearly 20 million passengers travel every year on the network, which generates an annual turnover of around £22million. ”We will build on our operational expertise to deliver a first-class service to passengers in Manchester.” Ian Dobbs Stagecoach already operates Supertram, a 29km tram system in Sheffield, incorpo- rating three routes in the city. Ian Dobbs, Chief Executive of Stagecoach Group’s Rail Division, said: “We are delighted to have been selected as preferred bidder to run Manchester’s Metrolink network, one of the UK’s premier light rail systems. “Stagecoach operates the tram system in Sheffield, where we are now carrying a record 13 million passengers a year, and we will build on our operational expertise to deliver a first-class service to passengers in Growing places: Plans are in place to tempt more people on to the tram in Manchester.
    [Show full text]
  • SPOKES Leaflet 86 Late 2003 and Richard Lochhead [SNP]
    POLITICIANS WE LIKE!! Following the Scottish Parliament election the Cross Party ESSENTIAL CONTACTS Cycle Group re-formed. Mark Ruskell [Green] is new Cycle training: 01505,614302 [email protected]. convener, with vice-conveners Bristow Muldoon [Uib] Traveline Scotland: rail, bus, ferry info [lo include cycle aspects SPOKES Leaflet 86 Late 2003 and Richard Lochhead [SNP]. Meetings are open to the and eyclemap lealleis?] 0870,608,2508 tvww.lraveline.org.uk. public. Details: [email protected]. Potholes, glass on cycleroutes, broken lights, etc anywhere SPOKES, The Lothian Cycle Campaign, St Martins Church, 232 Dairy Road, Edinburgh EHll 2JG ® 0131.313,2114 hIlD;//www,spokes,or£,uk/ /This is a mail address and answerphone - SPOKES is a voluntary organisation mtk nasiaffj Some 15 MSPs [below] signed up for Bike to Work day in Lothian [including Edinburgh], or Falkirk District: and/or joined the Bike Breakfast MSP ride 118.5.03.phoio]. [Use number oti nearesi lamp-posi lo report exact location]. Phone Lab: Sarah Boyack.KcnMcIniosh, PaulintMcNcill, B-Muldoiin 0800.232.123; Or see www.adinburfih.^ov.uk - Iransporl -Clarence. BIKE FUNDS THREAT Grn: Mark Ballard, Cliris Ballance, Robin Harper, Mark Ruskell Bad glass/dumping [Ed only]: Rapid Response 0808.100.3365 Despite two welcome government announcements which SNP: Richard Lochhead, Jim Mather SS/"; Rosie Kane Smoky commercial vehicles: 01506.445216. will assist smaller cycle projects, overall cycle project LibD: Tavish Scotl, Nora Radcliffe Con: Brian Monlcilh Drink-driving, speeding, driving whilst disqualified, and spending is set to fall drastically in less than two years. other road crime: Freephone Crimestoppers 0800.555.111.
    [Show full text]
  • Spice Briefing
    MSPs BY CONSTITUENCY AND REGION Scottish SESSION 1 Parliament This Fact Sheet provides a list of all Members of the Scottish Parliament (MSPs) who served during the first parliamentary session, Fact sheet 12 May 1999-31 March 2003, arranged alphabetically by the constituency or region that they represented. Each person in Scotland is represented by 8 MSPs – 1 constituency MSPs: Historical MSP and 7 regional MSPs. A region is a larger area which covers a Series number of constituencies. 30 March 2007 This Fact Sheet is divided into 2 parts. The first section, ‘MSPs by constituency’, lists the Scottish Parliament constituencies in alphabetical order with the MSP’s name, the party the MSP was elected to represent and the corresponding region. The second section, ‘MSPs by region’, lists the 8 political regions of Scotland in alphabetical order. It includes the name and party of the MSPs elected to represent each region. Abbreviations used: Con Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party Green Scottish Green Party Lab Scottish Labour LD Scottish Liberal Democrats SNP Scottish National Party SSP Scottish Socialist Party 1 MSPs BY CONSTITUENCY: SESSION 1 Constituency MSP Region Aberdeen Central Lewis Macdonald (Lab) North East Scotland Aberdeen North Elaine Thomson (Lab) North East Scotland Aberdeen South Nicol Stephen (LD) North East Scotland Airdrie and Shotts Karen Whitefield (Lab) Central Scotland Angus Andrew Welsh (SNP) North East Scotland Argyll and Bute George Lyon (LD) Highlands & Islands Ayr John Scott (Con)1 South of Scotland Ayr Ian
    [Show full text]
  • Maladministration and Its Remedies
    THE HAMLYN LECTURES Twenty-fifth Series MALADMINISTRATION AND ITS REMEDIES K. C. Wheare STEVENS MALADMINISTRATION AND ITS REMEDIES by K. C. WHEARE Fellow of All Souls College, Oxford Maladministration may be defined as administrative action (or inaction) based on or influenced by improper considerations or conduct. In this book, published contemporaneously with the 25th series of lectures under the auspices of the Hamlyn Trust, Sir Kenneth Wheare discusses the existing remedies for maladministration in Britain, and assesses their effec- tiveness in comparison with those available in other countries, particularly in Europe. The book begins with a comprehensive survey of maladministration as it may occur in the actions of the officials of both central and local government With the tendency towards giant departments in central government, and with the introduction in 1974 of enlarged local government units, the author sees a real danger, not only that public administration may be still further removed from those it is intended to serve, but also that more administration is likely to mean correspondingly more maladministration. The discussion opens up the vast question of how a civil service should be recruited and organised in the first place. The author goes on to consider, in separate chapters, the institutions intended at present to remedy mal- administration. He discusses the work of the Courts of Law, including Tribunals, and compares them with their counterparts in France and elsewhere. He takes a fresh look at the doctrine of Ministerial Respon- sibility and considers the effectiveness of Parliamentary Select Committees and Public and Ministerial Inquiries, making particular reference to the 1954 Crichel Down affair and to the yehicle and General Insurance Inquiry of 1972.
    [Show full text]
  • The Parliamentary Ombudsman: Firefighter Or Fire-Watcher?
    12 The Parliamentary Ombudsman: Firefi ghter or fi re-watcher? Contents 1. In search of a role 2. The PCA’s offi ce 3. From maladministration to good administration 4. Firefi ghting or fi re-watching? (a) The small claims court (b) Ombudsmen and courts (c) Fire-watching: Inspection and audit 5. Inquisitorial procedure (a) Screening (b) Investigation (c) Report 6. The ‘Big Inquiry’ (a) Grouping complaints: The Child Support Agency (b) Political cases 7. Occupational pensions: Challenging the ombudsman 8. Control by courts? 9. Conclusion: An ombudsman unfettered? 1. In search of a role In Chapter 10, we considered complaints-handling by the administration, set- tling for a ‘bottom-up’ approach. Th is led us to focus on proportionate dispute resolution (PDR) and machinery, such as internal review, by which complaints can be settled before they ripen into disputes. In so doing, we diverged from the ‘top-down’ tradition of administrative law where tribunals are seen as court substitutes. We returned to the classic approach in Chapter 11, looking at the recent reorganisation of the tribunal service and its place in the administrative justice system. We saw how the oral and adversarial tradition of British justice was refl ected in tribunal procedure and considered the importance attached to impartiality and independence, values now protected by ECHR Art. 6(1). We, 529 The Parliamentary Ombudsman: Firefi ghter or fi re-watcher? however, argued that recent reshaping of the tribunal system left unanswered key questions about oral and adversarial proceedings and whether they are always the most appropriate vehicle for resolving disputes with the administra- tion.
    [Show full text]
  • Improving Administrative Redress in Jersey
    JERSEY LAW COMMISSION CONSULTATION PAPER IMPROVING ADMINISTRATIVE REDRESS IN JERSEY JERSEY LAW COMMISSION CONSULTATION PAPER No. 1/2016/CP APRIL 2016 The Jersey Law Commission is an independent body appointed by the States Assembly to identify and examine aspects of Jersey law with a view to their development and reform. This includes in particular: the elimination of anomalies; the repeal of obsolete and unnecessary enactments; the reductions of the number of separate enactments; and generally the simplification and modernisation of the law. Members of the Law Commission serve on a part-time basis and are unremunerated. The current Law Commissioners are: Mr Clive Chaplin (chairman) Advocate Barbara Corbett Advocate Alan Binnington Ms Claire de Than Mr Malcolm Le Boutillier Professor Andrew Le Sueur (the Topic Commissioner and author of this report) Mr Jonathan Walker Published by the Jersey Law Commission in April 2016 This publication is available free of charge on the Jersey Law Commission website. Jersey Law Commission Law House 1 Seale Street St Helier Jersey JE2 3QG www.jerseylawcommission.org [email protected] Improving Administrative Redress Consultation Paper | CP 2016/1 page 2 CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 7 1.1. How to respond to this consultation ...................................................................................... 7 1.2. Administrative decision-making ..........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Work of the Ombudsman
    House of Commons Public Administration Select Committee WORK OF THE OMBUDSMAN Written Evidence List of written evidence 1. M B Wright (PHSO 1) 2. Alan Vaughan (PHSO 2) 3. C N Rock (PHSO 3) 4. Alison Pope (PHSO 4) 5. Helga Warzecha (PHSO 5) 6. Brenda Prentice (PHSO 6) 7. Alan Reid (PHSO 7) 8. Which? (PHSO 8) 9. Dee Speers (PHSO 9) 10. James Titcombe (PHSO 10) 11. Action Against Medical Accidents (AvMA) (PHSO 11) 12. Anonymous (PHSO 12) 13. Uncaged Campaigns (PHSO 13) 14. Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO 14) 15. Patrick Cockrell (PHSO 15) 16. W Morris (PHSO 16) 17. D R Tweedie (PHSO 17) Written evidence submitted by M.B.Wright (PHSO 1) 1) Although we understand the PASC cannot look at individual cases, we have a long outstanding and legitimate grievance against the PHSO case which highlights very serious failings by various senior members of that organisation, and they have resisted all attempts to get them to explain and/or justify their unsustainable position. Given the role they nominally perform, their reluctance – indeed their determination –not to even try to substantiate their indefensible position is very worrying – and suspicious. 2) We have submitted full detailed information of this travesty – with photocopies of all salient documents – to the PHSO, yet they negligently and unprofessionally overlooked the undisputed facts and merely nodded through the unsustainable status quo, presumably believing they would never hear of it again. When we quite properly questioned their flawed decision – sending copies of various letters and emails confirming our position and drawing attention to the errors in their findings – they simply clammed up and refused to explain themselves.
    [Show full text]
  • XPG Minutes 12 March 2003
    Minutes of Cross Party Group on Chronic Pain Wednesday 12 March 2003 at 12.30 Quakers Rooms, 7 Victoria Terrace,Edinburgh Attendance:- Dorothy-Grace Elder,MSP (Convenor) Gordon Anderson John Thomson Gerry Lafferty Helen McDade Cross Party Group on ME Mary Mulligan MSP Yvonne McEwan Derek Jones QMUC\Pain Concern Denis Martin, Janette Barrie NHS Lanarkshire Bill Macrae Ninewells Hospital,Dundee John Asbury Western Infirmary, Glasgow David Falconer Pain Association Liz Macleod Physiotherapy Pain Association Colin Shearer Backcare Mary Scanlon MSP Mary Mulligan Deputy Health Minister Joe Logan Scottish Executive Michael Cornbleet Scottish Executive Apologies:- Nora Radcliffe MSP Evelyn McKechnie Blair Smith John Currie Susan Aikenhead John McAllion MSP Nora Radcliffe MSP Susan Preston Rosemary Showell Michael Walton Paulo Quadras Christina McDonald Minutes of Cross Party Group on Chronic Pain Wednesday 12 March 2003 at 12.30 Quakers Rooms, 7 Victoria Terrace,Edinburgh 1.Dorothy-Grace Elder opened the meeting welcoming everyone and introduced the Deputy Health Minister Mary Mulligan,MSP.The Deputy Minister had to leave at 1p.m and it was agreed to allow her to address the meeting first and then respond to questions. 2.Discussion ensued on the issues raised after the Minister left. It was agreed that all members would undertake to write to Joe Logan with their views and comments on the inquiry being conducted by Professor McEwan. Details of contact details would be circulated urgently to all members Action: Gordon Anderson A summary of action points would be circulated to all members. Action :Gordon Anderson 3.Minutes of cross party group on chronic pain 20 June 2002 Proposed and seconded as an accurate record 2.
    [Show full text]
  • The Scottish Parliament Election
    The Scottish Parliament Election Report 3 May 2007 and Analysis The Scottish Parliament Election Report and 3 May 2007 Analysis The Scottish Parliament Election 3 May 2007 3 Preface The 2007 election produced a Parliament that Although the Electoral Reform Society would like broadly reflected the views of Scottish voters. to see the Scottish Parliament elected using the While the number of rejected ballot papers was Single Transferable Vote (STV) method, as was a serious cause for concern, it should not di- the case for the local government elections, the vert attention from an election in which the ac- Additional Member System (AMS) has given tual system worked tolerably well. No Scottish Scotland a representative Parliament. The mi- party had the support of anything like a major- nority SNP administration that has been formed ity of voters, and as a consequence, no party will need to seek the support of the other parties now has anything approaching a majority of in order to enact legislation, and that will ensure the seats. If the First-Past-the-Post system that decisions taken reflect the views of a much (which we still use to elect our MPs), had been higher proportion of voters than would otherwise used, Labour would have won an outright ma- have been the case – very much in keeping with jority of seats, despite only having had the sup- the four founding principles of devolution: the port of little more than 30 per cent of voters. sharing of power, accountability, openness and equal opportunities. This report has been prepared by Dr Martin Steven, Research Officer for ERS Scotland, with contributions from Christine McCartney and David Orr, and additional assistance from Ashley Dé, Dr Ken Ritchie, Amy Rodger, George Sheriff and Laura Woods.
    [Show full text]
  • Meeting of the Parliament
    MEETING OF THE PARLIAMENT Wednesday 21 March 2007 Session 2 £5.00 Parliamentary copyright. Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body 2007. Applications for reproduction should be made in writing to the Licensing Division, Her Majesty‟s Stationery Office, St Clements House, 2-16 Colegate, Norwich NR3 1BQ Fax 01603 723000, which is administering the copyright on behalf of the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body. Produced and published in Scotland on behalf of the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body by RR Donnelley. CONTENTS Wednesday 21 March 2007 Debates Col. TIME FOR REFLECTION .................................................................................................................................. 33363 POINT OF ORDER .......................................................................................................................................... 33365 RIGHTS OF RELATIVES TO DAMAGES (MESOTHELIOMA) (SCOTLAND) BILL: STAGE 3 ....................................... 33366 Motion moved—[Johann Lamont]. The Deputy Minister for Justice (Johann Lamont) ................................................................................... 33366 Mr Kenny MacAskill (Lothians) (SNP) ..................................................................................................... 33369 Margaret Mitchell (Central Scotland) (Con) ............................................................................................. 33370 Mike Pringle (Edinburgh South) (LD) .....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]