The Local Work of Scottish MPs and MSPs: Effects of Non-coterminous Boundaries and AMS Report to the Commission on Boundary Differences and Voting Systems Dr Jonathan Bradbury (University of Wales, Swansea) and Dr Meg Russell (Constitution Unit, University College London) May 2005 Preface This report has been commissioned from the authors by the Commission on Boundary Differences and Voting Systems in Scotland (The “Arbuthnott Commission”). The Commission was established to investigate the consequences of having different electoral systems in Scotland operating within different electoral boundaries – in particular for voter participation, engagement between public bodies and representatives, and representation of constituents. The report primarily addresses the third of these questions. It is based on evidence collected between 2000 and 2005 on three different research projects undertaken by the authors. Two of these projects were funded by the Leverhulme Trust’s ‘Nations and Regions’ programme and the third by the ESRC’s ‘Devolution and Constitutional Change’ programme. The evidence in the report is based on three rounds of postal surveys and interviews with MPs and MSPs over this period. - 1 - Table of Contents Preface...............................................................................................................................................1 List of Tables.....................................................................................................................................3 Executive Summary ..........................................................................................................................5 Introduction: The Local Representative Role in Scotland ................................................................9 Part 1: MPs and MSPs – Issues Around Coterminosity..................................................................12 Devolution and the Changing Pattern of Constituency Casework..............................................12 MPs’ Relations with Constituency MSPs ...................................................................................14 What Drives Competition and Co-operation...............................................................................18 Public Understanding..................................................................................................................22 Guidelines about Members’ Behaviour ......................................................................................23 Attitudes Towards Coterminosity ...............................................................................................25 The Likely Effects of Non-coterminosity ...................................................................................26 Part 2: List and Constituency Members – the Operation of the Additional Member System ........31 Roles in Local Representation Under AMS................................................................................31 Relations between MSPs over Local Representation..................................................................37 Views on Guidance about Members’ Behaviour ........................................................................40 MSP Views on Reform of the Electoral System.........................................................................44 MPs’ Relations with List MSPs ..................................................................................................47 The Operation of AMS and Multiple Electoral Systems ............................................................50 Part 3: Policy Options .....................................................................................................................54 Coterminosity and MP/MSP relations ........................................................................................55 Managing the Additional Member System .................................................................................57 Possible New Voting Systems ....................................................................................................59 Appendices......................................................................................................................................61 Appendix 1: Methods and Survey response rates .......................................................................61 Appendix 2: Party control of Scottish seats in Westminster and Scottish Parliament................63 A. Westminster constituencies................................................................................................63 B. Scottish Parliament constituencies .....................................................................................69 - 2 - List of Tables Introduction: The Local Representative Role in Scotland Table 1: Percentage of MPs and MSPs ranking local and other roles as ‘very important’, 2004.................................. 10 Table 2: Mean number of hours per week spent on constituency duties by MPs and MSPs, 2004.............................. .10 Part 1: MPs and MSPs – Issues Around Coterminosity Table 3: Change in constituency caseload of Scottish MPs since devolution ............................................................... 13 Table 4: Mean proportion of constituency correspondence received by Scottish MPs relating to four levels of government...................................................................................................................................................... 14 Table 5: Mean proportion of constituency correspondence received by MSPs relating to four levels of government . 14 Table 6: MPs’ perceptions of co-operation and competition in relationships with local constituency MSPs............... 15 Table 7: Constituency MSPs’ perceptions of co-operation and competition in relationships with local MPs .............. 15 Table 8: Specific forms of co-operation between MPs and constituency MSPs, MP responses 2004 .......................... 16 Table 9: MPs’ actions when approached about devolved matters................................................................................. 17 Table 10: Constituency MSPs’ actions when approached about Westminster matters ................................................. 17 Table 11: Extent to which MPs and constituency MSPs report being passed constituency correspondence by each other, 2004 ...................................................................................................................................................... 18 Table 12: Specific forms of co-operation between MPs and constituency MSPs of same and different parties, MP responses 2004 ................................................................................................................................................ 19 Table 13: Forwarding constituency enquiries by MPs and MSPs of same and different parties, MP responses 2004.. 20 Table 14: Forwarding constituency enquiries by MPs and MSPs of same and different parties, MSP responses 200420 Table 15: Perceived competition and co-operation between constituency MPs and MSPs of same and different parties, 2004................................................................................................................................................................. 20 Table 16: Is advice to the public relating to the differing responsibilities of MPs and MSPs adequate? MPs’ responses 2004................................................................................................................................................................. 22 Table 17: Is advice to the public relating to the differing responsibilities of MPs and MSPs adequate? MSPs’ responses 2004 ................................................................................................................................................ 23 Table 18: Are guidelines regulating MP-MSP relations adequate? MPs’ responses 2004............................................ 24 Table 19: Are guidelines regulating MP-MSP relations adequate? MSPs’ responses 2004.......................................... 24 Table 20: Should identical constituency boundaries be retained? MPs’ responses....................................................... 26 Table 21: Should identical constituency boundaries be retained? MSPs’ responses..................................................... 26 Table 22: Effect of ending coterminosity on number of overlapping constituencies .................................................... 27 Table 23: Effect of ending coterminosity in terms of competing party control............................................................. 29 Part 2: List and Constituency Members – the Operation of the Additional Member System Table 24: Percentage of list and constituency MSPs ranking local and other roles as ‘very important’, 2004............. 32 Table 25: Mean number of hours per week spent on constituency duties by list and constituency MSPs, 2004.......... 32 Table 26: Mean number of constituency surgeries held by MSPs per month ............................................................... 33 Table 27: Number of communications (letters/emails/phone calls) per week received by MSPs from individual constituents...................................................................................................................................................... 34 Table 28: Levels of casework activity by different types of List MSPs, 2004.............................................................