Chamber
Plenary, 09 Oct 2008
09 Oct 2008 · S3 · Plenary
Item of business
Elections 2007
Today's debate is welcome, although much of the ground covered in the Local Government and Communities Committee's report is not exactly new. Scotland's experience of the 2007 elections has been discussed several times in this Parliament. Despite what Michael McMahon seemed to suggest, the subject has been discussed widely by the general public in Scotland, too.
After all that discussion, and with the report in front of us, it is clear that, throughout Scotland, a consensus is emerging among our body politic that there needs to be much tighter management of the electoral process and, in particular, that responsibility for elections in Scotland should rest with the Scottish Parliament.
Nicol Stephen described the election last year as "a dark day". Given the Government that was elected, I am not sure that I agree with that statement, but I am sure that we can all recall the uncertainty that surrounded the elections of May 2007. I am sure that none of us wants that experience to be repeated. The committee's report, which builds on the Gould report, sets out a number of ways in which we can ensure that it is not repeated.
I will focus on a few key aspects of the committee's report. The report states that the post of chief electoral officer has operated successfully in Northern Ireland and considers how that could inform the establishment of a chief returning officer post in Scotland. The concept is not totally unusual: in 1997, in the devolution referendum, a chief counting officer for Scotland was appointed. Of course, we look forward to another constitutional referendum in Scotland in the not-too-distant future—one that will deliver Scotland's independence, which, naturally, would give this Parliament full powers over electoral law and regulation. It would also address Alison McInnes's concern about voter fatigue by removing an unnecessary tier of Government elections in Scotland. Perhaps that is an issue for another day. The report makes it clear that, if we had a chief returning officer for Scotland, that would help to establish lines of accountability among the diverse local authorities in Scotland and provide the oversight that was so clearly lacking in 2007.
The decoupling of Scottish parliamentary and local authority elections must not be overlooked. Such a move is extremely important for local democracy and for the mandate of our councillors and the legitimacy of our municipal governments. A separate polling day for local authorities, preferably at the mid-point between two parliamentary elections, will, I hope, provide a clearer focus in communities on issues of particular concern. It is a matter of realpolitik that decoupled polls can, and do, serve as a mid-term verdict on a national Government, but that is not necessarily a bad thing, or something for a Government of any party—particularly the SNP—to be afraid of.
However, the primary rationale for decoupling the elections is, rightly, to ensure that our municipal governments are given the prominence that they deserve as a result of having their own election day. As the committee's report acknowledges, that is a good motivation for us to act. We should look to decouple the elections.
One change that has already been made in local government elections is the introduction of the single transferable vote, which has been an incredibly positive move. I have excellent relations with many councillors throughout central Scotland and there has been a positive reaction from constituents who are able to keep their elected representatives on their toes through the multimember system. The introduction of STV has changed Scotland's local political landscape for the better—it has changed beyond recognition—even if it did take a bit longer than expected to realise the extent of what had happened on that day in May last year.
However, the introduction of STV as a new voting system in Scotland has not been without its challenges. The committee report comments on the design of the ballot paper for the local elections. It is important to note that, although the rate of spoiled ballots in the local elections was unacceptably high, it was still lower than the rate of spoiled ballots in our parliamentary elections and in STV elections held in Northern Ireland. That suggests to me that ballot design was not the sole reason for confusion and problems. After all, it was the Scottish electorate's first experience of using STV. We can expect the number of spoiled ballot papers to decline in future elections as people get used to the system, particularly if elections are decoupled.
The committee report also recommends that we investigate the increased use of postal voting. Postal voting is already under way in Ohio and several other American states four weeks before the United States presidential election. Given that Scotland is smaller than many of those states, perhaps we do not need such a radical move, but we can certainly explore the idea further. I look forward to hearing any proposals that emerge in that regard.
There is no single magic bullet in the committee's report or in any of the other reports. The Gould report, which the Parliament endorsed in full, remains the benchmark. Key to Gould was the call for full power over elections to be devolved to Scotland—but only if that power is used to implement the range of other recommendations that we have been discussing.
Voters in Scotland need and deserve an electoral system that enhances our democracy and ensures the legitimacy of those who are elected. They used such a system in 1997 to create their own Parliament. Surely that Parliament should have the responsibility and opportunity to repay the trust of the voters with the power to legislate for and oversee the running of elections in Scotland. I hope that the next time that the issue comes before us in the chamber, we can make a real and lasting difference to the electoral process.
After all that discussion, and with the report in front of us, it is clear that, throughout Scotland, a consensus is emerging among our body politic that there needs to be much tighter management of the electoral process and, in particular, that responsibility for elections in Scotland should rest with the Scottish Parliament.
Nicol Stephen described the election last year as "a dark day". Given the Government that was elected, I am not sure that I agree with that statement, but I am sure that we can all recall the uncertainty that surrounded the elections of May 2007. I am sure that none of us wants that experience to be repeated. The committee's report, which builds on the Gould report, sets out a number of ways in which we can ensure that it is not repeated.
I will focus on a few key aspects of the committee's report. The report states that the post of chief electoral officer has operated successfully in Northern Ireland and considers how that could inform the establishment of a chief returning officer post in Scotland. The concept is not totally unusual: in 1997, in the devolution referendum, a chief counting officer for Scotland was appointed. Of course, we look forward to another constitutional referendum in Scotland in the not-too-distant future—one that will deliver Scotland's independence, which, naturally, would give this Parliament full powers over electoral law and regulation. It would also address Alison McInnes's concern about voter fatigue by removing an unnecessary tier of Government elections in Scotland. Perhaps that is an issue for another day. The report makes it clear that, if we had a chief returning officer for Scotland, that would help to establish lines of accountability among the diverse local authorities in Scotland and provide the oversight that was so clearly lacking in 2007.
The decoupling of Scottish parliamentary and local authority elections must not be overlooked. Such a move is extremely important for local democracy and for the mandate of our councillors and the legitimacy of our municipal governments. A separate polling day for local authorities, preferably at the mid-point between two parliamentary elections, will, I hope, provide a clearer focus in communities on issues of particular concern. It is a matter of realpolitik that decoupled polls can, and do, serve as a mid-term verdict on a national Government, but that is not necessarily a bad thing, or something for a Government of any party—particularly the SNP—to be afraid of.
However, the primary rationale for decoupling the elections is, rightly, to ensure that our municipal governments are given the prominence that they deserve as a result of having their own election day. As the committee's report acknowledges, that is a good motivation for us to act. We should look to decouple the elections.
One change that has already been made in local government elections is the introduction of the single transferable vote, which has been an incredibly positive move. I have excellent relations with many councillors throughout central Scotland and there has been a positive reaction from constituents who are able to keep their elected representatives on their toes through the multimember system. The introduction of STV has changed Scotland's local political landscape for the better—it has changed beyond recognition—even if it did take a bit longer than expected to realise the extent of what had happened on that day in May last year.
However, the introduction of STV as a new voting system in Scotland has not been without its challenges. The committee report comments on the design of the ballot paper for the local elections. It is important to note that, although the rate of spoiled ballots in the local elections was unacceptably high, it was still lower than the rate of spoiled ballots in our parliamentary elections and in STV elections held in Northern Ireland. That suggests to me that ballot design was not the sole reason for confusion and problems. After all, it was the Scottish electorate's first experience of using STV. We can expect the number of spoiled ballot papers to decline in future elections as people get used to the system, particularly if elections are decoupled.
The committee report also recommends that we investigate the increased use of postal voting. Postal voting is already under way in Ohio and several other American states four weeks before the United States presidential election. Given that Scotland is smaller than many of those states, perhaps we do not need such a radical move, but we can certainly explore the idea further. I look forward to hearing any proposals that emerge in that regard.
There is no single magic bullet in the committee's report or in any of the other reports. The Gould report, which the Parliament endorsed in full, remains the benchmark. Key to Gould was the call for full power over elections to be devolved to Scotland—but only if that power is used to implement the range of other recommendations that we have been discussing.
Voters in Scotland need and deserve an electoral system that enhances our democracy and ensures the legitimacy of those who are elected. They used such a system in 1997 to create their own Parliament. Surely that Parliament should have the responsibility and opportunity to repay the trust of the voters with the power to legislate for and oversee the running of elections in Scotland. I hope that the next time that the issue comes before us in the chamber, we can make a real and lasting difference to the electoral process.
In the same item of business
The Presiding Officer (Alex Fergusson):
NPA
Good morning. The first item of business this morning is a debate on motion S3M-2667, in the name of Duncan McNeil, on behalf of the Local Government and Com...
Duncan McNeil (Greenock and Inverclyde) (Lab):
Lab
Let me start by thanking the committee members, the clerks, the officers and the Scottish Parliament information centre for all their hard work and patience ...
The Minister for Parliamentary Business (Bruce Crawford):
SNP
I wrote to the convener of the committee on 1 August to respond formally to the committee's report. I said that I was grateful for the committee's detailed c...
David Whitton (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (Lab):
Lab
We are here to consider the report into the circumstances surrounding the elections for the Scottish Parliament and Scottish local authorities that the Parli...
David McLetchie (Edinburgh Pentlands) (Con):
Con
Much rhetorical hot air has been expended on the debacle of the elections to the Scottish Parliament and Scotland's councils on 3 May last year when, as we k...
Alison McInnes (North East Scotland) (LD):
LD
It has been said that, in a democracy, the most important office is that of citizen. Sadly, it is clear from the analysis of last year's electoral process th...
Bruce Crawford:
SNP
I have read carefully what was said by the Electoral Commission, which has made a useful contribution to the debate. However, I find it difficult to understa...
Alison McInnes:
LD
As I said, the suggestion is worthy of further consideration. Before we come to conclusions, we should explore it further. We need something that refines the...
The Presiding Officer:
NPA
We come to speeches in the open debate. Members have a tight 6 minutes.
Bob Doris (Glasgow) (SNP):
SNP
In looking at the Gould report and considering its recommendations and their impact on the local government elections, it became apparent to members of the L...
Andy Kerr (East Kilbride) (Lab):
Lab
Mr Gould also said to the committee:"We do not need to bring responsibility for all elections to the Scottish Parliament in order to get clarity."—Official R...
Bob Doris:
SNP
He said that, but he also said that responsibility should go to the Scottish Parliament because that would be the logical choice.I had hoped that today's deb...
Duncan McNeil:
Lab
Does the member think that it was remiss of the committee—albeit that I suggested it—that we did not seek to broaden the remit of our inquiry to look at Scot...
Bob Doris:
SNP
The committee convener makes a good point, but if legislative responsibility were to be brought to this chamber that would happen quite naturally.Yesterday, ...
Michael McMahon (Hamilton North and Bellshill) (Lab):
Lab
We should welcome the fact that the Local Government and Communities Committee's report on the 2007 election has once more given us the chance to debate an i...
Bob Doris:
SNP
Would it not have been advisable and courteous for the Secretary of State for Scotland to await the outcome of today's debate first?
Michael McMahon:
Lab
I do not think that that would have mattered, given that he was restating a 10-year-old policy that the Government has no intention of changing. I could have...
John Wilson (Central Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
Every member who stood for election last year has their own experiences of the May 2007 Scottish Parliament and local government elections; David Whitton des...
James Kelly (Glasgow Rutherglen) (Lab):
Lab
I welcome the opportunity to take part in the debate and I commend the committee for its work in producing its comprehensive report.There is no doubt that al...
Nicol Stephen (Aberdeen South) (LD):
LD
The May 2007 election debacle was a dark day for democracy in Scotland. More than 85,000 votes were rejected in the constituency ballots and more than 60,000...
Andy Kerr:
Lab
For clarity, will the member remind the Parliament of his party's position on the ballot paper and on decoupling the elections?
Nicol Stephen:
LD
I will come on to those points. I do not believe that we should tinker with the system; fundamental change is needed.The debacle in May 2007 was a serious fa...
Gavin Brown (Lothians) (Con):
Con
Does the member regret the trebling in the failure of voting at council level in 2007, as compared with 2003 and 1999?
Nicol Stephen:
LD
I regret any spoiled ballot. However, it is important to emphasise that the dramatic shift was in the failure of voting under the Scottish Parliament voting ...
Jamie Hepburn (Central Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
Today's debate is welcome, although much of the ground covered in the Local Government and Communities Committee's report is not exactly new. Scotland's expe...
Des McNulty (Clydebank and Milngavie) (Lab):
Lab
The opening speakers all emphasised the importance of putting voters first when designing electoral systems. That is important, and it is the right thing to ...
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Alasdair Morgan):
SNP
Order. The member must withdraw that remark.
Des McNulty:
Lab
I withdraw that remark. There is an issue around voter fatigue. Not next year, but in future we will end up with voters being asked to vote every year, wheth...
Patrick Harvie (Glasgow) (Green):
Green
How infuriating that Des McNulty ended that speech with something—fixed terms—that I agree with him on.I thank the Local Government and Communities Committee...
Sandra White (Glasgow) (SNP):
SNP
I, too, thank the Local Government and Communities Committee for its report on what I would call the chaotic 2007 elections; I also thank all who gave eviden...