‘Senedd needs 80-90 members’
A SENEDD committee has recommended that the size of Wales’ legislature should be increased to have 80 or 90 members.
There are currently 60 Members of the Senedd charged with representing 40 constituencies and 20 regions.
The Committee on Senedd Electoral Reform says that is not enough to fulfil the institution’s responsibilities scrutinising the Welsh Government and making laws.
It also wants a more proportional electoral system introduced after the Senedd elections next year so that the 2026 elections are conducted under the Single Transferable Vote system in which voters rank candidates.
The committee said this system was both simple and maintained “a clear constituency link between constituents and their representatives”.
The Welsh Conservatives and the Brexit Party boycotted the committee, which was made up of Labour and Plaid Cymru Members of the Senedd.
Committee chair Dawn Bowden said: “We believe that the people of Wales would be better served by a Senedd which has the right number of Members. A larger Senedd would be cost effective, as Members would be better able to hold the Welsh Government to account for its spending and decisions, and pass better legislation, as well as helping people across Wales with their problems.
The committee’s recommendations are based on the conclusions of an expert panel on Assembly Electoral Reform, whose report in 2017 paved the way for 16 and 17 year olds to get the vote in council and Senedd elections in Wales.
Plaid Cymru Leader Adam Price said: “At a time when devolution is under direct assault from Westminster we need now more than ever before a strengthened Senedd. Our Parliament is too small and that represents a big danger to the health of our democracy.”
Welsh Conservative Senedd leader Paul Davies said: “This is a report which represents the views of just two parties in the Welsh Parliament and there is no public appetite for an increase in the number of politicians. The current voting system enables a roughly proportional Senedd while maintaining local accountability: we see no reason to change it.”