D’Hondt Leave Me This Way

Ben Wildsmith

Following Sarah Cooper Lesadd’s defection from Reform to Plaid Cymru, Cardiff Bay is reportedly alive with rumours that another Reform MS is considering joining the Conservatives.

Traffic between Reform and the Tories has thus far been one-way, but a combination of poor Welsh leadership, ongoing scandals at UK level, and Kemi Badenoch’s improved performance as Tory leader might see Darren Millar emerging as a siren voice across the choppy seas of opposition in Wales.

Never dull, is it?

Aside from the gossip value, the phenomenon of crossing the floor throws up some interesting conundrums for the peculiar way our democracy currently works in Wales.

The closed-list system that was introduced at the last election elevates political parties above individual representatives. We vote for parties rather than candidates; parties choose the candidates and rank them on their lists. This means that MSs are understood by the electorate to be representatives of party groupthink rather than voluntarily aligned with a broad church.

So, when an MS decides to defect, voters feel aggrieved that the entity they voted for – a party – has been disadvantaged by one they didn’t – the MS.

On social media, there have been calls for defection to be legislated against. If an MS disagrees with their party, the argument runs, they can resign and the next candidate on the party’s list can replace them. These calls are made in defence of democracy, and for the reasons I’ve outlined, a democratic deficit is indeed created when an MS defects. The alternatives, however, could have a yet more chilling effect.

Firstly, what if the MS doesn’t want to resign? If Sarah Cooper Lesadd had opted to stay in Reform but vote with the government, under what criteria would Reform be justified in ejecting her? Would a single rebellious vote be enough to end a political career? Would particular votes be regarded as more important than others?

We have a recent example of this sort of thinking. When Boris Johnson deselected all Tory candidates who refused to sign up for his Brexit proposals, it was, depending on your point of view, either strong leadership or authoritarianism. The effect was to end pro-European attitudes within the Conservative Party, severing a connection with the thinking of every previous Tory Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher included.

With the Senedd balanced as finely as it is, many would believe all votes to be of crucial importance, as the potential for votes of confidence in the government is always there in case of defeats. So, whips will be imposed and discipline enforced. If an MS faces losing their seat mid-term because they voted with their conscience, then you might argue that debates in the Siambr become academic exercises. MSs would be voting with their careers on the line every time.

Fluid

Manifestos are not binding contracts: the fluid nature of events prevents that. Labour’s current Westminster mandate, for instance, rests on an offer to the people that was so vague as to be gaseous. Additionally, hardly anybody reads these disingenuous screeds, so the notion that they represent the settled will of the people is dishonest.

The closed-list system has disempowered individual politicians, leaving them vulnerable to becoming functionaries of a party machine rather than representatives of the voters. How many people do you think could name all their constituency MSs? Could you?

If manifestos are vague, then the check in place to enforce the people’s will should be the judgement of an elected representative. People vote for somebody whose values they feel they understand and trust them to act accordingly. If those values are out of step with their party’s actions, then switching parties is an extreme expression of that duty.

Accountable

All of that has gone under the closed-list system. We have the same non-binding manifestos but with party functionaries enacting them rather than accountable, individual politicians.

My understanding is that this system was insisted upon by Labour as the price for agreeing with Plaid to expand the Senedd.

Its absurdity is slowly being revealed and further defections risk turning our democracy into an unrepresentative farce. In the first instance, the government should resolve to bin the system in time for the next election and be clear about what will replace it.

In the meantime, all of us should insist that party whipping be carried out without risking the integrity of debate.

---

Get more trusted Welsh news

Choose Nation.Cymru as a preferred source in Google News to see more of our journalism.