Clause 2 - Recommendations by Electoral Commission - relating to changes in number of United Kingdom MEPs
European Parliament (Representation) Bill
2:45 pm
Mr David Heath (Somerton and Frome, Liberal Democrat)
I rise to speak to new clause 1. The hon. Member for Stone will have the opportunity to say what he wants to say about the voting system.
I hear what the Minister has said, but it is transparently obvious to many people that there is a great deal of concern about the operation of the closed list system. It has been brought into disrepute for precisely the reasons that it was rejected on possibly three occasions, certainly twice, by the upper House when the European Parliamentary Elections Bill was under consideration in 1998.
The Bill went to the wire. There was a great deal of doubt as to whether it would complete its parliamentary passage in time. A majority in the upper House—Liberal Democrats, Conservatives, Cross Benchers and some who took the Labour Whip—felt that an open list system would have been a better option for achieving the Government's aims in reforming the European Parliament election system. I can do no better than to quote the Lords reason for insisting on their amendments, which were debated on 10 November 1998:
''Because electors should be able to vote for the individual party candidate of their choice.''—[Official Report, House of Lords, 10 November 1998; Vol. 594, c. 206.]
The problem with the present closed list system is that it puts far too much power in the hands of the party machine rather than of the elector in determining which competing candidates from a given single party shall be elected. It also puts an improper pressure on MEPs to address their attentions too much to the primary electorate which is, in their case, the membership of their party, rather than the wider electorate who can vote only for a party list.
For those reasons, we believe that the party list system is less good than the single transferable vote and the closed list system is inherently worse than an open list system, which would at least give the electorate the opportunity to express their choice between candidates.
I understand the Minister's saying that the scope of the Bill is limited to what is contained in the treaty of Nice and why she would not want to delay the process unnecessarily. However, this is an opportune time to review the system. In 1998, the then Home Secretary offered an early review as a concession. Since then, we have had further experience of what the system means for MEPs.
I am disappointed that some of the brightest and best MEPs are expressing concern that they are not part of a properly democratic system and are returning to domestic politics or going elsewhere. Some long-standing MEPs have found themselves running foul of their party list system and find that they will not be able to seek re-election under the next European Parliament elections simply because they have displeased someone within the hierarchy and apparatus of their own party.