Regional Assemblies (Preparations) Bill - Clause 19 - Advice of the Electoral Commission
Regional Assemblies (Preparations) Bill
5:15 pm
Mr Matthew Green (Ludlow, Liberal Democrat)
I could have begun my contribution by talking about the stretching to breaking point of amendment No. 73, but I wish to take this opportunity to raise the issue of the maximum number of members who can be elected to assemblies, which none of the amendments specifically deal with, although the subject has been touched on.
By chance, the west midlands regional assembly's response to the Government's White Paper fell through my letterbox this morning. I am glad to say that the majority of people on that assembly are enthusiasts for regional government, and I thought that I might bring to the Minister's attention a couple of paragraphs from its response that relate to the size of the assembly:
''One of the most controversial issues arising from the White Paper has been the size of ERA envisaged . . . Consultation meetings organised around the West Midlands by the Regional Assembly and the Constitutional Convention have revealed significant disquiet about whether such a small number of representatives''—
it assumes that there will be 35—
''could genuinely 'represent' the West Midlands.''
The assembly also makes a recommendation that the Minister might wish to take into account:
''The idea of a small, strategic ERA as a different kind of representative body than local councils or Westminster needs to be 'sold' better''.
By insisting that the numbers be so low, the Minister is running a risk. Some local councils have expressed worries in their responses about the overall numbers, and although the west midlands is not the biggest region—as we heard in an endless debate, the south-east is the largest—the west midlands has about 5 million people.
There is considerable disquiet about the overall numbers: the Minister is in danger of discouraging people from voting for a regional government by being so prescriptive about the upper and lower limits on the numbers, especially the upper limits. Like most other hon. Members, I do not want to see massive regional assemblies, but 35 is an eye-wateringly tight number for some of the larger regions, if we are going to have members who genuinely represent the different make-up of some of the especially diverse regions.