Group 2 will be next, and this group is amendments relating to Senedd Constituency boundary reviews, on publications and implementation. Amendment 1 is the lead amendment. I call on the Counsel General to move this amendment. Mick Antoniw.

Amendment 1 (Mick Antoniw) moved.

Diolch, Llywydd. I'm pleased to open the debate on this group of amendments, which make technical changes to section 2, and Schedules 2 and 3 to the Bill, which relate to Senedd Constituency boundary reviews.

Amendment 1 clarifies that reference to ‘that section’ in section 2(1) of Part 1 of the Bill means section 49J of the Democracy and Boundary Commission Cymru etc. Act 2013. The amendment seeks to do this in a more concise way.

Amendments 24, 25 and 31 ensure that there is linguistic consistency between the provisions relating to the publishing of representations, following the various periods of representations, required as part of the constituency boundary reviews. They also clarify that, when there is a requirement to publish the representations received, the Democracy and Boundary Commission Cymru must publish them in a document. 

Amendment 26 clarifies that when it publishes any notice as part of the 2026 pairing boundary review, it must be published on the commission’s website. This would include, for example, the notice at the commencement of the review. This provides consistency in the publishing requirements for all documents or reports published by the Democracy and Boundary Commission Cymru as part of the 2026 pairing review. It mirrors the publishing requirements set out for notices, reports and documents provided for in Schedule 3, which makes provision for subsequent full boundary reviews. Amendment 27 is a consequential amendment required due to amendment 26. 

Amendment 30 is another technical amendment, to ensure linguistic consistency with section 49H(3)(d) of the Democracy and Boundary Commission Cymru etc. Act 2013, as inserted by Schedule 3. So, I'd ask all Members to support the, I hope, uncontroversial amendments in this group.

Given that this is my first contribution today, as part of today's debate, I'd like to note my thanks to everyone who has worked hard in advising me through this process and also, of course, the clerks and my fellow Members on the reform committee.

Next week, it will be 25 years since the first elections to this Senedd. A quarter of a century later, it is entirely appropriate that we take the necessary steps towards reforming this Senedd. The need for these reforms has been evident for many years. Although the range of powers held by this Senedd remains far too limited, especially compared to the Scottish Parliament, Wales's devolved competencies have nevertheless increased significantly, both in number and complexity, since 1999, with a resulting increase in the responsibilities of elected Members, together with our ability to legislate.

Despite these developments, the size of the Senedd has not changed, and it is even more apparent that the size of our Senedd does not provide adequately for these powers. As I stated during our Stage 2 debate on this Bill, Wales deserves to have a Senedd of the size required for our democracy. In Scotland, there is one Member for around every 33,000 constituents. In Northern Ireland, there is one Member for around 15,000 constituents. In Wales, there is one Member for around 39,000 constituents. Furthermore, we must also remember that we have lost a number of representatives: Members of the European Parliament as a result of Brexit and, from the next Westminster election, a reduction in MPs from 40 to 32. This leaves Wales with the smallest electoral representation of all UK countries, and by some distance. On this measure alone, the introduction of the Senedd reform Bill is a democratic necessity, and surely no-one who truly believes in a well-functioning, proportional democracy could oppose it.

It is also clear that a larger Senedd facilitates more effective accountability and scrutiny of the Government. The number of policy areas that have now been devolved means that Opposition party Members often have multiple portfolios, thereby piling necessary scrutiny responsibilities onto a limited number of individuals. Increasing the number of Members of the Senedd will, therefore, enrich, improve and empower opposition politics in Wales—something that I would hope that even Tory Members of this Senedd would recognise, when not in this Chamber or in front of a camera.

We are also pleased that this Bill will address the obvious need for reform of our voting system, removing, once and for all, the antiquated first-past-the-post system that has been so damaging to voter engagement and enthusiasm in Westminster elections. All Plaid Cymru Members have been clear from the outset that this Bill does not achieve everything that we would like to see in terms of Senedd reform. Our policy as a party remains supportive of the single transferrable vote model rather than the closed list system that will be implemented by this Bill, and we will continue to push for this to be considered as part of the review process in 2030. However, we also recognise that no single party in the Senedd has the two-thirds Majority required to deliver reform on its own. Therefore, we have worked pragmatically with the Government to develop a set of proposals that will be able to reach these thresholds.

Turning to the substance of this group, we accept the Government's rationale for seeking clarity on the duties of the Democracy and Boundary Commission Cymru to publish reports on Constituency boundary reviews, and to advertise the information in appropriate places. Therefore, we will support amendments 1, 24, 25, 26, 27, 30 and 31.

The Counsel General.

Diolch yn fawr. I'm grateful to Members for their constructive contributions and I ask all Members to support all the amendments in this group. Diolch.

The question is that Amendment 1 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Amendment 1 is therefore agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.