Something historic happened yesterday, something good.

What happened in the Senedd (Welsh Parliament) was the Senedd Cymru (Members and Elections) Bill passed and did so with over 2/3rds of the chamber voting in favour.

News about Wales barely registers beyond its borders, news about politics in Wales barely registers within. It’s not surprising when the soap opera of Westminster looms large.

I mean, yesterday the Senedd decided to bring democracy in Wales into the 21^st century but that pales into insignificance when faced with an MP, leaving a party to go to another one even though she isn’t going to be an MP this time next year.

For the nation, its people and its democracy. It’s historic and we should be shouting it from the rooftops.

Almost 25 years to the day since the birth of devolution the decision was taken to increase the size of the Senedd from 60 to 96 members. Voting for more politicians is never going to get you an open top bus procession through the streets of Fishguard, Pwllheli or Llansantffraid ym mechain but in anything you do, you need the right number of people to do the job properly and this is a case in point.

Back in 1999, the original 60-member assembly was designed for a time when it had no powers to make legislation or raise taxes. It was half the size of the Scottish Parliament, and smaller than many Welsh councils. Today the Senedd oversees over £23bn in Welsh Government spending and passes legislation that affects key services such as health, education, and transport. Its powers and responsibilities have grown and therefore it is only right that its size does.

Back in 2020 Wales’ Auditor General said “Good scrutiny means good legislation, and good legislation pays for itself…a 0.17% annual saving, or improvement in value, in Welsh Government spending, would pay for 30 extra members.”

It gets even better.

Another nail in the coffin for First Past the Post

The bill also means that the Senedd will have a new electoral system for the next elections and the good news for us, is that it’s another nail in the coffin for First Past the Post in these isles. Not everything is sweetness and light though, any move to a fully proportional system is a step in the right direction but the decision to adopt a closed list system of PR, under which voters vote for a party rather than a named candidate, feels more like a sidestep.

We need a better, fairer system and that’s the Single Transferable Vote.

It means our work to make sure the people of Wales get the democracy they deserve continues.

ERS Cymru has campaigned tirelessly over the last few years to secure this much needed legislation along with other partners in civil society.

A change welcomed across Wales

The passing of the bill was also welcomed by other civil society organisations across Wales, including the Institute of Welsh Affairs (IWA) and the Women’s Equality Network (WEN) Wales.

Joe Rossiter, Co-Director of the Institute of Welsh Affairs, said:

“Today marks the next chapter in the ever-evolving story of devolution in Wales.

“As powers and responsibilities of the Senedd have grown over the past twenty-five years, it is vital that the Senedd’s capacity and capability continue to meet these shifting needs. The passing of the Bill today is an acknowledgement of the need to create a fit-for-purpose Senedd, which matches its growing list of responsibilities.

“Whilst today is a moment to celebrate progress made, the case for further reform remains. The closed list voting system established in the Bill, whilst more proportionate than first-past-the-post, doesn’t go far enough to create a Senedd which reflects votes.

“The passing of the Bill today is a step towards a more democratic Wales, but it is far from the last step on that journey.”

Victoria Vasey, Director of WEN Wales, added:

“Today marks a historic moment on a journey towards a more effective parliament for the people of Wales. The evidence is clear that a bigger Senedd is better equipped to properly scrutinise policy and legislation, which can lead to better decisions for all of us.

“While the passing of this legislation is a milestone, capacity isn’t everything. An effective parliament is one that represents its population, where women have an equal say and all protected characteristics and marginalised communities come together to make decision on the future of their country.

“We therefore welcome this legislation as part of a package of Senedd reform proposals, including legislation to encourage the election of a gender-balanced Senedd which is currently passing through the Senedd.

“We remain concerned about the closed list system, which will increase the power of political parties vs voter choice. We ask that this is kept under review and urge all political parties to do their bit towards making the most of the opportunity to promote equal and diverse representation in an expanded Senedd.

“This a pivotal moment in the story of Welsh devolution. Twenty-five years after the first elections to the Senedd, this Bill rights a historical inequality by finally bringing the Welsh parliament into line with the other devolved assemblies in the UK. Before this, Wales had a parliament less than half the size of Scotland’s, which was also the same size or smaller than nearly half of Welsh councils.”

The additional Senedd Members are badly needed to ensure that every decision the Welsh Government takes – decisions that affect every person in Wales – is properly looked at. This is an investment in better accountability so that problems are spotted earlier, and public money is spent more efficiently. And that is good for all of us.

Virtual victories

May saw the ‘virtual Commons’ come into its own. The ability for MPs to vote and speak up remotely – as the coronavirus crisis continues to grip the country – has been a huge boost for accountability.

Sadly, it was only ever intended as a temporary shift. But the speed that it has been drawn to a close by the government should have us all concerned.

We warned of a ‘blinkered and partisan’ decision to shut down virtual proceedings at the start of next month: with Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland still adhering to tight lockdown restrictions, banning virtual participation could result in the number of MPs able to participate plummeting and representatives from devolved nations being locked out, as we warned in the press in Wales and Scotland.

Are we about to witness an ‘England-only Parliament’ after this week’s recess? MPs and voters in the devolved nations are concerned, as reported in Scotland’s National.

We can learn from the best of the virtual proceedings. Support for lasting innovations is growing, with some figures calling for remote contributions to be allowed in the long-run, particularly for Scottish MPs representing island areas.

The ERS penned a letter in the Independent speaking out against the rash and reckless end to virtual proceedings, and in a news story looked at what might be worth keeping – including remote voting for ill, pregnant or far-flung representatives.

STV for Labour’s NEC

Labour was set to consider switching to the Single Transferable Vote for its executive elections in May. When the news emerged, we were quick off the mark, helping to lead the campaign for fairer representation for all.

Working with campaigners at Fair Internal Labour Elections, Open Labour, and campaigners across the party spectrum, we highlighted the broad support for change. We helped secure coverage across the Labour-linked press, from the Canary to the Morning Star. (The decision has now been delayed to June)

Lords lobbying, and ‘after Covid’

May also saw fresh rumours of a Lords overhaul in the making. (We’ve heard this one before!). A minister who also happens to be a hereditary peer soon rejected claims that the Lords would be reformed. Funny that.

Finally, we saw letters challenging the government’s voter ID plans, and were featured in a fascinating piece titled: “Building a better society after Covid – could citizens’ assemblies help?” Let us know your thoughts!

Over the past week, we’ve seen a glimpse of why Ministers are so keen to end the ‘virtual Parliament’ procedures.

Commons leader Jacob Rees-Mogg recently announced that MPs must return next month – despite being able to vote, legislate and contribute to debates from home. He told the Commons it was to ‘set an example’ to the rest of the country – to go to work.

But the Financial Times was among several outlets reporting a different reason for the move:

“Senior Conservatives have called for all MPs to be allowed to return to the House of Commons, as they become concerned Boris Johnson is struggling in the deserted chamber in his encounters with new Labour leader Keir Starmer.”

Over the past month, MPs have shown that they can work from home. In fact, it can be even more effective than working from Parliament in some ways – voting times have been cut down from up to an hour with social distancing measures, to just 15 minutes.

With some legislation featuring dozens of amendments, that’s a lot more time for MPs to spend standing up for their constituents, scrutinising legislation and dealing with case work.

The Commons leader insists social distancing will be maintained when virtual proceedings end. But here’s the thing: MPs can already turn up the Commons under the ‘hybrid’ arrangements.

All that ending the ability to vote and speak remotely would do is reduce the number of MPs able to contribute – potentially quite dramatically.

Parliament has shown that it can rapidly innovate in a health crisis. And though not perfect, the Commons authorities (unlike the Lords) have impressed everyone in how smoothly the virtual contributions have gone.

If the reason for shutting down the virtual proceedings is because there’s not enough cheering and jeering behind the PM, this is a travesty.

We should be learning from how Parliament has adapted during this crisis, not stymieing any innovation.

So rather than packing hundreds of people into narrow voting lobbies, the government should keep these ‘hybrid’ proceedings going for the duration of the pandemic – and learn from it.

The Procedure Committee is currently consulting on how the virtual proceedings have been going. The Commons leader should work with them, not against them.

MPs who are ill, pregnant or based hundreds of miles from Westminster should not be cast aside by a rushed return to ‘business as usual’.

Today – fittingly the day of PMQs – opposition parties will attempt to oppose the move to end virtual proceedings.

We have to keep learning these innovations as we come out of the pandemic, so we can build a stronger, more effective parliament that reflects the diversity of the whole UK.

It would be a great shame for Parliament if ministers shut down a good thing – simply because they were afraid it was working too well.

How do we keep scrutiny going when many MPs can’t come into Parliament?

The House of Commons Commission met on Thursday morning to address that challenge. For the past few weeks, calls have been growing for a move to a ‘virtual Parliament’ – letting MPs contribute remotely when the Commons returns next Tuesday.

The Commission agreed proposals for a ‘hybrid’ arrangement – a half-way house between fully-virtual sittings (MPs calling in entirely by video-link, voting remotely) and carrying on as if there was no crisis.

While the proposals show good progress towards a virtual Parliament, it will be up to the parties to endorse the proposals next week. And some significant questions remain.

The elephant in the room seems to be the question of how MPs will vote. What is paramount is that voters are represented, and that members are safe.

That means we must either see a rapid rollout of proxy voting for MPs and Peers, or allowing them to vote digitally. This is an urgent matter of scrutiny, representation and safety. We hope all parties work together to make it happen. (It is currently unclear whether the arrangements for the House of Lords will be similarly robust.)

The changes we saw before the recess were not fit for purpose, leaving votes at the whim of whips or whoever was able to turn up. Votes were taking 30-40 minutes, with considerable risk to members and their staff.

The next step towards a virtual Parliament must be getting to grips with voting. Other Parliaments have managed it (as we’ve highlighted here). So can we.

One thing is clear. We cannot let voters’ voices be diminished when life-changing decisions are being made every day. Parliament can and must rise to the challenge.

The ERS are at the forefront of civil society calls for a ‘modern, democratic’ response to how Parliament handles the pandemic.

See here for how we can maintain robust scrutiny while life-changing decisions are being made each day.

Next Tuesday, MPs and Peers return to Parliament. In theory, at least.

Given the dangers of parliamentarians coming together in large numbers, calls have been growing for a ‘virtual Parliament’ – backed by over 100 MPs, the ERS, and others.  That would involve as much parliamentary work taking place online as possible.

We’ve already seen Select Committees hold remote meetings during recess, a welcome development given the number and scale of decisions being made all the time by government during this crisis. A virtual Parliament would move Parliamentary debates, questions to ministers, and possibly voting online too.

As things stand, the House of Commons will sit – as normal – next Tuesday. As has been noted, for the Commons to adopt ‘virtual sitting’ a motion to that effect will need to be approved by the House when it returns.

The Speaker has backed the proposals – and now Commons leader Jacob Rees-Mogg has too. In a letter to Keir Starmer, Mr Rees-Mogg said: “In these unprecedented times, technological solutions have already been implemented for select committees and options are being prepared for the Speaker, the government and other parties to consider next week.

“It is important that we have a comprehensive solution that does not inadvertently exclude any members.”

But what might these democratic solutions look like?

The Commonwealth Parliamentary Association (CPA) has just published a toolkit for parliaments, on ‘delivering parliamentary democracy’ amid the crisis.

The report points to some excellent ways parliaments around the world have been responding to the crisis, noting that the Norwegian and New Zealand Parliaments have set up dedicated coronavirus select committees given the enormous life-changing decisions being made each day by their governments.

In Brazil, Parliamentarians and parliamentary staff are able to to work remotely during the current global health emergency using video-conferencing and virtual management tools. “The system allows Members of Parliament to register to a session and shows all phases of the legislative process including the bill under discussion, amendments, the results of each voting round, speeches, and committee agendas. The first remote plenary session took place on 20 March 2020 and was livecast to the public through the Parliament’s media and digital platforms,” the report notes.

Parliaments should look at ways for legislators to vote electronically, verbally via video-conference or via special e-voting software, the CPA argue.

They note that ‘emergency powers mean Parliament should sit’ – adding weight to recent calls for an early ‘recall’ of Parliament in the UK.

The authors make some powerful points on the scope of government powers that Parliaments must hold in check: “In the absence of robust scrutiny during the passage of Emergency Legislation, it is even more important during this period for Parliamentarians to identify any unintended effects of emergency measures and to suggest changes where necessary.”

But it is also a time to work together in the national interest: “It is crucial that Emergency Legislation does not continue indefinitely and beyond necessary. In times of emergency such as a global pandemic, party-politics should be put aside as far as possible.”

There is no doubt that the urgency of the crisis means all parts of our democracy must move quickly:  “Many of the changes required to maintain the operation of the Parliament will also have to be decided through informal cooperation and political agreement.”

That is certainly the case in the UK, where virtual parliament arrangements will need the consent of the opposition to avoid being forced to a vote. Many in government and opposition have so far expressed broad agreement on the principles for a virtual Parliament – a good sign.

From debates over personal protective equipment, business support and testing, the need for proper scrutiny during this crisis has been very clear. Whilst it is vital that parliament puts the health and safety of MPs and staff first by responding to the needs of MPs to self-isolate, it is also necessary for them provide a way for them to continue legislative work remotely.

As parliamentary authorities prepare ‘virtual Parliament’ options this week, all sides will be learning from best practice across the world. They can also help lead the way in ensuring an innovative democratic response: to help our representatives ask the questions that need answering – and to ensure voters everywhere are heard.