Senedd Cymru | Welsh Parliament
Bil Senedd Cymru (Rhestrau Ymgeiswyr Etholiadol)| Senedd Cymru (Electoral Candidate Lists) Bill
Ymateb gan Unigolyn | Evidence from Individual
I don’t understand why the Senedd is going ahead with a Bill that the Llywydd has stated does not pass the test for legislative competence. Why is the Senedd is going against clear legal advice? This will be challenged in court and will be a waste of taxpayers’ money. My main concerns are that the Bill is undemocratic. Closed lists reduce the choice for voters to vote for candidates they prefer and put all the power in the hands of a few party leaders instead of the many voters. The statement on Gender is not clear. Women or Not Women? This is confusing as I take women to mean adult human female and not women to mean Male. But you do not state this clearly in your documentation. Do you mean that anyone who identifies as a woman can stand as a Woman? If so this will mean that quotas will not be achieved as males who ‘identify’ as women can stand in the place of women.
The Bill is not clear on what is a Woman. Do you mean adult human female? Why are you using the term ‘not a woman’? Surely this would be male? The legislation wording is so woolly as to be easily misinterpreted. You cannot enforce sanctions for non-compliance when you are introducing a Bill that is worded so badly it will fail in a court of law. Instead of gender quotas, you should use the phrase Sex Quota to mean Male or Female. If any male can identify as a woman and be listed as a women then you will not achieve the stated aim of the Bill. I believe this is a form of Self-ID by the back door. It would not achieve the aim of equality between the sexes.
The Bill appears to be contradictory to the Equality Act 2010. The barriers are that closed lists are anti-democratic. The use of the terms ‘woman’ ‘not a woman’ are open to abuse. The language used is unclear and does not seem to match up with legislation wording of the Equality Act and would therefore be open to abuse. The Senedd has achieved 50:50 male:female representation in the past without such legislation which proves that this proposed Bill is unnecessary.
The Equality Impact Assessment indicates that males would be able to self-identify as women to get on the lists of candidates. This is wrong. The Welsh Government appears to be introducing self-ID by the back door against legal advice. The Bill states that candidates would complete a gender statement that says you are a ‘woman’ or ‘not a woman’. That wording is open to interpretation and there doesn’t seem to be any way of enforcing or checking that the ‘gender statement’ is correct. It will be open to abuse and will not achieve the stated aim of ‘gender parity’.
I consider that at a time of great economic difficulty in Wales the government should be focusing on issues that affect the people of Wales directly, e.g. the dismal state of NHS Wales, the poos educational standards, poor transport links, lack of meaningful jobs and career pathways for young people. This Bill is a waste of money and not legally sound.
I believe the Welsh Government has not proved itself capable of making sound subordinate legislation, as this Bill indicates.
No
The Senedd should heed the advice of The Llywydd who has stated that this legislation is not sound. The reputational damage to Wales (and the cost) will be immense and, at a time of great economic hardship, the government should be focusing on sorting out the problems of all the people of Wales not the tiny handful of the population who will benefit greatly from an expansion of the Senedd. It is an expense the country can ill afford.
The Bill does nothing to sort out the barriers to women standing for political office, e.g. if you stand as an independent you have to reveal your home address to voters which is a barrier.