« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
RENEWING LOCAL DEMOCRACY: THE NEXT STEPS
APPENDIX B KERLEY GROUP'S CONCLUSIONS ON STV
The Kerley Group concluded that STV best met the terms of their remit. The reasons for their conclusions are set out below:
'On the two principal criteria - proportionality and the councillor-ward link ……
STV is a proportional system. It also ensures that each member has a ward - all are elected on the same footing. However, each elector has a number (two or more) of ward representatives to turn to: this has both advantages and possible drawbacks.
We turn now to the other criteria which we have to consider - fair provision for independents, allowance for geographical diversity, and a close fit between council wards and natural communities - and review the systems that satisfy the two principal criteria of proportionality and the councillor-ward link - STV and AMS - against them.
Consideration of these final three criteria suggests that there is little between STV and AMS in respect of them. Returning to consideration of our two primary criteria - proportionality and the councillor-ward link - we do consider that the two classes of member that AMS would produce, with the possible disadvantages which we have noted above, are distinctly less attractive than the single type of member that STV provides.
Accordingly we, consider that STV best meets the requirements of our remit.
Any consideration of size and boundaries has implications for proportionality and the recognition of natural boundaries. We consider that 4 member wards will usually balance these requirements: they will be large enough to achieve proportionality, and also offer a sound link between the electorate and its communities.
We consider it highly desirable that wards should reflect natural communities and, accordingly, we recommend that there should be flexibility in ward sizes - ranging from 3 to 5 member wards - to allow natural communities to be maintained within wards.
However, we recognise that in sparsely populated parts of Scotland, four member wards would cover very large geographic areas. Such very large wards might be to the detriment of some of the electorate who could be geographically remote from their councillors; it would also be difficult to map such very large wards onto a natural community.
Accordingly, in sparsely populated parts of Scotland we recommend that, exceptionally, wards comprising a minimum of 2 councillors may be appropriate.'
« Previous | Contents | Next »