Contents

The Assembly’s Electoral System

1.

AWEMA finds the information provided under this section very revealing. We believe that it underlines the lack of confidence even of the Establishment in Wales. Table 2 shows the remarkable ratio between Member: Population and compares this with that of Scotland and Northern Ireland.

Accepting the special circumstances, Northern Ireland can be seen to be the most dynamic against which Wales appears to be 3 times worse off. If the same proportions were applied in Wales, we would have 180 Assembly Members.

Even if one compared Scotland with Wales and sought parity, Wales would still end up with 74 Assembly Members.

2.

Based on the Member: Population ratio, if we applied the 2001 census where BME communities account for 62,000 people spread across Wales, we would have had 4 BME Assembly Members using the Northern Ireland proportions.

3.

In AWEMA’s view, using the Scotland and Wales figures we would still have 1/2 Assembly Members from the BME Communities.

4.

However, if good practice were used, the appropriate model to use would be the BME population of Cardiff (8.4%). This is based on the factual notion that Cardiff is the home of the NAfW. On that basis Wales would boast of 5 Assembly Members. This model is currently being applied as good practice by reputable institutions throughout the country. The National Assembly for Wales must lead the way.

5.

In AWEMA’s view, all the above shows that Wales remains hesitant as a nation, and it lacks confidence even in wanting to find its own voice.

Is the Assembly Sufficiently Representative?

1.

AWEMA is heartened to note that in its possible definition of representativeness the document recognises under 19(c), ethnicity in the population of Wales.

We believe this to be an important inclusion as we attach a host of other labels with ethnicity that we have alluded to elsewhere in this document when discussing ‘Strands of Equality’. We do not propose to rehearse those arguments again here as the points have already been made.

2.

AWEMA attaches a similar importance to 19 (d) that includes minority interests. The BME communities in the Assembly are now beginning to be referred to as ‘Communities of Interest’. We welcome this positive slant towards the BME communities.

3.

AWEMA would go further and state that the term Mixed Race should be marginalized in favour of Dual Heritage or indeed in some cases Multi-Heritage communities.

4.

AWEMA finds Table 3, as providing the most revealing information of all. The BME Communities now fully understand the term inclusive. This meant a system of voting that would include the elite of all the Political Parties with a share in the new institution.

5.

AWEMA now fully understands that the BME communities were hoodwinked by the use of the term inclusive. To them, it meant that they too would have a real stake in the New Wales and in its decision making processes.

6.

It is AWEMA’s view that the BME Communities were never meant to be a part of the New Politics in Wales. We were only tolerated to ensure that our votes came in on the night of the Referendum.

7.

AWEMA commissioned a research through the Politics Department of the University of Wales- Swansea to research into BME attitudes towards the Assembly. 175 interviews were conducted and a report produced by Dr. Jonathan Bradbury.

This showed that although only some 40% voted in the Assembly Elections, the support for the Assembly and the strengthening of its powers stood at 65%. The overall support in Wales generally is at just over 50%. The importance of a "Parliament" shone through.

8.

AWEMA agrees with the consultation document that the characteristics of the Assembly Members is largely in the control of the political parties. We do, however, contend that Political Parties will take just as long in delivering multi-racial and multi-cultural diversity as it did in delivering gender balance.

The Commission does have it in its gift to recommend mechanisms that ensures that if a recommendation of extending the powers is proposed, due regard is taken on issues of representation. All mechanisms in our view need to be attached to the mainstream Political Parties.

AWEMA is not confident that the application of exclusive proportionality will result in good government. We would be very concerned if extreme minority parties such as the BNP were able to take advantage of a "list" system to gain a foothold in the corridors of government.

Also, the undue influence of Minority Parties in a minority government cannot be emphasised enough. One only has to look at the polarisation of the system of government in Israel to ensure that Wales does not have a system that lends itself to instability.

In our view, it is important that whichever system is used, that the programme of government is delivered in a stable environment.

It is equally important that Wales is seen as a young country in the world, which has a voice capable of being heard at the Regional, National, Supranational and International levels. The BME communities care passionately about what happened in the world they live in due to their own international connections.

In AWEMA’s view, the BME communities [and indeed the whole of Wales] have been unable to have their voice heard over Iraq and Palestine.

AWEMA is expressing the above views in this section of the consultation document to ensure that the powers, composition and the number in the Assembly can take account of a Country that had no voice over the war in Iraq.

Wales is worse off based on the Member: Population ratios when compared to Scotland and Northern Ireland.

If the BME population of Cardiff [as the home to the Assembly] with 8.4% was to be applied to the composition of the Assembly Members, we would have at least 5 BME Assembly Members

Wales remains hesitant as a nation and lacks confidence even in trying to find its own voice.

Although communities of interest are recognised in the consultation document, the present system has failed in delivering their participation and contribution to the decision making processes of the Assembly.

The present Assembly was never meant to include BME communities in its concept of inclusivity.

Recommendations

1.

Whichever system is proposed, it really must ensure that the BME communities are also the decision makers.