Electoral boundaries - determination process: independent review report

Introduction

Electoral boundaries are a fundamental part of our electoral system. Reviews of the numbers of electors within each constituency or ward are an important part of maintaining the electoral map, ensuring that the numbers of voters remain largely equal, and that each person’s vote counts equally across the country or council area. It is therefore critical that in Scotland, we have the right processes in place to review and amend electoral boundaries.

There are a range of views on how best to approve electoral boundary changes in Scotland, with strength of feeling on all sides. It is this diversity of views which has underlined the importance of the independence of this Review. While the Scottish Government and some key stakeholders have made their views on automaticity known in the past, it should be noted the first question I asked in the consultation for this Review was whether a change to an automatic approval system for boundary reviews was seen as desirable in Scotland. Systems where parliaments do not vote on changes to electoral boundaries are referred to as ‘automaticity’, and this term will be used throughout this report.

Currently, Scottish Parliament and local government electoral boundaries are reviewed by Boundaries Scotland, an independent public body made up of non-political Commissioners. Boundaries Scotland conducts reviews of electoral boundaries every 8 to 12 years for the constituencies and regions of the Scottish Parliament and every 15 years for local government wards and councillor numbers.

I was appointed by Scottish Ministers to consider the process by which proposals for boundary changes are approved and implemented. The Terms of Reference of this Review can be found at Annex C of this report. I have examined the existing process and compared it to what is considered international best practice in this field. One of the options was to recommend that these reviews should be approved without a vote in the Scottish Parliament. Currently, reviews of both Scottish Parliament constituencies and regional boundaries, and local government electoral arrangements must be first scrutinised by a Parliamentary Committee and then approved by a vote in the Scottish Parliament.

In my view, and as raised among the responses to the consultation, automaticity should not mean a lack of, or reduction in, scrutiny compared to the current system. While the type of scrutiny would change under an automatic system, it is important that any move to automaticity includes robust checks and balances that the public and institutions can have trust in.

A key part of this Review was to take account of international best practice, and compare the current process in Scotland to a number of other countries with comparable electoral systems and boundary commissions. There are a range of models which are used elsewhere, and I believe that we can and should, learn from these countries’ experiences. In particular, I looked at the systems and processes used in the UK (Westminster), Wales, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada. However, while it was important that I considered international practice, I have endeavoured to propose recommendations that I consider to be best for the specific circumstances of Scotland. I have given my independent view on the approval process for changes to electoral boundaries in Scotland, having been informed by and taken account of the broad engagement undertaken, and the evidence that has been presented to me throughout this Review.

It also became clear to me early on that I could not make recommendations on the process for the approval of boundary changes in isolation. A move to automaticity would inevitably have implications for other parts of the process. I therefore considered how automaticity would work best in a Scottish context and my recommendations can be seen to fall into three main categories: changes to the approval process; impact on consultation requirements during reviews; and the structure and scrutiny of Boundaries Scotland.

It may be helpful to note that while there are also boundary reviews in Scotland for UK Parliament (Westminster) constituencies, these are the responsibility of the UK Government so have not been considered by this Review (except within the context of international comparisons).

Background

When conducting reviews, Boundaries Scotland makes initial proposals for Scottish Parliament constituency and region boundaries which are then subject to a public consultation. For reviews of wards and councillor numbers, Boundaries Scotland must initially consult the relevant local councils for a 2-month period before holding a public consultation. For Scottish Parliament constituency and region reviews, further rounds of public consultation are held if any changes are made to the initial proposals. Events called local inquiries are held if Boundaries Scotland chooses, or if local councils or a body of at least 100 electors (500 for regions) lodge an objection to the recommendations. Following the review, Boundaries Scotland submits its report with recommendations to Scottish Ministers, who then lay legislation in the Scottish Parliament which would give effect to those proposed changes. It is first scrutinised by a Parliamentary Committee and then put to a vote of the whole Parliament. If the vote passes, the boundaries change in line with the recommendations.

In recent years, some of Boundaries Scotland’s recommendations for local government electoral arrangements have not been implemented. In these instances, this was as a result of the scrutinising Parliamentary Committee recommending that Parliament should not approve the changes proposed by Boundaries Scotland, and the Scottish Government consequently withdrawing the legislative instruments that would have given effect to them. Concerns have been raised by some that these reports were rejected despite Boundaries Scotland correctly following the process it was required to. The most recent review of Scottish Parliament constituencies and regions was recently passed by the Parliament and the revised boundaries will be in place for the election scheduled for next year.

Consultation

Throughout this Review, I have consulted directly with a broad range of stakeholders, as well as holding a formal 12-week online public consultation on the questions addressed in this report. I am very grateful to those who engaged and contributed, whether that be in face-to-face meetings with members of the public, via consultation responses, or extensive discussions with electoral and other bodies. I believe that a mix of formal and informal consultation has allowed me to gather views from a wide range of interested bodies and members of the public.

The public consultation on the Review ran for 12 weeks, and received 33 written responses – 24 from individuals and 9 from organisations. The views of the individuals and organisations who responded have been considered as part of this report and recommendations. The analysis report of the consultation responses can be found on the Scottish Government website. The responses demonstrate a wide spectrum of views on the topics, and there will inevitably be people who disagree with some of the recommendations made in this report, in particular in relation to the introduction of automaticity. The public consultation did not attract a high number of responses but they were diverse, and many were detailed, providing a rich resource for my deliberations. I am grateful to all those who contributed and I have considered all perspectives and views carefully in reaching my own conclusions.

The consultation asked questions about whether the current system continues to be the best way to approve boundary changes in Scotland, or whether a system of automatic approval would be an improvement. Its findings have informed my recommendations on moving to a system which is designed to improve the overall process for everyone, but in particular for the public.