In May, the voting system used in the Senedd election will change. Gone are the days of ‘First Past The Post’ (FPTP), with the old system’s Regional List element, formerly used to elect a third of Senedd members, now being used to elect them all.

Whilst we should all welcome the elimination of FPTP, the new closed-list system has serious, avoidable flaws that mean it is not much of an upgrade, if at all.

In simple terms, the new system divides Wales into 16 constituencies, each with six members, chosen proportionally, using the D’Hondt method, from closed lists of candidates selected entirely by the parties. The voter can see the list, but has no influence whatsoever on the order in which the candidates are elected.

In other words, instead of the voter saying ‘I want this person to represent me’, they are effectively saying ‘I am content with any of the people whose names are in this list’. It’s hard to argue that’s a major improvement.

That’s not to say there aren’t any good aspects; tactical voting is effectively eliminated, meaning every vote counts, local representation is sort of retained, albeit in massive constituencies, and the effect of a large number of demographically and politically similar seats in South Wales on the proportionality of national results is dampened.

What we saw in Scotland at the 2024 general election with Labour winning four times more seats than the SNP with a vote share advantage of only five percentage points won’t happen here. Parties are rewarded for the votes they get, rather than how the votes they didn’t are distributed.

This, however, shouldn’t get in the way of calling what the new system actually is. A power grab by the establishments of the political parties from the people to themselves. Especially those who have given incumbents first dibs on the list. A person’s position on the list, and in many cases their job, is no longer determined by the people of their communities, but by their loyalty to the leadership of their parties.

This means that some seriously unfit, unworthy people can retain their jobs, effectively for as long as they want, so long as they back and are backed by the party establishment.

Of all the voting systems available, Welsh Ministers chose the one that gives the people the least control over who represents them, divides Wales into constituencies which way too varied and over-sized to effectively represent the communities within them, and which makes Senedd Members less accountable to the people than ever before.

They should have chosen the Single Transferable Vote system used in Ireland and on Scottish Councils. It maintains local representation, allows voters to rank candidates within a party’s list (so they could, for instance, vote for all but one candidate in a party), and even vote for candidates across multiple parties, and creates a parliament which reflects the national popular vote much more effectively than first past the post. Not perfect, but much better than this.

Plaid Cymru supported the Single Transferable Vote, but were too blinded by the prospect of an expanded Senedd to force Labour to accept it. Instead we are left with a closed-list system which is a prime example of ‘more representative of the popular vote’ not always meaning ‘better’. The Conservatives’ policy of reversing the expansion and refusing more powers largely shelters them from this debate, but doesn’t make them right.

We can only hope that whoever forms the next Welsh Government swiftly replaces it with a better system for the 2030 election.