UK Parliament / Open data

Localism Bill (ways and means)

Proceeding contribution from John Stevenson (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 17 May 2011. It occurred during Debate on bills on Localism Bill.
I accept that they are not universally supported by all parties, but I believe that there is broad support. The hon. Gentleman raises a separate point, though, because there are several reasons why elected mayors have not caught on. However, I want to concentrate on my amendment 2 about their actual election. At present, mayors are elected under the supplementary vote system, which is retained in the Bill. Effectively it is a form of the alternative vote. My amendment 2 would change that so that future elections are done under first past the post. That would provide a consistent approach to elections. Varying the voting system creates confusion and a lack of certainty for the average voter. Two weeks ago, this country went to the polling booth for a referendum on whether we wanted AV or first past the post. Had the voters supported AV, I would have withdrawn this amendment. I would have accepted the will of the people. In fact, there was an overwhelming and emphatic vote for first past the post. As one hon. Member said to me, ““The people of this country did not say no; they said never.”” I accept that judgment, but I believe there has to be consistency. I support the amendment on the basis that we should have a consistent approach to our elections and that elected mayors should therefore be elected under first past the post. I genuinely hope that the House will agree with what the people said two weeks ago and support the amendment.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
528 c217-8 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Legislation
Localism Bill 2010-12
Back to top