Support quality, independent, local journalism…that matters

From just £1 a month you can help fund our work – and use our website without adverts. Become a member today

By Stephen Clear, Bangor University

Next May’s Senedd (Welsh Parliament) election won’t just be another trip to the polls. It will mark a major change in how Welsh democracy works. The number of elected members is increasing from 60 to 96, and the voting system is being overhauled. These changes have now passed into law.

But what exactly is changing – and why?

When the then assembly was first established in 1999, it had limited powers and just 60 members. Much has changed since then and it now has increased responsibility including primary law-making powers over matters such as health, education, environment, transport and economic development.

The Wales Act 2014 also bestowed a number of new financial powers on the now Senedd, including taxation and borrowing powers. But its size has stayed the same.

This led to concerns about capacity and effectiveness. In 2017, an independent expert panel on electoral reform concluded that the Senedd was no longer fit for purpose. It warned that 60 members simply weren’t enough to scrutinise the Welsh Government, pass legislation and respond to constituents. A bigger chamber, it argued, would improve both the quality of lawmaking and democratic accountability.

Wales also has fewer elected politicians per person than any other UK nation. Scotland has 129 MSPs, while Northern Ireland has 90 MLAs. Even with next year’s changes, Wales will still have fewer elected members per citizen compared with Northern Ireland.

It’s a similar picture when Wales is compared with other small European nations.

More Senedd Members could ease workloads, improve local representation and importantly, may encourage a more diverse pool of people to stand for office.

How is the voting system changing?

Alongside expansion will be a change in how Senedd Members are elected.

Since its inception, Wales has used the “additional member system”, which is a mix of first-past-the-post for constituency seats and proportional representation for regional ones.

From 2026, that system will be replaced by a closed list proportional system, using the D’Hondt method. It’s a system which is designed to be fairer, ensuring that the proportion of seats a party wins more closely reflects the votes they get. But it also means voters will have less say over which individuals get elected.

Wales will be divided into 16 constituencies, each electing six MSs. Instead of voting for a single candidate, voters will choose one party or independent candidate.

Parties will submit a list of up to eight candidates per constituency. Seats will then be allocated based on the overall share of the vote each party gets, with candidates elected in the order they appear on their party’s list.

For example, if a party wins a percentage share of the vote equating to three seats, the top three people on their party list will be elected. The calculation for this is defined by the D’Hondt formula. The decision to adopt this method in Wales was one of the recommendations of the special purpose committee on Senedd reform in 2022.

Several countries across Europe use this system for their elections, including Spain and Portugal. In countries with small constituency sizes, D’Hondt has sometimes favoured larger parties and made it harder for smaller parties to gain ground. That’s something observers in Wales will be watching closely.

An alternative method, Sainte-Laguë, used in Sweden and Latvia, is often seen as more balanced in its treatment of small and medium-sized parties, potentially leading to more consensual politics. But it too has its downsides. In countries which have many smaller parties, it can lead to fragmented parliaments and make decision-making more difficult.

In sum, no system is perfect. But D’Hondt was chosen for its balance between proportionality, simplicity and practicality.

Could this confuse voters?

One concern is the growing differences between electoral systems across the UK, and even within Wales itself.

At the UK level, first-past-the-post (FPTP) is the method used for Westminster elections. Meanwhile, some Welsh councils are experimenting with the single transferable vote method, which lets voters rank candidates in order of preference.

So, some people in Wales could find themselves navigating three different voting systems for three different elections. Obviously, this raises the risk of confusion. Voters who are used to one vote and the “winner takes all” nature of FPTP may be confused by how seats are allocated in Wales come 2026.

With numerous different systems, the risk is that people do not fully understand how their vote translates into representation. In turn this risks undermining confidence and reducing voter turnout.

Voters will need clear, accessible information on how their vote works – and why it matters. But this is particularly challenging when UK-wide media often defaults to FPTP-centric language and framing surrounding debates, which can shape public expectations. News about Wales often barely registers beyond its borders, while news about politics in Wales barely registers within.

Electoral reform often prompts broader conversations. As Welsh voters adjust to the new proportional system, some may begin to question Westminster’s FPTP model, especially if the Senedd better reflects the diversity of votes cast. FPTP is frequently criticised for producing “wasted votes” and encouraging tactical voting, particularly in safe seats.

Under a more proportional system, tactical voting becomes less necessary, which has the potential to shift voter habits in Wales.

If the 2026 reform leads to a more representative and effective Senedd, it may not only reshape Welsh democracy, but reignite debates about electoral reform across the UK.

Stephen Clear, Lecturer in Constitutional and Administrative Law, and Public Procurement, Bangor University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.