Next year, the Senedd will take an historic step forward.

For the first time, Wales will elect all of its Members of the Senedd (MSs) through a fully proportional system. For too long, Welsh elections have used a mixed-member voting system that has seen votes wasted, smaller parties squeezed, and many voices under-represented.

But while the destination is welcome, the route being taken is not the best one. Wales is moving to a closed-list proportional representation system, a model that improves fairness between parties but reduces fairness between voters and the individuals who represent them in the Senedd.

If we genuinely believe in liberal democracy, accountability and putting power in the hands of citizens, then Wales must go further. Open-list PR would give voters the voice they deserve.

Where we’re coming from: MMPR

Since the Senedd’s creation, Wales has elected its representatives through a form of Mixed-Member Proportional Representation (MMPR). This gave voters two choices: a local constituency MS (elected by First Past The Post (FPTP)), and a regional party list.

Without a doubt, there were clear strengths with MMPR. Voters had a constituency link, knowing who their local MS was, and it gave them a sense of relatability, while also providing an element of proportionality, ensuring that votes for smaller parties were not entirely wasted.

The weakness of this system, however, was apparent: FPTP skewed representation, often benefiting bigger parties and leaving many voters feeling that their vote didn’t matter, along with shackling smaller parties’ potential to break through.

So it’s clear that reform was overdue. But the replacement is far from perfect.

Where we’re going: closed-list PR

The new voting system will divide Wales into sixteen large constituencies, each electing six MSs. Voters will cast a single vote for a party, with seats then distributed proportionally. The candidates and their order are set entirely by the party leadership.

This means if a party wins three seats in an area, the top three names on its pre-determined lists are elected. Voters cannot move candidates up or down the list; their only choice is the party label.

This raises serious risks:

• Power is centralised in the party headquarters, who decide the order of the list.
• Voter influence is weakened, as individuals no longer have a say in who represents their area
• Accountability is lost, as MSs may end up answering more to the party that, again, decides where they will be placed on the list than to their constituents.
• Local connections are lost, as each constituency now covers six seats, and voters cannot distinguish between candidates within a party.

Closed-list PR is certainly more proportional than MMPR. But it does not deliver the kind of democratic accountability the Senedd should aspire to.

Why open-list PR would be better

Open-list PR offers a better balance. Under this model, voters still cast their vote for a party, ensuring proportional outcomes. But they can express a preference for individual candidates on the party list. The more preference a candidate receives, the higher they move up the list, making them more likely to be elected.

The benefits for Wales are clear:

• Stronger accountability, as MSs can’t rely solely on party favour, instead having to answer directly to the voters who gave them preference votes.
• A closer connection to the communities they represent can be fostered under an open-list system, ensuring a stronger local voice in the Senedd.
• Voters have greater choice, and can distinguish between different voices within a party, lending their preference to those who reflect their values most.
• Wales has a political culture where voters often feel a stronger personal link to their representatives, which an open-list would strengthen.

The Liberal Democratic case

As Liberal Democrats, we champion reforms that put power in the hands of the people. That is why we have always backed proportional representation. But proportionality alone is not enough.

Closed-list PR risks replacing one democratic deficit with another. It hands more control to parties and takes it away from the voters. Open-list PR, by contrast, shares power, ensuring that voters are in charge of both the parties they elect and the people who represent them.

This matters for accountability. Closed-list PR rewards politicians who, despite being unpopular in their local area, remain loyal to the party membership. Open-list PR gives voters the final say. In a democracy, people should feel they can shape not only which party governs them, but who speaks for them.

Conclusion

We cannot, and should not, downplay the fact that a move to proportional representation is a huge step forward for Wales. But closed-list PR should not be where we stop.

If the Senedd is to reflect not just how people vote, but also who people want representing them, then open-list PR is the next logical step. It delivers a Welsh democracy that is fairer and freer.

In the end, closed lists mean closed doors. Open lists mean open democracy. If we are serious about giving power to the people, then the choice is clear.

* Jack Meredith is a member of the Welsh Liberal Democrats and an active campaigner and canvasser with Swansea and Gower Liberal Democrats. His writing focuses on democratic reform, social justice, trade unionism, economic democracy, and the institutional foundations of effective government. He has written for the Fabians, Lib Dem Voice, Liberator, Nation Cymru, Bylines Cymru, and Centre Think Tank.