Group 4: Extension of right to vote to foreign nationals and associated electoral registration (Amendments 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 61, 62, 63, 1)

Part of the debate – in the Senedd at 5:29 pm on 13 November 2019.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Leanne Wood Leanne Wood Plaid Cymru 5:29, 13 November 2019

Plaid Cymru believes that everyone who lives in Wales has a stake in our nation's future and has the right to help shape it. That's why we support the Government's amendments to extend the right to vote. We do, however, have some questions about the Government's interpretation of its own amendments on extending the franchise to foreign citizens living in Wales. Specifically, we would like clarity from the Government as to whether these amendments are intended to extend the franchise to people seeking asylum, as I understand that the Government does not believe that they do. We believe that these amendments can and should be interpreted to include people who are seeking asylum. The amendments extend the right to vote to 'qualifying foreign citizens', which is defined as including a person who requires leave to remain,

'but for the time being has (or is, by virtue of any enactment, to be treated as having) any description of such leave'.

People seeking asylum should be included in the franchise as they can be understood to fall into this category. This is because while people have an outstanding claim to asylum it's clear that, in many ways, they are treated as having some form of leave to remain. People seeking asylum are on immigration bail, which means that they are permitted to live in the UK while they await a decision on their claim. Their permission to stay may be conditional, but they are here legally, and there's no inherent reason why they cannot, therefore, be given the right to vote.

We know that there's a precedent in Ireland, where people seeking asylum can vote and stand in local elections. Therefore, I would ask the Government to explain why is it that they believe that these amendments do not include people seeking asylum and what is the justification for that. As this is a move towards residency-based, rather than citizenship-based, franchise, why are some people who are legally resident in Wales intended to be excluded from it, and how is this intention compatible with the Welsh Government's stated aim to make Wales the first world nation of sanctuary for refugees and asylum seekers?

Some people live in Wales for years while waiting for a decision on their asylum claim, due to the poor processes and hostile attitudes of the UK Government. How can we say that they are not also residents of this country? They are affected by the decisions that we are making as politicians just as much as anyone else who lives in Wales, and they have an equal right to influence those decisions. If we recognise this principle with regard to other migrants and refugees living in Wales, then it applies equally well to people who are still waiting for a decision on their claim for protection. Immigration status should not be a barrier to political participation.

On the understanding that these amendments are seeking to ensure that everyone who lives in Wales can participate politically, there is no moral or practical argument in my view for excluding people who are seeking asylum. There will be a gap between the intent of these amendments and their effect unless we take them in their most expansive sense to truly include all people living in Wales. I fully support the vision of making Wales the world's first nation of sanctuary, but, if we're going to achieve that, we must embed it in all of our actions. We must say to people seeking asylum that they are welcome, that they are included, and that they too will be able to exercise our most fundamental democratic right.