It will be a very strange feeling indeed if I find myself campaigning alongside local Conservatives for a 'NO' outcome in the referendum on changing the electoral system next year if it takes its course through parliament.(currently by no means absolutely certain)
I do not believe that FPTP is a system that serves us well as a modern democracy. I accept that it is unfair that the Liberal Democrats secured 23% of the vote at the General Election but only 8.7% of the seats in the House of Commons because of the 'inefficient' distribution of their support.
AV was and still is Labour Party policy. I didn't agree with that before the election and I don't agree with it now.
If the question is 'how do we achieve a fairer voting system?' the answer is most definitely not AV.
The study carried out by the late Lord Jenkins of Hillhead was very clear. AV is not a proportional system.
No voting system is without its flaws but AV seems to address very few of the problems and adds rather too many more of its own.
AV by is preferential structure has the ability to magnify trends. Under AV it is predicted that Labour would have secured a majority of 200+ in 1997. I may like the idea of that, but it would not have been fair.
In reality it gives no additional choice to the vast majority of voters in any given seat who will be backing the parties in first and second place. It simply encourages voters for smaller parties to make a grudging decision about the least worst 'other' options than their own preferred candidate. That is not fair.
The truth is in politics the 2nd choice much less the 3rd is of almost incalculably smaller value and yet will be counted as of equal value to 1st preference. That is not fair.
Let's be honest. AV will not produce a fairer electoral system. But it might just be a little fairer to the Liberal Democrats. The two really are not the same thing. Whilst I sympathise with the unequal outcome to vote share the Lib Dems suffer with, AV is not the answer.
One of the argued strengths of AV is that it maintains the constituency link. I agree with that. I support AV+. It maintains that link and the plus element would iron out much of the iniquity outlined above.
Changing our electoral system is such a profound constitutional step that a 'make do and mend' approach to reform simply isn't good enough for me.
I have had many people, mostly Lib Dems, assure me that AV is just a first step to further reform. I am not convinced by that argument, but even if I were I believe it would be a first step in the wrong direction for the reasons I have given.
It seems to me that a 'NO' vote in next years referendum can easily be shown to be a no to the flawed AV system rather than electoral reform in principle, I hope an incoming Labour or Labour/other coalition government could propose a vote on a genuinely fair system within 10 years. Whereas a 'YES' vote will in my view close off the prospect of truly fair votes for another 20 or 30 years as the forces of 'conservatism' will find it easy to portray the matter as settled.
I completely understand the hesitation that many of my Labour friends feel towards electoral reform. The idea of never again having a majority Labour government is not an easy one to accept. But Living in Tory Wealden, my Labour vote means nothing. It is not fair and it is not right and whatever instinctive reservations I may have, reform is a must. AV+ is not perfect but it is in my mind the best solution and I will continue to work to achieve it.
That will mean voting 'NO' to AV in the referendum next year.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I well written piece but I disagree
ReplyDeleteI’m in principle in favour of AV because it allows people to express preferences. You don’t mention this in your article.
What makes you think that rejecting AV will do anything other than consolidate FPTP for the next 100 years? Bear in mind, in answering, that losing the referendum heightens the likelihood of the coalition breaking down, gives us a huge failure to campaign on at the next election (under FPTP), and increases the chances of a majority Tory government in 2015.
The principle/pragmatics argument falls down too, in that AV does actually provide one half of what most of us want from an electoral system – preference. It doesn’t provide proportionality, but a preferential system is, in fact, half the battle and maybe more, given the ease with which you can move from AV to STV by bundling constituencies.
Thanks for the comment! I clearly do address the issue of preferences in the piece in some detail, so not sure how you missed that.
ReplyDeleteThe other issues you raise, I feel I have addressed. It is simply, as you said , the case that we disagree.