Electoral reformers rather regrettably have to be grateful to the MPs’ expenses story. Without that sorry and shameful tale reforming the system of voting for the House of Commons would have stayed in the shadows where it has languished for so long. Although we now have a form of PR for may legislative bodies, including the London Assembly, the Scottish Parliament and the Welsh Assembly, thr subject has virtually been taboo for the Mother of Parliaments, except among a few diehards such as myself. Now we see both an article and a comment piece in the “Observer” on 26 July stating that Downing Street will hold a referendum on changes to the voting system on the same day as the next General Election.
We have now arrived. Electoral reform for Westminster seems within our grasp and not a distant hope in a murky future. The campaign has truly taken off. The Labour Campaign for Electoral Reform (LCER) Executive Committee which I attended last week was uncharacteristically confident, discussing concrete action with a definite end in view. The hope is that the Queen’s Speech will include a commitment to introduce a Bill to reform the voting system for the House of Commons in the next parliamentary session and that this will then open the way for the referendum.
While I believe there is everything to play for, we must not let this opportunity slip through our fingers. If we lose this time, all hope of electoral reform may go for a generation. Even though the proposed change in the alternative vote (AV) system, which is not truly proportionate, I believe we should support it wholeheartedly. It’s much better that the present profoundly undemocratic first past the post way of voting. First past the post means that all policy and all electoral campaigning is concentrated on those seats which may change hands. This equates to a small percentage of those eligible to vote. It’s politics for swing voters, not politics for the majority, and is clearly outdated in a modern country such as Britain.
I call on the Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, Harriet Harman as Leader of the House and the Government as a whole to include changing the voting system for the House of Commons in the Queen’s Speech. Now is the time for change. It is only Labout that can and will deliver this particular change. We owe it to our voters to make every single vote count.
Filed under: Labour Party | Tagged: Gordon Brown, Harriet Harman, LCER
Isn’t the big problem with PR is that elected politicians, such as yourself, are pushed ever further away from the public?
Your position as an MEP is largely dependent on you being approved and placed on the list by Party HQ. In June 2009, I might have wanted to vote for Labour candidates 3, 5 and 7 and not the rest. As an incumbent your position is largely secure – the voters never get to judge YOU on your individual merits.
Any PR system must ensure electors can select from within lists – and not be forced into rigid party list systems.
You should embrace open primaries and the alternative vote–like Mr Milliband! Then ordinary people could get nominated and elected. My problem with other forms of electoral reform is that they put too much power in the hands of parties and the professional political class, which is a very bad thing. I also have a problem with people describing themselves as elected when they were appointed by said parties, though I know how moribund how many constiutuency districts are under the present system.
Still, a simpler, smaller house of commons with more ordinary people in it, and either a fully appointed Lords or one elected according to regions or interest groups would do me nicely. And lots of elected Mayors. Please convince the evil European uberlord conspiracy to tell Parliament to make it happen, Mary.
All the best,
Martin
Jonathan, I agree with you. I am no fan of the closed list we use for European Parliament elections and agree that any PR system should ensure that electors have the final choice of candidate.