Vote with your heart and your head – the best case I can make for AV

The way Yes To Fairer Votes makes the case for AV didn’t strike me as correct when I first read their website. I am all in favour of simple, compelling arguments, but when over-simplification results in statements that are only tangentially linked to the matter at hand something is not right. Focus groups to hone a message, OK, but some thinking and honesty too please.

So what then is the best argument for the Alternative Vote?

Something like “Vote with your heart and your head” is about the best I can do.

Continue reading →

Email This Post

Print This Post

We have been at our best when at our boldest – so AV?

Gordon Brown - CC / Flickr

Gordon Brown - CC / Flickr

Two striking phrases appear in Tony Blair’s 2002 Labour Conference speech – the famous “We have been at our best when at our boldest” and a lesser known line “Thanks to the brilliance and vision of Gordon Brown we have succeeded beyond any Labour government“.

Fast forward a little over 7 years, and more than 12 years after Labour’s historic 1997 election victory, and the same Gordon Brown has penned a column in The Guardian where he makes his case for holding a referendum after the election on voting system reform for Westminster. The problem is that the option on the table is the Alternative Vote system – keeping the one MP / one constituency system, but allowing voters to rank candidates. The Electoral Reform Society gives the idea a lukewarm welcome and I’m inclined to agree, but bold this definitely is not – it is at best a compromise. Mark Reckons has more on the issue from a Lib Dem perspective.

Continue reading →

[caption id="attachment_3126" align="alignright" width="300" caption="Gordon Brown - CC / Flickr"][/caption] Two striking phrases appear in Tony Blair's 2002 Labour Conference speech - the famous "We have been at our best when at our boldest" and a lesser known line "Thanks to the brilliance and vision of Gordon Brown we have succeeded beyond any Labour government". Fast forward a little over 7 years, and more than 12 years after Labour's historic 1997 election victory, and the same Gordon Brown has penned a column in The Guardian where he makes his case for holding a referendum after the election on voting system reform for Westminster. The problem is that the option on the table is the Alternative Vote system - keeping the one MP / one constituency system, but allowing voters to rank candidates. The Electoral Reform Society gives the idea a lukewarm welcome and I'm inclined to agree, but bold this definitely is not - it is at best a compromise. Mark Reckons has more on the issue from a Lib Dem perspective. Brown is not right when he says "This is about giving the people a choice, and it can unite those who believe in electoral reform with those who want to maintain a strong constituency link" - I do not believe in election reform, I believe in democracy and a parliament where the percentage of seats reflects accurately the percentage of votes case for a party. And that means a proportional election system, not AV. Plus if Brown says he wants to give a choice, why not give a menu of options? AV, and some proportional system as well in a referendum? Interestingly Brown's piece also makes some statements about the need for the UK to have a written constitution, and to have this in place by 2015. He even talks about the need for party political compromise on the issue. I somehow suspect this idea is not going to get far, especially now just prior to an election, and the series of issues that needs to be sorted would make the negotiations very lengthy and protracted... still I hope this idea gains ground faster than the AV idea does!

Email This Post

Print This Post

Gordon Brown and AV – no, not now Gordon

Gordon Brown - CC / Flickr

Gordon Brown - CC / Flickr

At the ‘we don’t want to oust Gordon’ PLP meeting earlier this week many words were spoken about how the Prime Minister had learnt the lessons of the last week, how he was now going to be better at listening. So what news slips out today? That the Prime Minister is actively contemplating proposing the Alternative Vote system as an alternative to First Past the Post as the system to elect Westminster MPs. Why, oh, why has this been announced now? We’re barely 48 hours after a terrible election defeat for Labour – an announcement like this looks terrible tactically as Mike Smithson points out. Which members of the PLP were aware of, or indeed back, Gordon’s plan?

Continue reading →

[caption id="attachment_2439" align="alignright" width="300" caption="Gordon Brown - CC / Flickr"][/caption] At the 'we don't want to oust Gordon' PLP meeting earlier this week many words were spoken about how the Prime Minister had learnt the lessons of the last week, how he was now going to be better at listening. So what news slips out today? That the Prime Minister is actively contemplating proposing the Alternative Vote system as an alternative to First Past the Post as the system to elect Westminster MPs. Why, oh, why has this been announced now? We're barely 48 hours after a terrible election defeat for Labour - an announcement like this looks terrible tactically as Mike Smithson points out. Which members of the PLP were aware of, or indeed back, Gordon's plan? Then there's the issue of AV itself - on balance it's a little better than FPTP but it still can come up with very skewed results - Unlock Democracy reckons Labour would have been wiped out in the EP elections if AV had been used. Iain Dale is also right to point out that this just looks like a Prime Minister wanting to mess with the election system just for the sake of his own advantage - probably so, although David Cameron is not immune from that accusation too - the Tory leader's piece in The Guardian almost uniquely contained ideas that would be favourable to his party. So what should happen? The scale and breadth of constitutional reform in the UK since 1997 has been unprecedented - see this post for a list of the main changes. But all of those changes have been conducted piecemeal, without a plan or vision of how the UK should be governed. Any sensible debate about the issue is brushed under the carpet with the blithe line that voters don't care about governmental structures and constitutional matters. Labour might have previously managed to get away with major changes without debate - no longer. The party and its leader are just not strong enough at the moment. So Brown should shut up about AV, should actually allow a discussion about different voting systems - and indeed the very principles of the UK constitution - to develop. There is no pressing rush, and listening for a while would for sure do no harm.

Email This Post

Print This Post