Labourhome

Straw heralds AV for Commons

NorthernMonkey Mon Mar 24, 2008 at 06:27:53 PM GMT Facebook

The Guardian's leader this morning observes that finally after 11 years, the government might be getting serious on constitutional reform.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/mar/24/localgovernment.voterapathy

Not only does it appear that the Lord Chancellor Jack Straw has reached cross-party consensus for House of Lords reform (the plans are based on creating an elected Senate based on regional PR), but Ministers have backed his plan to introduce the Alternative Vote for General Elections to the House of Commons.

This is a great step forward and hopefully the government will carry it through before 2010.

The plans also include compulsory voting - this I absolutely do not believe in. The right not to vote is as important as the right to vote and the state should not force people to exercise their democratic right.

Nonetheless, these plans represent a fundamental change in the government's attitude to constitutional reform and should be welcomed.

Advertise on this site with MessageSpace

tags: Jack Straw, House of Commons, House of Lords, Alternative Vote, Electoral Reform (all tags)

Straw heralds AV for Commons | 34 comments (34 topical)

Re: Jack Straw to introduce AV (#1)

by Sensible Comrade on Mon Mar 24, 2008 at 07:57:08 PM GMT

Northern Monkey - compulsory voting does not require you to put an 'x' on the ballot paper. Citizens are entitled to spoil their ballot papers. Or perhaps there will be a 'none of the above' option. I am a great enthusiast for compulsory voting and think it could play an important role in rejuvenating our democracy (alongside numerous other measures).

Apart from that I agree with your post.

Re: Jack Straw to introduce AV (#2)

by lastword on Mon Mar 24, 2008 at 08:14:23 PM GMT

Northern Monkey, that's the second time I've agreed with you this week. Must have been something in my Easter eggs!

[ Parent ]

Re: Jack Straw to introduce AV (#6)

by NorthernMonkey on Mon Mar 24, 2008 at 09:00:17 PM GMT

It's clearly the power of the Alternative Vote that's bringing us together!

[ Parent ]

Re: Jack Straw to introduce AV (#13)

by oratorhunt on Tue Mar 25, 2008 at 04:11:45 PM GMT

The government should be congratulated on waking up to the fact the First Past the Post is outdate, unfair and in need of reform.

Secondly we need to recognise that AV, whilst it is a bit of a step forward in the sense of allowing voters to transfer a 2nd preference, IS NOT A PROPORTIONAL SYSTEM. Indeed, it can give an even more unfair "winner's bonus" than FPTP does. It might give a constituency MP a degree more legitimacy, in the sense of having been elected by a broader group of voters, but the government as a whole will not be legitimate if it is still elected on a minority share of the vote (something quite possible under AV).

If we are to introduce AV, it would not need a referendum, since it is really a minor tweak to FPTP. We should move straight away to AV (voting by numerical preference). Why limit it to just two votes - we don't do that in Labour internal elections?

And then we should have a commission to review its performance with representatives of ordinary voters to determine whether an additional step could be taken to introduce proportionality. (This could be either AV, with a proportional 'top-up' - as Jenkins recommended - or, in by moving to the multi-member Single Transferable Vote).

[ Parent ]

: Re: Jack Straw to introduce AV (#16)

by NorthernMonkey on Tue Mar 25, 2008 at 05:08:14 PM GMT

I agree with you that AV should not just be two votes - we should be able to rank all candidates.

The same should be extended to the London Mayor vote as well.

I don't understand why the government has an obsession with moving forward in only very small steps rather than making bold reforms in one go.

[ Parent ]

Re: Jack Straw to introduce AV (#3)

by wgm on Mon Mar 24, 2008 at 08:19:32 PM GMT

I agree about compulsory voting - if people can't choose from the six to ten options most ballot papers have at a General Election then they can pick "none of the above" or spoil their paper - not just sit at home muttering about "all politicians being the same" and not engaging with democracy at all.

AV is preferable to STV or other systems if it retains the constituency link and allows people to choose a "fringe" party (that reflects their views closely but stands no chance of winning) first, and then who they prefer as a government (one of the major parties with a broad platform they most approve of or dislike the least) second.

[ Parent ]

: Re: Jack Straw to introduce AV (#4)

by swatantra on Mon Mar 24, 2008 at 08:36:02 PM GMT

Thank goodness the Govt is doing something at last on PR. Its a step forward and might help Labour remain the governing party, along with minor partners, if necessary. Anything, to keep the Tories out.

[ Parent ]

Re: Jack Straw to introduce AV (#5)

by NorthernMonkey on Mon Mar 24, 2008 at 08:46:33 PM GMT

Hi Sensible Comrade,

But I can't agree with the government forcing to choose an option at all. If people feel apathetic and do not wish to express their democratic right then surely that is up to them?

Sometimes I think there is a tendancy for members of our party to want compulsory voting because it will benefit Labour more than the Tories (although admittedly not everyone believes in it for this reason). But that should not come into it. Everything should be done to make the system more democratic, not to benefit one party more than any other.

[ Parent ]

: Re: Jack Straw to introduce AV (#7)

by AdL on Mon Mar 24, 2008 at 09:13:02 PM GMT

I agree with Northern Monkey here. I've long been of the opinion that some reform of the voting system is needed, and regardless of whether or not it will help us or the Tories more is moot. The fact is it is needed, and we should put party advantage to one side (the same can be said for party funding). As for compulsory voting - It is something I can't agree with. We do need to find a way of getting people to engage with politics. Forcing them to vote isn't the answer.

[ Parent ]

Re: (#8)

by jljb2 on Mon Mar 24, 2008 at 09:34:01 PM GMT

Thank God! I've been wishing this'd happen for years - AV and compulsory voting is perfect! It'll shift British politics decisively to the left and mitigate all need for New Labour claptrap - can't wait! We'll be able to be left wing again!

: Re: (#11)

by Free Socialist on Tue Mar 25, 2008 at 01:30:10 AM GMT

The best thing that could come of this is if an electorally viable rival to the left of Labour emerges. (No, not Liberals, they aren't left-wing anyway, or opportunist Nationalists.) Because Labour honestly needs to strive to win votes from the left of the political spectrum. Unfortunately FPTP has warped our political system in recent decades by pulling parties ever rightwards to compete for certain 'key' votes in southern England...

[ Parent ]

Re: Jack Straw to introduce AV for General (#9)

by LabourOutlook on Mon Mar 24, 2008 at 11:37:06 PM GMT

The Tories are already beginning to spin this as "Labour are behind in the polls, so they're trying to rig the voting system".

Should we be worried about this?

: Re: Jack Straw to introduce AV for General (#10)

by CitizenAndreas on Tue Mar 25, 2008 at 12:50:33 AM GMT

Well, the Tory spin is several parsecs off from the actual facts. The roots of these policy ideas trace themselves back to the Fabian's 2007 autumn conference when the polls were looking much better for us. The case for both compulsory voting and AV were put to the audience and the audience responded positively for both.
Personally, I don't see the problem with compulsory voting, compulsion to turn up at a voting booth every five years doesn't seem so bad. You can still spoil your ballot paper. The right not to vote is not all that fundamental.
As for AV, plenty of people vote tactically and the big losers from this are the smaller, non mainstream parties. If a political party is truly representative of the views of ordinary people, it has nothing to lose from allowing people to have a second choice.

[ Parent ]
: Re: Jack Straw to introduce AV for General (#14)

by swatantra on Tue Mar 25, 2008 at 04:27:28 PM GMT

Let them say what they like! We're doing this because its about time we gave all shades of opinion a voice in a free society, not for it to be dominated by the 3 major parties. So we're doing the right thing.Labour Campaign for Electoral Reform LCER has been pressing a change for years. One third of the popular vote is not really a mandate to govern for any party.

[ Parent ]

Re: Straw heralds PR for Commons (#12)

by TonyHannon on Tue Mar 25, 2008 at 12:57:49 PM GMT

On the one hand, people have a right not to vote - it's an important right but when I compare it to how people are compelled to jury service, compelling them into a local voting station once or twice every four or five years(where they can spoil their vote if they want) hardly seems such a heavy-handed state violation of rights.

To be absolutely frank - it also riles me a little bit to see people denied a vote all over the world or risk life and limb to go to a polling booth while we facilitate a significant number of people to dismiss the entire process as a sham - despite the fact that their apathy undermines the validity of election results.

Having said that - it's right to do more to get people voting but we need to recognise what's putting people off. It would be preferable to realise that the tools of engagement we have now aren't working (courting partisan newspaper columnists, writing propagandistic leaflets, opposition for opposition's sake, political point scoring etc.).

Compulsory voting would only cover the sympton of voter apathy and ignorance - not cure the cause.

Re: Straw heralds PR for Commons (#15)

by NorthernMonkey on Tue Mar 25, 2008 at 04:54:24 PM GMT

Alex (or Jag?) - you seem to have changed the title of this thread to 'Straw heralds PR for Commons'.

I've had to change this because AV is not a form of PR - it's different. I hope this is ok.

Re: Straw heralds PR for Commons (#17)

by alexhilton on Tue Mar 25, 2008 at 05:17:55 PM GMT

That was me - I was being deliberately broad in my definition simply because OR is understood more clearly by its acronym than AV

[ Parent ]

Re: Straw heralds PR for Commons (#18)

by oratorhunt on Tue Mar 25, 2008 at 05:22:25 PM GMT

PR can cover various systems (STV, AMS/MMP, AV+, list PR), but not AV since it isn't proportional!

[ Parent ]

Re: Straw heralds PR for Commons (#19)

by alexhilton on Tue Mar 25, 2008 at 05:38:32 PM GMT

This I know - like I say, I was broadening the definition unilaterally for the sake of a more grabby headline; and the author has re-edited it into a compromise headline.

If you will let me take this back to the issue at hand. I personally support multi-member STV, Ideally with 3-member constituencies so that the geographies aren't so large as to effectively break the constituency link. The system would also give MPs a reason to compete more for their seats because the system would help differentiate MPs who are "bed-blockers" from effective MPs who are merely old.

We could also get rid of AWS by saying that all 3-member seats should have at least one female candidate and having target areas where two of the three are women - but ultimately leaving it to the voters who is elected of the three.

HOWEVER, if the government wants to go for AV, I would jump at the chance because it is an in-principle acceptance that something must be done. AV for 2010 and 3-member STV thereafter would be a great result as far as I'm concerned.

[ Parent ]

: Re: Straw heralds PR for Commons (#20)

by oratorhunt on Tue Mar 25, 2008 at 05:42:29 PM GMT

Agree that if AV is on offer we need to take it, but I agree that we shouldn't see it as the end-stage but as the beginning of a process - one that hopefully gets us towards a PR system like STV.

[ Parent ]

Re: Straw heralds AV for Commons (#21)

by SW on Tue Mar 25, 2008 at 08:23:13 PM GMT

How short-sighted to only finally be doing this now. In the first two terms with large majorities this could have been achieved and would have been generous and politically-astute. It probably will not succeed now and looks like a panic measure even if it is not.

Re: Straw heralds AV for Commons (#22)

by writingwrongs on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 07:27:53 PM GMT

There's much to be commended in all this, but I'm wary of compulsion in the electoral process. If political parties can't entice people voluntarily to the ballot box that's OUR problem and something we need to work on. I'm also wary of rather less palatable ideas being bundled into this, such as "a review of party funding" being used to attack the democratic link between trade unions and the party.

We need to be careful what we're wishing for

: Re: Straw heralds AV for Commons (#24)

by pauldburgin on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 11:05:43 AM GMT

I agree that we have to be careful, but it is enticing. It wipes away the "unfairness" of FPTP by making sure that each MP has over 50% of the vote, plus each MP still has a constituency to maintain so there is still that important link with voters

[ Parent ]

Re: Straw heralds AV for Commons (#23)

by Free Socialist on Fri Mar 28, 2008 at 02:11:31 AM GMT

Another issue we need to think of related to a possible change from FPTP to AV is who would we have to rely on if it meant an new era of European-style coalition politics? And does such a party even exist at present?

Re: Straw heralds AV for Commons (#25)

by alexhilton on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 11:16:11 PM GMT

AV isn't more likely to produce coalitions. In some cases could be less likely. it's not a proportional system. It's just fairer because it really does give more voters the opportunity for their votes to count.

Really it's an enshrinement of tactical voting.

[ Parent ]

: Re: Straw heralds AV for Commons (#26)

by rwendland on Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 09:01:04 PM GMT

Won't AV produce more LibDem winners on the back of 2nd choices going for the centre? Thus fewer main 2 party winners. Therefore fewer absolute winners, and more coalitions?

[ Parent ]

Re: Straw heralds AV for Commons (#27)

by Group51 on Mon Apr 14, 2008 at 12:24:13 AM GMT

AV for Westminster? Please God - yes yes yes!