Fearing AV

Is Britain ready for a new, scrubbed up voting system?  The Tories, modern in rhetoric and fogey by disposition, don’t think so, and they have made this clear as Britons go to the poll for the first referendum the country has seen in 36 years.  The brittle alliance with Nick Clegg’s Liberal Democrats is becoming starker than ever over the issue of Alternative Voting (or AV).  Prime Minister David Cameron may well have agreed to run the agenda with the Liberal Democrats, but that doesn’t mean he won’t sabotage their quest to alter the status quo.

The determined Cameronians are keen to up the ante on the cost of the exercise, terrifying voters into believing that a system of preferential voting will bring in a new regime of exorbitant costs, unnecessary waste and unending complexity.  Nothing in that sense is particularly plausible.  The sprawling, unending Australian electoral system, covering an enormous landmass, handles it with economy and efficiency.  Voters Down Under, however cranky they might be when getting out to vote on a weekend, generally number every box of the ballot in order of preference without demur.

None of this has convinced Cameron, who fears that British democracy is under threat if the ‘Yes’ vote comes through.  ‘Nothing less than the way our democracy works is on the line.  First Past the Post has worked for generations.  It is simple to understand, gives each person an equal voice and lets the people kick out governments they don’t like.  We cannot give all this up’. Such simplicity surely verges on village idiocy, but Cameron is unrepentant.  ‘Politics shouldn’t be some mind-bending exercise.’  To expect the voter to be deliberating, intelligent and patient over a list of choices is something distasteful to Cameron.  One should vote by gut not mind.

Individuals like the Olympic gold medallist James Cracknell have no time for complexity in political life.  ‘The Alternative Vote is so complicated that it will put people off voting and if it allows people who come in third to win then it’s certainly not fair’ (The Telegraph, May 5).  Boris Johnson, Mayor’s stumbling and error-prone Mayor, is equally dismissive, claiming that AV would be actually ‘less proportional and less fair’, as if to say that a two-party contest in politics could ever be anything but proportional.  That a person might win first past the post with 20 percent of the vote, with other parties dividing the remainder, does not strike Lord Reid as particularly odd.  ‘That is the British way, it is the fairest way, and it is the best way.’  No more than two parties, with the occasional spoiler at number three is all these figures can handle. Hypocrisy can only go so far.

Labour is confused on the issue, with 130 opposed and 86 in favour.  Former Labour Home Secretary David Blunkett is keen that voters sink the AV proposal.  ‘If you think we should keep one person, one vote, if you think we should keep the system that is simple and straightforward and has stood us in good stead, then please join us in voting no.’  Surely no better argument for conservatism has ever been made by a member of a progressive party.

This is not to say that the AV model doesn’t have its faults.  There is no guarantee, for one thing, that a plethora of multi-party coalitions will come to the fore.  On the contrary, the Australian experience suggests otherwise, and both countries loathe grand coalitions of diverse parties.  Few safe seats may, on the surface, imply a richer democracy, but what it definitely does do is elevate political campaigning to a battle of the marginals.  But the fault with First past the post is that a two-party contest tends to be inevitable in any case, as voters fear seeing their vote exhausted.

This might be Clegg’s only chance at resurrection from within.  The Lib Dems and Tories are at each other’s throats, with Chris Huhne possibly readying himself for succeeding the less than shiny Clegg should he take the fall.  The austerity measures may well put pay to his influence in the next election.  But as the knives are being readied for his demise, he will hope that he might at least have left one mark: the presence of a new electoral system for Britain.  Given the polling figures that show the No campaign in the ascendant, we shall have to see.

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge.  He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne.  Email: bkampmark@gmail.com


More articles by:

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

March 21, 2018
Paul Street
Time is Running Out: Who Will Protect Our Wrecked Democracy from the American Oligarchy?
Mel Goodman
The Great Myth of the So-Called “Adults in the Room”
Chris Floyd
Stumbling Blocks: Tim Kaine and the Bipartisan Abettors of Atrocity
Eric Draitser
The Political Repression of the Radical Left in Crimea
Patrick Cockburn
Erdogan Threatens Wider War Against the Kurds
John Steppling
It is Us
Thomas Knapp
Death Penalty for Drug Dealers? Be Careful What You Wish for, President Trump
Manuel García, Jr.
Why I Am Leftist (Vietnam War)
Isaac Christiansen
A Left Critique of Russiagate
Howard Gregory
The Unemployment Rate is an Inadequate Reporter of U.S. Economic Health
Ramzy Baroud
Who Wants to Kill Palestinian Prime Minister Rami Hamdallah?
Roy Morrison
Trouble Ahead: The Trump Administration at Home and Abroad
Roger Hayden
Too Many Dead Grizzlies
George Wuerthner
The Lessons of the Battle to Save the Ancient Forests of French Pete
Binoy Kampmark
Fictional Free Trade and Permanent Protectionism: Donald Trump’s Economic Orthodoxy
Rivera Sun
Think Outside the Protest Box
March 20, 2018
Jonathan Cook
US Smooths Israel’s Path to Annexing West Bank
Jeffrey St. Clair
How They Sold the Iraq War
Chris Busby
Cancer, George Monbiot and Nuclear Weapons Test Fallout
Nick Alexandrov
Washington’s Invasion of Iraq at Fifteen
David Mattson
Wyoming Plans to Slaughter Grizzly Bears
Paul Edwards
My Lai and the Bad Apples Scam
Julian Vigo
The Privatization of Water and the Impoverishment of the Global South
Mir Alikhan
Trump and Pompeo on Three Issues: Paris, Iran and North Korea
Seiji Yamada
Preparing For Nuclear War is Useless
Gary Leupp
Brennan, Venality and Turpitude
Martha Rosenberg
Why There’s a Boycott of Ben & Jerry’s on World Water Day, March 22
John Pilger
Skripal Case: a Carefully-Constructed Drama?
March 19, 2018
Henry Heller
The Moment of Trump
John Davis
Pristine Buildings, Tarnished Architect
Uri Avnery
The Fake Enemy
Patrick Cockburn
The Fall of Afrin and the Next Phase of the Syrian War
Nick Pemberton
The Democrats Can’t Save Us
Nomi Prins 
Jared Kushner, RIP: a Political Obituary for the President’s Son-in-Law
Georgina Downs
The Double Standards and Hypocrisy of the UK Government Over the ‘Nerve Agent’ Spy Poisoning
Dean Baker
Trump and the Federal Reserve
Colin Todhunter
The Strategy of Tension Towards Russia and the Push to Nuclear War
Kevin Zeese - Margaret Flowers
US Empire on Decline
Ralph Nader
Ahoy America, Give Trump a Taste of His Own Medicine Starting on Trump Imitation Day
Robert Dodge
Eliminate Nuclear Weapons by Divesting from Them
Laura Finley
Shame on You, Katy Perry
Weekend Edition
March 16, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Michael Uhl
The Tip of the Iceberg: My Lai Fifty Years On
Bruce E. Levine
School Shootings: Who to Listen to Instead of Mainstream Shrinks
Mel Goodman
Caveat Emptor: MSNBC and CNN Use CIA Apologists for False Commentary
Paul Street
The Obama Presidency Gets Some Early High Historiography