FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

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

December 13, 2018
John Davis
What World Do We Seek?
Subhankar Banerjee
Biological Annihilation: a Planet in Loss Mode
Lawrence Davidson
What the Attack on Marc Lamont Hill Tells Us
James McEnteer
Breathless
Ramzy Baroud
The Real Face of Justin Trudeau: Are Palestinians Canada’s new Jews?
Dean Baker
Pelosi Would Sabotage the Progressive Agenda With a Pay-Go Rule
Elliot Sperber
Understanding the Yellow Vests Movement Through Basic Color Theory 
Rivera Sun
The End of the NRA? Business Magazines Tell Activists: The Strategy is Working
Kevin Zeese - Margaret Flowers
Historic Opportunity to Transform Trade
December 12, 2018
Arshad Khan
War, Anniversaries and Lessons Never Learned
Paul Street
Blacking Out the Yellow Vests on Cable News: Corporate Media Doing its Job
Kenneth Surin
The Brexit Shambles Rambles On
David Schultz
Stacking the Deck Against Democracy in Wisconsin
Steve Early
The Housing Affordability Crisis and What Millennials Can do About It
George Ochenski
Collaboration Failure: Trump Trashes Sage Grouse Protections
Rob Seimetz
Bringing a Life Into a Dying World: A Letter From a Father to His Unborn Son
Michael Howard
PETA and the ‘S’-Word
John Kendall Hawkins
Good Panopt, Bad Panopt: Does It Make A Difference?
Kim C. Domenico
Redeeming Utopia: a Meditation On An Essay by Ursula LeGuin
Binoy Kampmark
Exhuming Franco: Spain’s Immemorial Divisions
ADRIAN KUZMINSKI
Democratizing Money
Laura Finley
Congress Must Reauthorize VAWA
December 11, 2018
Eric Draitser
AFRICOM: A Neocolonial Occupation Force?
Sheldon Richman
War Over Ukraine?
Louis Proyect
Why World War II, Not the New Deal, Ended the Great Depression
Howard Lisnoff
Police Violence and Mass Policing in the U.S.
Mark Ashwill
A “Patriotic” Education Study Abroad Program in Viet Nam: God Bless America, Right or Wrong!
Laura Flanders
HUD Official to Move into Public Housing?
Nino Pagliccia
Resistance is Not Terrorism
Matthew Johnson
See No Evil, See No Good: The Truth Is Not Black and White
Maria Paez Victor
How Reuters Slandered Venezuela’s Social Benefits Card
December 10, 2018
Jacques R. Pauwels
Foreign Interventions in Revolutionary Russia
Richard Klin
The Disasters of War
Katie Fite
Rebranding Bundy
Gary Olson
A Few Thoughts on Politics and Personal Identity
Patrick Cockburn
Brexit Britain’s Crisis of Self-Confidence Will Only End in Tears and Rising Nationalism
Andrew Moss
Undocumented Citizen
Dean Baker
Trump and China: Going With Patent Holders Against Workers
Lawrence Wittner
Reviving the Nuclear Disarmament Movement: a Practical Proposal
Dan Siegel
Thoughts on the 2018 Elections and Beyond
Thomas Knapp
Election 2020: I Can Smell the Dumpster Fires Already
Weekend Edition
December 07, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Steve Hendricks
What If We Just Buy Off Big Fossil Fuel? A Novel Plan to Mitigate the Climate Calamity
Jeffrey St. Clair
Cancer as Weapon: Poppy Bush’s Radioactive War on Iraq
Paul Street
The McCain and Bush Death Tours: Establishment Rituals in How to be a Proper Ruler
Jason Hirthler
Laws of the Jungle: The Free Market and the Continuity of Change
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail