Coach travel to Rally for a Change

Posted by malcolmclark on June 25, 2009 | Comments (1)

The following coaches have been organised already for the rally. As more people book for the rally, we may put on coaches from other destinations. Also, if you can get a group of a dozen or more people together from the same pick-up point, we may be able to arrange transport.

Suggested £5 donation to be collected on the bus.

To book, or for any travel enquiries, email mikael@voteforachange.co.uk

Leicester

Outbound journey: 116 St. Peters Road (Opposite Sara Estate) 14.30 to Westminster (Approx. 3hrs)

Return Journey: Westminster 21.15 to 116 St. Peters Road

Oxford:

Outbound Journey: Oxford Train Station 16:00 to Westminster (Max 2hr Journey)

Return Journey: Westminster 21:15 to Oxford Station.

Get your MP to sign Early Day Motion 1681

Posted by malcolmclark on June 24, 2009 | Comments (1)

John Grogan MP has tabled an early day motion, EDM 1681, that "calls for a for a referendum regarding a more proportional voting system for elections to the House of Commons."

Already over 40 MPs have signed, including a few MPs (like John Mann) who have never before gone public with their support.

For the full EDM wording and to see which MPs have signed see: http://tinyurl.com/ldu6oc

To increase the level of support for EDM 1681 please write to your MP and ask them to sign (if they are able to). If they have signed already say thank you. If by convention they are not allowed to sign it (e.g. government ministers), then please ask them to forward your views on to the party's constitutional affairs spokesperson.

You can write to your MP c/o the House of Commons, London SW1A 0AA or via the website http://www.theyworkforyou.com

Remember that:

(i) the present political moment offers a once in a life time opportunity to move towards a new kind of politics, and it is essential that voters get to decide how MPs are elected by means of a national referendum

(ii) The EDM can in theory be signed even by anti-reform MPs (Diane Abbott for instance has signed), and certainly by those in favour of AV. It is about the call for a referendum, not backing a specific PR system. So whatever their position, you should ask them to agree that the people not politicians should make the decision on how MPs are elected; and the MP would be free to argue their case for the status quo in such a referendum.

Good luck and let me know what success you have.

Oxford academic forecasts a change of voting system for Westminster

Posted by philconnor on June 19, 2009 | Comments (2)

In a debate to accompany the launch of his book 'The New British Constitution', Vernon Bogdanor last night predicted that MPs would be elected by proportional representation within 10 years.

In the book he analyses the way the British constitution has changed and points out the strengths and weaknesses of what he sees as currently being in place. Greatest of these weaknesses is the lack of popular involvement in politics and he gives four methods to strengthen the democratic process, one of which is a move to a more proportional system to elect MPs.

"We need an electoral system which makes every vote count", he said and pointed out the undemocratic nature of safe seats and how they lead to voter apathy. "You could call a donkey conservative in Macclesfield and it would win!".

Vernon, who is the Professor of Government at Oxford University, also wrote the introduction to the very useful 'PR Myths' quick guide. Access it here

Elections Minister prejudges debate and also spins against reform

Posted by malcolmclark on June 19, 2009 | Comments (2)

You know something is amiss when a newspaper comes up with this title for an article about the Minister in charge of democracy and elections: "Labour minister - electoral reform isn't such a good idea"

The remarks reported on were those of Michael Wills at Ministry of Justice Questions in the House of Commons on Tuesday. These remarks were then followed by this article written by Michael Wills in The Guardian on Wednesday calling for "change now" and more than hinting at electoral reform.

Turns out, Elections Minister Michael Wills has been cunning / disingenuous (delete as appropriate) and been talking down the merits of reform to MPs in the Commons chamber whilst talking up the prospects to Guardian readers. It makes perfect sense for a politician: talk to some of the defenders of the status quo (MPs) in one way; talk to some of those most supportive of democratic reform (Guardian readers) in another way.

But this isn't even subtle. Not is it at different times: the Commons answers and the Comment is Free article were in effect spoken / written on the same day.

It gets worse though. In the Commons chamber, Michael Wills plays up many of the myths and straw men about PR: coalitions; unstable governments; potential power of smallest parties; letting in extremists. He also does an effective job of spinning the government's own neutral review of voting systems, essentially shining a harsher light on the PR systems already introduced than the review itself.

It gets even worse though. In the Guardian article he is all for "action now; no more "reviews or debates about whether to have a debate". Yet in the Commons chamber he seems keen only for a debate and says "the Prime Minister confirmed last week that the Government would shortly be launching a debate on electoral reform." Committing to a referendum on the voting system no later than the next election should be exactly the kind of action that Wills is wanting to see. But no, he shys away from referenda and such ways of implementing radical reform ... in favour of other methods (National Councils and other talking shops) which would enable the issue to be kicked into the long grass.

The real villany of Michael Wills' comments is perhaps this: he seems to be seeking to prejudice the outcome of any debate, both within the Commons and outside. In the Commons he continues to make arguments for keeping First-Past-the-Post, and against real change. He certainly is failing to keep neutral. In avenues like The Guardian he then seems to pushing (or at least giving unsubtle hints about the benefits of) the Alternative Vote. Yet in that same article, he also says "reform of the electoral system should not turn on which party benefits most. The debate must be about principle. Which system secures legitimacy for the public?"

Well, he can't have it both ways. How can the debate be about principle when he has a vested interest in the outcome - as a sitting MP and as a government minister? Especially when he takes such public views.

Michael Wills needs to step back, be systems neutral and simply facilitate an open and truly national public debate. We welcome him promoting the need for a debate, and the need for urgent radical reform; but he must not be allowed to prejudice the outcome of that debate, or fix it for his (and many in the government's) preferred system AV to come out on top.

As soon as the government announces it will hold a referendum on the voting system, including giving voters the choice of a more proportional system, then Michael Wills can validly have his say; along with the entire electorate. But until that time his pronouncements only serve to underscore the fact that politicians won't implement real changes that take power away from their and their parties' control, unless public pressure forces them to do it.

Be part of that public pressure: write to Michael Wills c/o Ministry of Justice, 102 Petty France, London SW1H 9AJ or email michaelwillsmp@parliament.uk