« Queens Speech initial reaction | Main | Renewed Welsh local focus »
December 12, 2008
Three Line Whipping into an anti-PR frenzy
The Telegraph blog is running a story about an un-named Brownite who is excited about a possible hung parliament scenario, where Brown can do a deal with the LibDems and bring in PR to 'destroy the Conservatives'.
Inevitably, there are a flurry of excited comments. But ICamp stands out as a voice of reason and knowledge:
"It's hard to see the logic in this. The Tories got more votes than Labour in England in 2005. Any UK Parliament elected by PR would have a substantial number of Tory MPs - who could form a minority or coalition govt just as Labour could. Both the Labour Party and the Tories oppose PR for the UK - they prefer to 'risk all' since each knows that it will get its turn from time to time to be master of England and to implement in full its own minority agenda whether the people of England want it or not. They do not wish to have govts that reflect the will of the English people. PR is for the 'fringes. PR for the UK would also facilitate the representation in Parliament of English nationalist parties (both left and right)along with the Greens, parties which are denied a foothold at the moment. A more likely scenario if Labour is the largest party at the next election and makes a deal with the Lib-Dems is that it will then fail to introduce PR and instead hold another election as soon as it believes it can win outright. Back to the old politics."
Indeed.
Posted by malcolmclark on December 12, 2008
Comments
"PR for the UK would also facilitate the representation in Parliament of English nationalist parties (both left and right) along with the Greens, parties which are denied a foothold at the moment."
It is all very well to say that the Tories had more votes in England than LABOUR in 2005. But they certainly did not have more than the left-of-centre including the Greens. Not only is every one of their Westminster votes completely wasted under FPTP but this very fact means that the party does not expand as would probably be the case under a truly representative system simply because people assume that it is not worth joinng the party or voting for it.
Here is a comment recorded in the icpr report :
"Margaret Thatcher of course recognised (and indeed rejoiced in) the undemocratic nature of first-past-the post which had ensured a majority of Tory governments (mostly with minority votes) throughout the twentieth century. AS SHE EXPLAINED TO DAVID FROST in an interview in 1995, if the Tories did not get back (at the next general election) they might not get back for many years -‘they might change the voting system.’"
If as reported by Tony Benn in his Guardian article of 11th Dec., Thatcher (CORRECTLY) described NEW Labour as "HER greatest achievement", Tony Blair could surely describe lifting this great fear off Thatcher’s shoulders as HIS greatest achievement (by so cynically ratting on the 1997 PR manifesto commitments).
Posted by: Joe Patterson at December 13, 2008 01:05 PM
"PR for the UK would also facilitate the representation in Parliament of English nationalist parties (both left and right) along with the Greens, parties which are denied a foothold at the moment."
It is all very well to say that the Tories had more votes in England than LABOUR in 2005. But they certainly did not have more than the left-of-centre including the Greens. Not only is every one of their Westminster votes completely wasted under FPTP but this very fact means that the party does not expand as would probably be the case under a truly representative system simply because people assume that it is not worth joinng the party or voting for it.
Here is a comment recorded in the icpr report :
"Margaret Thatcher of course recognised (and indeed rejoiced in) the undemocratic nature of first-past-the post which had ensured a majority of Tory governments (mostly with minority votes) throughout the twentieth century. AS SHE EXPLAINED TO DAVID FROST in an interview in 1995, if the Tories did not get back (at the next general election) they might not get back for many years -‘they might change the voting system.’"
If as reported by Tony Benn in his Guardian article of 11th Dec., Thatcher (CORRECTLY) described NEW Labour as "HER greatest achievement", Tony Blair could surely describe lifting this great fear off Thatcher’s shoulders as HIS greatest achievement (by so cynically ratting on the 1997 PR manifesto commitments).
Posted by: Joe Patterson at December 13, 2008 01:05 PM
The commentary above, which I agree virtually word for word with, probably reflects a pragmatic assessment of the UK's current political complexion and the likely electoral strategies adopted by various mainstream parties.
This is why it is vital to discover the LibDems real intentions in this matter now rather than when events thrust, upon a still relatively ignorant public, the prospect of exerting some real influence.
For example, no doubt the vast majority of the media will portray a balance Parliament outcome as "a period of uncertainty bordering on crisis". In fact it will the best thing to happen in a generation because for once the public, could (if they held their nerve) drag the mainstream parties kicking and screaming through the doorway they've been resolutely avoiding for the last few decades - you know the one marked "Modern Representative Democracy"
Posted by: Peter Davidson at December 22, 2008 11:19 AM
We're democrats and believe in free speech, but we're also committed to civil and rational debate. We reserve the right to delete material posted to our site, but we hope and expect to exercise this right rarely if at all.
