« Iceland - a good result | Main | news from our canadian cousins »
May 13, 2009
a fresh angle on the expenses saga
We're now on what feels like day 100 of the MPs expenses story, and I think there's an STV angle here. People are talking already about the possibility of a huge unseating of incumbent MPs at the 2010 election. But it takes a lot of anger to vote against your party.
One of the advantages of STV in multi-member constituencies is that it allows voters to punish their MP but not their Party.
So if "40k" Phil Hope was standing in a 4 member constituency, voters could give him their 4th preference, rather than their first - and the likelihood is that he loses his seat, but without the need for tactical voting or for Labour members to vote against Labour, or to abstain.
STV is about the positive expression of beliefs, whilst FPTP is about negativity and tactical voting. STV could improve the calibre of MPs by weakening the grip of the political parties. A political meritocracy is what we need.
We have this discraceful abuse of expenses becuase MPs thought they weren't accountable to the electorate for their claims - which until now they weren't, because we didn't know. They were though accountable to party whips, who of course did nothing because there was no political advantage in clamping down.
FPTP facilitates centralised, over powerful party machines. STV puts the power to chose MPs into the hands of voters. When the entire political class has been caught with its hand in the till, we need this power more than ever.
Posted by stevenskelton on May 13, 2009
Comments
Because FPTP is all about negativity and tactical voting it is vital that voters treat the system as it is, rather than how they would like it to be, ie by voting negatively and tactically. Phil Hope's Tory opponent should be backed, not for the current embarrassment but because it will help deprive Labour of its Commons majority. Conversely, if the Tories win eg Leicester West they will be on the way to their own Commons majority and so Labour need to be backed there to block it. Only by depriving any party of a majority will FPTP be ended.
Posted by: Hugh at May 13, 2009 09:40 PM
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.
