Today’s Guardian is reporting that David Miliband,
… would like to persuade Nick Clegg to pull out of plans for a referendum on the alternative vote next May.
Instead, Miliband wants the Liberal Democrat leader to consider his proposal of a joint referendum on the House of Commons voting system and an elected House of Lords on the same day – something Miliband has called a democracy day.
Pause for a moment to recall that the Conservatives have agreed to introduce elections for the House of Lords, and by Proportional Representation no less.
So David Miliband’s offer amounts to a massive watering down of what the Conservatives have already agreed to on the Lords. In other words, it’s a bloody awful offer. In fact, it has all the signs of being nothing to do with wanting to woo Liberal Democrats (do a deal with me! get less! go on!) and far more to do with Labour internal politics:
Friends of David Miliband have said that if he became leader and Clegg opted to support his plan, he would be able to pledge more full-throated Labour support for the Commons voting reform if it was combined with a ballot on whether to introduce an elected second chamber.
In other words, it is a idea being floated to try to give David Miliband some cover for supporting AV in a referendum which, er…, is what was in Labour’s general election manifesto.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Devil's Porridge
The surprisingly complicated history of Highbury and Islington
Councillor joins Lib Dems in Somerset
Some kids just need more hugs and cuddles
Test post 6
Tim Leunig
Tim Rogers
Mick Taylor
Steve Trevethan
14 Comments
“Pause for a moment to recall that the Conservatives have agreed to introduce elections for the House of Lords, and by Proportional Representation no less.”
Where/when was the offer made?
In the Coalition Agreement.
“We will establish a committee to bring forward proposals for a wholly or mainly elected upper chamber on the basis of proportional representation. The committee will come forward with a draft motion by December 2010. It is likely that this will advocate single long terms of office. It is also likely that there will be a grandfathering system for current Peers. In the interim, Lords appointments will be made with the objective of creating a second chamber that is reflective of the share of the vote secured by the political parties in the last general election.”
“Wholly or mainly”- we’ll have to wait until December to find out what exactly the proposals are concerning the Lords.
With hindsight or foresight it might have been a great deal better for the Lib Dems if they had left the issue of voting reform of the commons alone and asked instead for STV for the Lords, Local Government or Euro-elections.
Anyone of these would have been OK as once people get a taste of STV they are far more likley to want it for the Commons.
What an absolutely absurd proposal my Milliband. This is quite clearly about setting up hit U-turn into opposing AV when the referendum comes. Now he will be able to say “I oppose what I used to support because the coalition is going ahead with PR for the Lords without a referendum”. What a charlatan.
Postponing the AV referendum might be no bad thing. Better than losing it due to Lib Dem unpopularity.
Whichever way the new leader jumps the fact is there will be Labour activists on both sides in the AV debate. The last time that happened was in the European accession vote in 1975. Some historians have seen that divsion as a contributary factor in the eventual breakaway of the SDP.
thank you paul and james.
If the proposal is that the same referendum covers both issues then this may be an attempt to make the referendum more winnable as lords reform is based on the well understoood and presumably popular conncept of democracy whilst AV may be to dull and technical to get people enthusiastic about.
Mike(The Labour One) has a point that the wording of the Coalition Agreement is a bit vague, as I argued at the time. ( https://www.libdemvoice.org/opinion-silly-me-how-i-was-nearly-suckered-by-the-promise-of-lords-reform-19517.html ) Personally, I never thought a referendum on AV was the clincher in the coalition deal, as I thought it would be difficult to win (especially if there is a turnout threshold), but if we could get a powerful elected second chamber, it would make a few years of Tory dominated govt seem a lot more palatable. And Clegg would deserve a column as high as Earl Grey’s in Newcastle. (But if he fails….)
Surely anyone who supports Electoral Reform should be heartened by the fact that ALL Labour Leadership candidates have backed AV during their campaigns. This is a first, and is significant for the future, whatever the outcome of the Referendum.
The problem that I can see with the present reforms is in the attached reduction of seats in the Commons. This does seem to many like simple gerrymandering. It seems strange at the very least that we have a growing population, yet a shrinking number of representatives.
Charges by the Conservatives that the Boundary Commission is “Biased towards Labour” do not ring true. If it was simply an attempt to equalise constituencies, it would not seem as so divisive.
As a Labour Party member, I look forward to working with you all to secure a Yes vote, but it may take a lot more than one referendum, and of course, most Conservatives see this as another way of kicking this issue into the long grass…
paul labour activists can hardly jump to the lib dems any more as unfortunately there is only yellow tory and blue tory so the split would have no where to go
Of course the “opposition” is going to want to free itself from offers it made to a part of the current Government prior to the election, lets face it the agrement is going to be interpreted by the senior party in a way that benefits the senior party most, Labour do not have t do what you tell them, nor do they have to convince your party membership, they have only to appear to have a position that is within the realms of reason here.
That is they can oppose the AV systerm as proppossed quite legatimatly if there is a sell out fudge on the Lords (it is not wholly irellavent that they had 13 years to change the Lords and did not however this will not do you any favours if you agree a fudge on this, (the Torys know they are in the driving seat and will not give you what you want in december IMHO)).
Labour doing a u turn on this and having half or even a quarter of a reason will do, this then will throw the ball back in to the court of the Tory right wing, they will dig there heals in (knowing that the Lib dem party is a Lap Dog party, that they have you where they want you) they will get whatever they want same as on Cuts, schools etc as long as they dress it up a wee bit for Cleggee weggy.
It is interesting that LibDems believe that Labour should be bound by their manifesto commitments while in opposition, but that the LibDems should not be bound by their manifesto commitments (or indeed by party policy)while in government.