Over at the Financial Times, Lib Dem MEP Andrew Duff offers a European perspective on the UK’s general election – and finds the continent as gripped as the rest of us by Thursday’s national poll:
In Brussels and across Europe there has been a surge of interest in the British general election campaign. People had more or less accepted that David Cameron would form a Conservative government, probably with a large majority, but now the outcome looks far from certain. …
Yet the thing that has galvanised continental political interest is the exposure of the iniquity of British electoral procedure. That Mr Brown could come third in terms of the popular vote yet still retain the largest number of seats in the Commons, and return as prime minister, is thought to be scandalous. Indeed, if such a result were to be declared in any benighted east European country, MEPs would pass cross resolutions about corruption and the abuse of fundamental rights.
Whatever comes out in the wash after May 6, a change to a system of proportional representation in Britain, where seats won at Westminster broadly match votes cast in the country, is a precondition for the rehabilitation of Britain’s reputation as a democracy.
You can read the rest of Andrew’s article here.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
The Joy of Six 1559
Clacton ad infinitum
Which is the most unworkable policy?
paul barker
suzanne fletcher
Caron Lindsay
William Wallace
Peter wrigley
3 Comments
But what is http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/0e6bd692-56ef-11df-aa89-00144feab49a.html all about?
Needs explanation, surely electoral reform is a Liberal Democrat sine qua non? Surely NC is talking purely about giving confidence and supply to a credible minority government, or is more intended?
Paul,
Paddy Ashdown made the mistake of hanging too much on a promise of electoral reform. We are saying this time that there are FOUR pre-conditions: electoral reform, a funded Pupil Premium, the raised Income Tax threshold, and broken up banks & sustainable investment policies.
The rest of the manifesto may be a bit more “aspirational” with regard to the reality on May 7th; the priorities above are those that must happen to create a fairer Britain and the remainder being what LibDems in Parliament would fight for the rest of the time.
Yes, I understand and accept the four pre-conditions; they promise a better future for the country. I don’t understand, though, how this article talks about dropping one of them. LD’s should give NC, his front-bench and the parliamentary party as much manoeuvring room as they need, but surely this makes no sense?