Like many former Liberals of a certain vintage, I was wooed to the cause of electoral reform by the diminutive but formidable figure of Enid Lakeman, who even at an advanced age could spear opponents with her logic and conviction. I wish she were around today to add her appraisal of whether Gordon Brown’s referendum on AV is a step forwards or a step backwards in the long march to Fair Votes.
As virtually everyone seems to be talking about ‘fairness’ these days, surely it is time that LibDems seized the moment and trumpeted our belief in STV? Moreover, we should make use of new media, not least social networking, to get our message over.
That was the core theme of my address to the AGM of the LibDem electoral pressure group DAGGER at the party headquarters at Cowley Street last weekend. Just as Fair Votes remains the discourse of the enlightened few, so, too often, is it confined within the boundaries of traditional campaigning – which would have been very familiar to Enid Lakeman – such as ill-attended public meetings, pamphlets and the occasional book.
It is time for electoral reform to go viral. Moreover, I believe we should be using every opportunity offered by new media to get out a strong clarion call for STV, thereby forcing a public debate on the issue. We can do this through writing posts on our blogs (if we have one), commenting on other people’s blogs and setting up or joining appropriate Facebook groups.
Above all, we can tweet. Make STV a song on Twitter that will become as familiar and persistent as that of a songthrush. All the evidence shows that even if no electoral system is perfect, STV is better than anything else that has been tried.
Even Roy Jenkins recognised that in the report his Commission produced in 1998, though he then went on perversely to recommend AV+ on the grounds that the House of Commons would accept nothing more radical. Brown, of course, hasn’t even offered the possibility of that.
But our discredited Parliament should not be the body which chooses our voting system. It should be the people, after an informed debate, in which STV should figure large. If STV is good enough for the Scots and the Irish, why not for Britain as a whole? That sentence was less than 140 characters, so there’s a good tweet for a start!
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Is the market for flats in England/Liverpool dead?
X-Ray Spex: Germfree Adolescents
The targeting of journalists is a real threat to democracy
Café with a view #20: Bedfords Park Nature Discovery Centre
north easterly
Caron Lindsay
Meg Thomas
Peter Davies
Judy Abel
5 Comments
One word: how?
I regularly tweet about STV yet, inexplicably, it hasn’t become a trending topic to rival the Iran Election or Michael Jackson.
Alas I think James is right. I’ve been heartened by unusual trending topics on Twitter – not least my beloved Everton suddenly rising to prominence after beating Manchester United – but I think STV is a bridge too far. And I think the level of tweet bombardment to make any sort of impact would probably see most of my followers head for the hills, and I couldn’t really blame them.
Completely agree though that we should be doing much more to push for STV.
Are groups like Vote for a Change not already attempting viral pro-STV campaigns? The fact that they’re not mentioned here suggest that they’re not particularly successful…
Dave’s right – wouln’t we be better off backing existing campaigns rather than confusing people with yet another?
Don’t forget that Power 2010 recently selected PR as the top issue for reform – why not add support to that?
I want a fair voting system, but one I understand. I want to vote for the best party for the Government, but also for the best MP. Voting must be simple and every vote should count.
I don’t want multimember constituencies – too much information! I want to elect an MP for my local area.
To argue that a move to AV would then lead to a better PR system seems wishful thinking.
The merits of the different systems are endlessly debated and it has got us nowhere. There is no consensus because people are put off by complex voting systems. Others are put off because of the upheaval the new systems would cause. Others just don’t want a fair voting system.
It has been shown that there is a public majority for a fair voting system in principle. There is no agreement on how. The key to public support is a system that every one, voters and politicians, understands.
MPs also have to vote for it. A reform that retains the existing electoral machinery and structure, thus not immediately threatening MPs and their campaigning organisation with redundancy, might just find a consensus. You cannot ask the Turkeys to vote for Christmas.
To achieve a consensus, a system must have as many virtues as possible, and at the same time, none of the vices. It must also be so easy and natural to introduce that it will seem like no real change at all when it comes to an election.
If you are not sure such an electoral system exists, have a look at Direct Party and Representative voting (DPR) at http://www.dprvoting.org