What Do We Want? Representatives That Represent Us! #PRNow

Brexit is an absolute mess. However, this won't be a post demanding any particular solution to that now grave crisis. It is a post dedicated to what is clearly, after the last 3 years, a pressing need to help make our political culture healthier and more responsive.

The paralysis in Parliament right now comes not just because no one has an idea of the way forward. It is also because attempting to balance the, sometimes contradictory, beliefs of different important groups within each party means there's no way to make a decision that pleases anyone. A compromise might cause a split in your party or bring down your Government.

These parties, filled with their warring interest groups, still don't manage to represent the electorate. Votes are wasted as an MP could easily be elected with less than 40% of the vote (i.e. 60% of those turning out to vote, let alone of the electorate as a whole, voted AGAINST them and they still won). Governments can get large majorities and do all sorts of crazy things (like introducing an ill-conceived referendum without considering what needed to be done if a particular side won) despite the majority of people in this country having voted for someone else.

MPs stand on manifestos they don't believe in. Deals are done behind closed doors with very little understanding of what might have been traded to win support for whatever legislation or policy was up for debate.

What we need is proportional representation. We need to ensure more votes matter. We need to ensure MPs can stand on manifestos they actually believe in. We need to break up the not-fit-for-purpose "umbrella" parties and get parties that actually reflect the diverse opinions of our electorate. We need political parties that will know they won't win a majority and be upfront with the electorate about what they will and what they won't compromise on so we all know what we are getting into before the trouble starts.

So sign the petition calling for a fairer voting system. Use your anger righteously and lets finally start digging this country out of the big hole it has gotten itself into.

Where Do We Go From Here?

I doubt it needs to be said but... being a liberal, Folkestonian, unionist electoral reformer has not been a very pleasant or comfortable experience these last two days. But now the feelings of sadness, depression and disgust have calmed to a mere numbness, it's time to see where we go from here. (Note I may not actually suggest where we go from here and may just get distracted by ranting....)

Shepway

What I'd hoped wouldn't happen has happened. The Liberal Democrats have been wiped off the council , and the only opposition to the triumphant Tory administration are two People First councillors (to 44 Tories). I won't doubt the commitment of those two councillors to represent their constituents well but that majority gives the Tories the ability to ignore campaigns against projects they support.  Residents are now the people responsible for scrutinising the workings of Shepway district council.

We must not shy away from those responsibilities. From the small (such as my other halves quick call to the council to get some illegal "No Parking" cones removed from our streets yesterday) to the big (Fisherman's Wharf ring a bell? Public meeting attendance a must). We must hold them to account.

The Shepway Liberal Democrats are reeling right now, and many will sympathise with our own dear Sam's words on Newsnight last night I'm sure, but we must take heart that there was no "Labour breakthrough". We can, and must, come back fighting. I know the former councillors have a truly deep love for Shepway and whatever happens to the party, they won't just stop caring.

Nationally

It was awful. There's no sugar coating our performance at the local English elections, the Scottish Parliament elections and at the Welsh Assembly. It was dire. I believe a "collapse" or a "disaster" might be overplaying it somewhat, we still got 17% of the vote at the local elections and got 1056 councillors elected. It was, however, a wake up call. The Tories didn't get punished for the Coalition because they didn't do anything that their supporters wouldn't expect of them! It's not because they've used Lib Dems as human shields. It's not because the Coalition policies are generally popular.

We as Lib Dems suffered such a dismal fallout because we haven't listened to voters, OUR voters, since the 2010 election. You don't get to air a video like this:



And then expect your supporters to swallow a love-in with the Tories, a reversal on tuition fees and etc. etc. I know, it's tough to say this, but things have got to change.

I'm not advocating a sulky withdrawal from the Coalition. I'm advocating what I've been advocating since last year... grown up politics! We must call a spade a spade, and be brutally honest with our coalition partners. It might already be too late. Nick Clegg may not be the man for the job (but I do hope he is!). Tough decisions lie ahead.

When the media try their "OMG coalition split" stupidity we must call them out on it, not pretend the divisions are minor and gloss over them. The divisions are real, and it's time we said so. We are DIVIDED and working together. It's not a contradiction. Next time the Tories ask us to vote for something our supporters do not want don't say "Sure okay we'll vote for it but cross our fingers whilst we do". We do not vote for it. We get bigger concessions. We fight for every drop of Tory blood. Excuses like "it's in the national interest" "we didn't win the election so we can't do everything we want" and the old "look at all the other pretty things we got" lines DO NOT WORK ON THE PUBLIC. They are not stupid. They feel betrayed. And quite honestly following an election ad like the one above, can you blame them?? In lots of cases our supporters did not switch sides, they just didn't bother turning up. Disaffected and miserable. We need to speak to them, apologise for getting carried away and sort ourselves out. Now. I truly wish our ministers would stop spinning and start listening.

But... we must stay strong as a party. We do not agree with each other on our future direction. We need to listen to each other and learn. We need to really work together and fight to recover our lost support (and more!) if we have any hope of securing a more liberal future for this country. We cannot split and I urge all members to stay and fight for the party they want. I've faltered these last few months, but I'm no longer going anywhere.

We have a duty to keep up the struggle, to protect our country from the excesses of the conservative and illiberal forces that too often get their hands on the reins of power. We must not let the Tories target minorities in this country like they have done in the past. We must not let Labour take away our rights "for our own good". We have to survive as a party to ensure someone is able to scream for justice and fight for freedom.

We must not continue on blind to the message the public have clearly sent to us. But we MUST continue on.

Electoral reform

Heart. Broken. I don't think that quite covers it but the AV loss, expected though it was, was a bitter blow. The gloating from the No to AV side didn't help and the spinning from the Yes to AV side almost made me violent.

Clegg-hate was obviously a factor, but I think it is naive to blame everything on our leader. We need to learn from this referendum and really study what lay behind the No vote. Was it just to punish us? Or was it that the system wasn't liked? Or worse... do the British just not want electoral reform? These are the questions that lay before us. The answers will tell us what we do next, but they may not be what we want to hear. The public has spoken, and it's time to try and listen (although with any referendum it's next to impossible to really hear what's being said). I've been listening to colleagues who truly believe the system was just too complicated. That might confound election geeks and students of politics but I think this actually goes a long way to explaining the no vote. I think we may have lost the argument on my beloved STV already. Additional Members might be our best bet. :(

In the meantime, we must focus on achievable goals. House of Lords reform. That's what we need to get, and we need to do it properly.

The State Of The Union

Whilst I was lying battered and bruised on the floor following the election results somebody came up and stabbed me through the heart. The SNP's stunning victory in Scotland (managing to achieve a majority in a PR-lite system is no mean feat) puts the existence of our Union into question. A real question. That people will vote on. Seeing the stupidity on both sides of the AV debate (from the campaigns themselves I mean), and the downright misrepresentations they perpetuated I have grave concerns about the conduct of a referendum on such an emotive subject as Scottish independence. Whilst the polls don't suggest Scottish people back such a singularly final move, I worry greatly for what might happen if the debate is not kept above board (by both sides!).

I believe in democracy. I must support the concept of a referendum on the subject. But, with a bearded dragon as my witness (the house is empty right now and I don't believe in sky fairies), I will fight to try to keep this union together. I will not let the country of my birth, the country I love, disappear easily.

Our islands ,and their many varied people, must not be split apart based solely on where you happen to live. Instead we must fight the forces of nationalism by addressing the remaining, genuine grievances of all in a new federal structure. Devolution was a typical British compromise. We must move beyond it to something more stable (please oh bearded dragon let it be federalism not independence).

Other views;

Crawling from the Wreckage
What went wrong
How to implement full Lords reform, now that the referendum is lost. 
When Nick and the LibDems balloon was well and truly burst


If you feel benevolent and particularly generous, this writer always appreciates things bought for him from his wishlist

Reform Cat For Parliament! That's What I Say #yes2AV

Hilarious video featuring... cats! Plus it's all about why AV is awesome.



My main reason for voting Yes to AV is now to ensure I can rank Reform Cat and Battle Cat by preference as it'd be shame for either one of them not to get my support... ;)


If you feel benevolent and particularly generous, this writer always appreciates things bought for him from his wishlist

I'm Saying Yes!! #yes2AV

If you feel benevolent and particularly generous, this writer always appreciates things bought for him from his wishlist

Yes To AV Tidbits

Today saw the launch of the Yes To AV broadcast after various news programmes. It's alright, and at least 15 times more accurate than it's No2AV equivalent



I'm very much a believer in the idea that it shouldn't matter what party might get elected when trying to consider which is the best (or in AV's case "better) electoral system. Cries of "Oh noes... the BNP are coming" do not upset me too much. If you don't think you can stop the BNP through the power of your arguments then you've lost to them already. BUT I have heard, IRL, people talking about AV strengthening the BNP and this is turning them off. So this article from the Guardian serves a useful purpose.

Switch to AV would not boost BNP chances, says thinktank

And finally the truth about the infamous "miserable little compromise" quote comes out..

Nick Clegg’s miserable little compromise.

If you feel benevolent and particularly generous, this writer always appreciates things bought for him from his wishlist

The Flaws Of First Past The Post

AV is not a perfect system, nor is it my preferred system, but it does help eliminate some of the worst features of first past the post. This video shows you exactly what they are...



Yoinked from here

I made my own case for AV here

If you feel benevolent and particularly generous, this writer always appreciates things bought for him from his wishlist

Yes To AV

You know I'm not one for compromise. Sheesh, it's been 5 years and I'm still bitter over civil partnerships. I like reforms to be bold and as complete as possible. So no, I'm not overly enamoured with next year's alternative vote referendum. I'm a proportional representation supporter and, like many, I support the single transferable vote as the "best" system. Not perfect, I hasten to add, but I think it is the best.

Unfortunately the question that will, if the legislation gets passed, be asked in May 2011 is not about STV, it's all about the Alternative Vote: 

Do you want the United Kingdom to adopt the 'alternative vote' system instead of the current 'first past the post' system for electing Members of Parliament to the House of Commons?

It's the answer to that question that I (and you) need to decide on. But before we can, there's a lot of controversy over the legislation. The Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill is contentious for a number of reasons. The first is the date the referendum is due to be held on. It coincides with other elections, and people feel that the message may be diluted or people confused due to the campaign getting mixed in with others.

On the people getting confused front, I have to say I'm very dubious about this argument. We've managed to run different elections on the same day without confusion (except in some cases where there are different voting systems being used at once). And many US states manage to hold various elections and "referendums" on the same day without anybody screaming "I just don't understand!!!". But the idea that the message might get mixed up with the election campaigns is one that has merit. Alas I think it does make sense, both for turnout reasons and for financial reasons, to hold the AV referendum at the same time as other elections. It's another compromise, but we've already made one massive one (AV over PR!) so why people seem more worried by this than the basic fact PR isn't on the ballot, I don't know!

The more controversial part of the Bill is to do with constituency sizes. The proposal is to bring down the number of constituencies to 600, and to equalise the size of the electorates in each (as far as possible).

Part of this controversy centres around some claims that this is "gerrymandering", ignoring completely that the Government will not actually carry out the boundary review but simply set the rules for it. I will not address these concerns as they are, quite simply, partisan attacks.

The more sensible and considered criticism of this reform is that the boundaries may cross natural borders and local Government jurisdictions, a headache for candidates, campaigns and electorates. Also there's issue with the speed of this reform (taking place just before a census), and with it's ability to calculate the number of electors in a region. There's a good piece on this on Open Democracy. I'm not going to answer these criticisms because I wholeheartedly agree with them and hope that these can be worked out in the debates and votes in Parliament *chortles merrily to himself about the idea that MPs might focus on sensible considerations*

So whether the Bill gets passed is still up for argument. Let's imagine if it does. I think there will be a few camps in the AV referendum including:

For the Yes vote:

• Those who favour AV as their system of choice
• Those who favour PR but are putting their faith in AV as a "step in the right direction" 
• Those who favour PR, know we're not going to get it just yet, so are supporting the campaign as a last resort (that's me included)
• The "liberal" partisans of the Coalition who see this as just another battle against anti-Coalition sorts. 

For the No vote: 

• Those who favour FPTP as their system of choice (right wing Tories, some Labourites) 
• Those who favour PR and are NOT going to compromise (they have my sympathies, but I suspect this will be a very small, invisible grouping) 
• Tories who are outraged by the Coalition and wish to thumb their noses at it
• Labourites and other anti-Coalition "lefties" who wish to "hurt" the Lib Dems because of their "betrayal" 

I think those who favour FPTP are actually a small group as the status quo really doesn't really inflame one's soul. So, based on where I think the various camps sit, the strength of cohesive, passionate argument certainly seems to fall on the pro-AV side. The danger is allowing "politics" to get involved. 

We all saw and felt what happened in the country during the expenses scandal. A dislike of politicians generally and an urge among a lot of people for change. This is what helped create the "Clegg bubble" that so excited us all during the election (even if it came to nothing but a small increase in the Lib Dem vote). People were desperate for "another way". The AV campaign must embrace that feeling, and try to be as sensible, unpartisan and creative as possible. 

I live in a constituency where a Tory being elected is as predictable as the Sun rising in the morning. That shouldn't be the way politics works. The majority of us who didn't vote for the Tory should still get a say in our representative in Parliament. It's so simple a message, and it's the one major argument that I see getting people onboard with the Yes campaign. It needs to focus on FPTP's role in corruption (across the parties), in it's inability to shift MPs of certain parties in certain areas, and it's lack of choice. 

That's why I want AV (I'm under no illusions it's a "stepping stone" to PR). I want the right to be able to say that if my first preference doesn't win by more than 50% of the vote (and neither does anyone else) then my vote can go to someone else (who might not be my favourite but is preferably not a Tory). So I'll be voting Yes in the AV referendum and I'll be happily campaigning for the Yes campaign here in Folkestone and Hythe. 

If we can avoid it becoming a partisan issue, once (and if) the relevant legislation is passed, and get support from sensible pro-AV people in all the parties, we can win the argument. Because the arguments for FPTP aren't up to much. The only thing that stands in the way is if the referendum becomes a referendum not on our electoral system but on whether you like the Government or not. If that happens, it will be a great stain upon our political party system, and a great shame for democracy.

If you feel benevolent and particularly generous, this writer always appreciates things bought for him from his wishlist

Reform Is Never Easy

The 55% rule, needed to ensure a fixed term Parliament under our dodgy uncodified constitution, is causing a lot of confusion (thanks mainly to the media) and upset (thanks mainly to conservative members of the Tory and Labour parties). What to actually know what it means? Here's a serious explanation and here's a fun one.

I think the boo-ha-ha from the old guard, on this issue alone, illustrates how hard the fight for reform is going to be. If they get upset about fixed term Parliaments, how will they feel over an elected House of Lords?? Time to get down to business and fight the good fight for radical political reform... against rebel members of the Coalition and against the Opposition. It's going to be fun!

If you feel benevolent and particularly generous, this writer always appreciates things bought for him from his wishlist

Things That Piss Me Off About Hung Parliaments

Well not about hung Parliaments themselves but people's reactions to them and perception of them.

1) "Unelected Prime Ministers". This is a hold over from before the election. The sort of idiotic issue that only the uneducated journalists of our rotten press could come up with. But when I heard William Hague, one of the great Parliamentarians of our time, mutter those words I knew something was up. There's no way anyone with his experience could use that phrase except for politically dubious reasons. Obviously he wishes people to accept David Cameron as our "elected PM" but in so doing he makes things very "constitutionally" wonky and really sets the Tory party up for future falls if our system isn't reformed. Let's be clear here... under our system we do not elect Prime Ministers. The Prime Minister is the person who commands the majority support in the house. That is it. That could be Mr Cameron. Or Diane Abbott (please God no). Clear? Me either... but that's our unwritten constitution for you.

All this talk about how awful unelected leaders are, puts our monarch in a nasty situation (and who elected you Ma'am?)... which does not please this old royalist one bit. Be warned Mr Hague.

Personally I think all this "unelected PM" and "illegitimate Government" stuff the Tories are banging on about is going to lead to a constitutional crisis. And quite frankly, I agree with the Queen.

2) Proportional representation. Have ever so many people been so deluded for so long? I don't mind positive arguments FOR FPTP but the negative arguments against PR (whatever your flavour) just do not hold true. MOST Governments in the developed world work under some form of PR. And let's face it... those countries are just fine. Sure each system comes with it's own problems but FPTP is far from perfect and doesn't even win "best of a bad bunch". So let's stick to the facts and not mind-numbingly stupid suggestions that coalitions don't work etc.

3) The voters voted for... This is currently journalists and politicians favourite one. The public voted for... cheesecakes on a Thursday. The public voted for... power sharing, alternating daily between Cameron and Brown with Clegg taking over every other Wednesday and Bank Holidays.

I'm truly amazed they were able to deduce what this strange creature called the public wants simply based on a combination of our votes. Like reading tea leaves. FPTP allows people only to express their preference for who their MP is. Nothing more.

4) All coalitions in a hung Parliament where no party secured more than 50% of vote or seats will be a coalition of the losers. Simple.

Sigh. I don't think this is going to end well for anyone, as the level of intelligence required for this sort of politics seems quite beyond our politicians and journalists. Look... if the Irish can do this, so can we!! :p

If you feel benevolent and particularly generous, this writer always appreciates things bought for him from his wishlist

Electoral Reform: Nick Can't Give Up On It

Not that I think he will. Unlike a lot of rather ungrateful members of the party who have pre-judged our leader's mindset even before it's made clear; I still support our leader, the Parliamentary party and the Federal Executive.

However I think it is quite clear, both from talking with non-members behind such projects as the RATM-LD Facebook group and my own feelings, that Nick Clegg cannot give up on electoral reform. He must champion it. That is the the role we must take in this Parliament... whereever we are....

This is the issue of our time... economic crisis' come and go (despite what the Tories and the press might think). Our country and democracy are more important issues, in my opinion.

Fair votes now. Nick Clegg for Prime Minister!

If you feel benevolent and particularly generous, this writer always appreciates things bought for him from his wishlist