AV: It’s got to be yes (to having a referendum)
Posted on September 9, 2010Today sees a crucial stage in the campaign to defeat AV in a referendum – the bill is being put to Parliament, and it is essential that all opponents of AV vote in favour of putting the question to the people.
I understand the temptation for many MPs who see AV as an absurd distraction that wouldn’t do anything to improve British democracy. They are right, but they should resist any urge to sink the proposal at this stage.
Fundamentally, the No to AV campaign must be about healthy democracy. That means the people should have the right to decided on this constitutional issue, and we must trust them.
If the referendum bill is voted down today that would do immeasurable harm to the anti-AV cause. At the moment I think there is a very good chance of winning a referendum campaign, but if No campaigners were seen to deny the people the chance to choose for themselves then it may well result in an eventual Yes vote in a few years time.
AV is an obscure hobbyists’ issue pursued by political enthusiasts on the fringes of wider British society. The referendum should be about ordinary people in the real world having an opportunity to reject the ideas of an out-of-touch elite. I trust that the British electorate have too much common sense to vote Yes in a referendum – and Parliamentary opponents of AV should trust them too.
In the longer run, MPs have a responsibility to the future of direct democracy in Britain. This campaign should be openly welcomed as a key moment in handing power to the people on all sorts of issues. That means giving people the right to decide for themselves, and showing that you have faith that they will make the right decisions. Today’s vote is not just about AV, it is about the chance of referenda on the EU and all sorts of other issues in future. MPs from all sides must live up to that responsibility.
Tags: AV, AV Referendum, Conservatives, Direct Democracy, New Labour, No2AV, Parliament, Referendum, Yes2AV
Categories: Opinion, Politics, Westminster
Grudgingly, I think we should show we believe in direct democracy and urge a referendum in order to vote NO. I would rather have no referendum but it’s no excuse to deny a vote on an issue one wouldn’t vote yes to.
06.09.2010 12:41
Gubbins is right – a Yes vote in parliament and then a vigorous NO campaign across the country to prevent the disaster of an AV system.
06.09.2010 12:49
It would be more democratic to enable the electorate to decide exactly how we choose our MPs. New Zealand showed in the 1990s how this could be done. The people were offered a choice among four electoral systems then in a second, binding referendum they could decide whether to make the reform or not. They indeed chose to replace “first past the post” by MMP. More detail about this may be found via http://iniref.wordpress.com/ in the post “Electoral system referendum announced”. See our home web site for more about democracy reform.
07.09.2010 10:06
Mark, do you have any thoughts on this point, from “Iniref”? If people had a choice of which voting system to use, wouldn’t that tackle any fears you have about a new system being “the idea of an out-of-touch elite”?
07.09.2010 12:19
I’d be happy to take that approach of a multiple choice referendum followed by a yes/no confirmation referendum. It’d settle queries over the odd choice of AV, and it would settle the question much more permanently. To be honest In Britain I think those who are fans of STV, AV etc etc are largely an out-of-touch elite, and I don’t think there’s real demand for a change away from FPTP – but the best way to find out is to have a referendum.
I should add that though a multiple choice referendum would be good, I don’t think that is grounds to reject this vote – multi choice isn’t on the table.
07.09.2010 12:27
It’s clear that most people don’t spend their time thinking about voting systems. The geeky types who are interested in changing the system are thus likely to be those abnormally interested in politics – many of whom will be part of the “political elite”. But this doesn’t mean that there isn’t considerable popular feeling against the current system, which keeps delivering a large section of the “political elite” into power in the first place.
In a similar way – most people don’t understand the intricacies of Friedman-ite economics, but this doesn’t stop them from being opposed to large government debt.
If FPTP fans are really interested in freedom and choice, I’d expect them to fully SUPPORT a vote on different electoral systems, rather than arguing that it’s not an issue and trying to protect the political establishment from change.
08.09.2010 15:53
I am wondering what arguments people are going to use to argue for a NO vote. Does first past the post work better than AV, in principle or in practice? So far, the main point seems to be stronger (simple majority) governments are less likely. Is that substantially it?
07.09.2010 11:21
Unless of course the public give the wrong answer and AV enthusiasts insist that the referendum is run again à la Ireland and the Lisbon Treaty. A true victory for direct democracy if ever there was one!
07.09.2010 11:50