The Rejection of AV – Better Luck Next Time (if there is a Next Time)

As a supporter of the 'Yes to AV' campaign, naturally I have been disappointed by the result of 68% of the 42 % Turnout voting to reject AV.

The reason I voted ‘Yes’ to AV wasn’t because I believe it’s the best system available, but it was the best system on offer. Proportional Representation would have been the ideal, but seeing as there was no chance of this system being put forward to the electorate, I felt compelled to support something that was a step closer to it.

I’ve read and heard plenty of reasons why people voted to reject AV and don’t want to sound like a ‘sore loser’ about this. At the end of the day, the No campaign was clearly very effective, regardless of it being patronising and bent on scaring people, having more high profile support or more wealthy individual donors.

Clearly the right-wing media have whipped up a storm over this, stating that many No voters rejected AV to spite Nick Clegg and give the Liberal Democrats a kicking. I honestly hope people weren’t so shallow about a chance to change the future of democracy in this country for the sake of ill feeling to one individual or to a political party. There was plenty of opportunity for ‘punishing’ Lib Dems in the Local Elections themselves, which has obviously resulted in massive losses for them.

In my opinion, an opportunity has definitely been missed here to push this country’s electoral system towards being fairer and more proportional. I think to reject the Alternative Vote system as, in Clegg's own words, a ‘miserable little compromise’ to Proportional Representation was a mistake. It was still a chance to make some progress. How could it be assumed that adopting AV would ever stop PR from being a possibility further down the line? “It’s a start...” is part of a comment from Rupert Read (Green Party Councillor for Norwich) on a Left Foot Forward blog post from last year. This would have been useful for people to remember at the ballot box on Thursday.

Will this resounding ‘No’ be twisted by the two main parties and used as an excuse not to offer a referendum on any other Electoral Reform? AV is clearly not going to be raised as an option again, but I fear that Electoral Reform as an issue in itself will now slip to the bottom of the political agenda, obviously for the Tories, but probably now also for Labour after their rather muted support for the Yes campaign.

So we are stuck with First Past The Post for the foreseeable future, left wondering when another chance will come to change it for a fairer voting system. My guess? Not for a generation. I sincerely hope I’m proved wrong.

Stuck in the middle with you

The Tory - Lib Dem coalition crystallises a monumental and frightening shift in British politics. Prior to the General Election last year there was a misplaced belief that the combined support for Labour and the Lib Dems represented a 'progressive consensus'. The acts of the government – spawned from the policies of New Labour – show that this is clearly untrue. The consensus which prevails is that of individualism, competition and marketisation. This right-wing swing means it's absolutely crucial that those on the left oppose the Alternative Vote – and the Lib Dems, by showing their true colours, are the ones to blame.

The arguments forwarded by the anti-AV brigade are largely flawed and self-defeating. Mehdi Hasan produced a terrific critique in the latest New Statesman:

The Alternative Vote isn't a foreign system. From trade unions to workplace committees, professional societies to student groups, millions of Britons already have experience of voting under AV. It doesn't require expensive voting machines, or cost £250m ... AV isn't a "confusing system" (David Cameron) or "fiendishly complicated" (Daily Mail). If the Australians can manage to rank candidates in a 1-2-3 order, so can we. AV doesn't automatically result in hung parliaments: over the past 100 years, Australia has had fewer hung parliaments under AV than the UK has had under FPTP. Meanwhile, Canada, despite using FPTP, has been beset by hung parliaments in recent years.

The arguments forwarded by the No to AV campaign are largely uninspiring because they are extolled by reactionary and conservative Westminster traditionalists. Arguments of complication and cost are largely irrelevant in terms of electoral reform and we should strive for a genuinely proportional system whatever the intellectual or financial cost. However AV is not a proportional system and – whatever the outcome of the referendum – it will delay moves to proportional representation. Furthermore – and by far the most compelling argument against AV – it will further entrench a centripetal party system which is becoming increasingly bland, centralised and uninspiring.

The key argument against AV is that – far from increasing choice – AV acts to eliminate differences between parties and, therefore, reduces choice. Parties are forced to compete for second preference votes and this, inevitably, blunts radicalism and forces parties to compete for the centre ground. The coalition has forced the shift of the political playground to the right and, as a result, Labour will have to further reconfigure their policies in line with market forces in order to win second preference votes from Tories and Lib Dems. For this reason – and to ensure Labour doesn't slip further to the right – the Alternative Vote should be opposed by socialists and progressives and we should champion a genuinely proportional system.

AV is not about increasing representation or democratisation, it is about ensuring the supremacy of liberal individualism and marketisation. We stand at a political crossroads: the expenses scandal – coupled with the Lib Dems' public sacrifice of manifesto commitments – has eroded people's faith in government; the organised labour movement – facing an unprecedented assault on public services – is reawakening from its slumber to lead the fightback. It is hoped that AV will be a political apathy panacea but, in the long term, by encouraging the convergence of party politics, the erosion of public support in government will be even greater.

Prior to the General Election, Nick Clegg described the Alternative Vote as "a miserable little compromise" (NB: he may have been describing himself). It pains me to say it but, with regards to that quote, I agree with Nick.