Leading article: The electorate deserves a fairer voting system

For all its faults, the alternative vote is a step in the right direction

An amendment to the Constitutional Reform Bill, which opens the door to a referendum on an alternative vote system, has been passed by the House of Commons, despite a rebellion by backbench Labour MPs. The parliamentary opposition that the amendment attracted was not surprising. There has always been a hard core of Labour MPs opposed to electoral reform.

In a sense, this opposition is one of the reasons why electoral reform is so necessary. Many Labour (and Conservative) MPs are doing very nicely out of the present first-past-the-post voting system. It is perhaps no coincidence that some of those MPs who have been guilty of the worst abuses of the House of Commons expenses system hail from safe seats.

Our winner-takes-all electoral system has bred a sense of entitlement and immunity among our political representatives. And it is small wonder considering that many MPs know that no matter how lazy, incompetent, or greedy they are, their re-election to parliament at each successive general election is almost guarateed.

Of course, the alternative vote would not eliminate safe seats. Nor would it create a proportional voting system. But by ensuring that every MP would need to win the direct, or indirect, backing of a majority of voters in their constituency, it would at least be a step in the direction of a fairer voting system.

If such a procedure were put in place, it would be much easier to move to the sort of radical reform of the electoral system that is really needed. The "AV plus" system, devised by the late electoral reformer and Liberal Democrat statesman Roy Jenkins, which would keep the constituency system and top up representation with a number of regional MPs elected on a proportional basis, would finally be within reach.

It is true that there is a heavy dose of cynicism from Gordon Brown in promoting this agenda now. The Prime Minister's sudden push for reform is probably more about political positioning in the event of a hung parliament, rather than intellectual conviction. As David Cameron pointed out in Prime Minister's Questions last week, Mr Brown was one of the roadblocks to reform when the electoral reform issue was last live in 1997. This amendment – which might well not become law before the general election – smacks of an attempt to woo the Liberal Democrats, rather than a sincere effort to make the voting system fairer. But whatever Mr Brown's motives, if he is pushing a reforming policy, it deserves support. Those who want a change in our voting system should get behind it.

Mr Cameron might be justified in pointing to Mr Brown's cynicism, but his own outright opposition to the proposal does him and his party no favours. The Conservative leader claims he wants an overhaul of business-as-usual Westminster politics, yet he rejects the most radical reform on the table; a reform which would revolutionise the public's relationship with its elected representatives. The Tory proposal to reduce the number of MPs in the Commons is simply no substitute.

One of Mr Cameron's slogans is, "We can't go on like this". But when it comes to a broken voting system, the Conservative leader seems to be stubbornly in favour of more of the same. After everything that it has put up with in recent years, the electorate, frankly, deserves better.