- Tuesday 21 May 2013
- My Account
- Logout
- Register
- Login
- News
-
Voices
-
Find by writer
- Yasmin Alibhai-Brown
- Rebecca Armstrong
- Memphis Barker
- Terence Blacker
- Chris Blackhurst
- David Blanchflower
- Archie Bland
- Ian Burrell
- Andrew Buncombe
- Ben Chu
- Patrick Cockburn
- Laura Davis
- Mary Dejevsky
- Grace Dent
- Robert Fisk
- Andrew Grice
- Stefano Hatfield
- Philip Hensher
- Ian Herbert
- Howard Jacobson
- Ellen E Jones
- Alice Jones
- Owen Jones
- Simon Kelner
- Dominic Lawson
- Donald Macintyre
- Lisa Markwell
- Comment
- Campaigns
- Debate
- Editorials
- Letters
- IV Drip
- Archive
- Our Voices
- Commentators
- Columnists
- Democracy 2015
- IV Drip Archive
-
Find by writer
- Sport
- Tech
- Life
- Property
- Arts & Ents
- Travel
- Money
- IndyBest
- Blogs
- Student
Monday 6 September 2010
Leading article: The neglect of the bigger picture
MPs return to Westminster today and head straight into what could prove to be one of the defining battles of this Parliament. The first Commons debate will be on the Coalition Government's bill to stage a referendum on the Alternative Vote next May.
Despite backing AV in its manifesto at the last election, Labour plans to vote against the bill, arguing that the Government is trying to sneak through plans to gerrymander constituencies in favour of the Conservative Party at the same time. In an interview with this newspaper today, the favourite for the Labour leadership, David Miliband, accuses the Coalition of engaging in "student politics" by packaging the bill for a referendum on AV with a move to reduce the number of MPs (from 650 to 600) and to equalise the size of constituencies.
The bill, as it stands, is certainly not perfect. But Mr Miliband is wrong to identify the inclusion of constituency reform as a great point of principle. It is indeed likely that the Conservatives would benefit from the equalisation of the size of constituencies. But the argument that this is gerrymandering is hyperbolic; especially since the present system benefits the Labour Party (whose MPs disproportionately come from smaller seats).
And the shortcomings of the bill – such as the use of lists of registered voters rather than the adult population to draw up new seats and the senseless requirement that no constituency can be more than 5 per cent greater or smaller than the national average – can all be fixed through constructive amendments. There is no good reason to reject the entire bill.
Labour no doubt calculates that it will be putting maximum pressure on the Government by adopting a stance of maximum opposition. If the Liberal Democrats do not get their referendum on voting reform (their key demand in post-election negotiations) the Coalition will come under huge strain as the third party's MPs and activists ask what the point is of their partnership with the Conservatives.
But Labour is neglecting the bigger picture. The Party will look monumentally cynical if it votes to head off a referendum that it was campaigning for as recently as May. It will be joining forces with the reactionary right of the Tory Party, which also wants to defeat the bill, although for different reasons. And if Labour helps to scupper this bill, it will jeopardise its chance of forming a coalition with the Liberal Democrats at the next election. Worst of all, Labour will be, implicitly, allying itself with a discredited electoral system.
The Labour Party has commissioned its own research on the effect of the bill which suggests the Liberal Democrats would suffer more than any other party in the redrawing of constituency boundaries. This has prompted Jack Straw, who is leading the Labour charge against the bill, to argue that the Liberal Democrats are like "turkeys voting for Christmas". But what the Liberal Democrats understand – and Mr Straw plainly does not – is that this is a once in a generation chance to begin the reform of our flawed voting system.
The Liberal Democrat leader, Nick Clegg, argued at the last election that AV was "a miserable little compromise". And so it is, when compared to a truly proportional electoral system. But it is a beginning.
Nick Clegg and the Liberal Democrats are justified in their analysis that this bill is the best means available for advancing electoral reform. They are right not to make the best the enemy of the good. Meanwhile, Labour is confusing tactics with strategy and, if the party continues down this path of short-sighted opposition, it risks finding itself on the wrong side of progressive history.
-
Austerity has hardened the nation's heart
Yasmin Alibhai Brown -
Voices in Danger: In Pakistan, state brutality makes journalism a dangerous business
Voices in Danger -
The chasm that could swallow Cameron alive
Donald Macintyre -
The Daily Cartoon
-
The moral case on tax avoidance is overwhelming - and we all know Google wants to do the right thing
Owen Jones
-
Letters: Of course big business loves the EU
-
The so-called 'Robin Hood Tax' will rob pensioners and small businesses not just bankers
-
Internet porn is no kind of education, but LOLcats and Tumblr (almost) make up for it
-
Ed Miliband is staring at an open goal and I know just the pair of strikers to win it for him
-
Poll: Does the fact that Boris Johnson has a love child change your opinion of the Mayor?
-
Never fall ill at a weekend - our out-of-hours health service is a disgrace
Get your summer started with British Military Fitness
BMF is the UK’s biggest and best loved outdoor fitness classes
Visit York
Find out what The Independent's resident travel expert has to say about one of the most beautiful small cities in the world
Enter the latest Independent competitions
Win anything from gadgets to five-star holidays on our competitions and offers page.
Business videos from commercial thought leaders
Watch the best in the business world give their insights into the world of business.
Related Articles
-
PM under more pressure as 130 Tory MPs oppose gay marriage Bill
-
Three former pupils complain of sex abuse by adults at school linked to late Cyril Smith MP
-
Royal Mail reveals profits boost - but Vince Cable says 'no alternative' to privatisation
-
Bad news for David Cameron as poll puts Ukip just two points behind Tories
Get the best in opinion from Independent Voices, straight to your inbox every Thursday lunchtime.
Subscribe
iJobs General
Java Developer
£200 - £250 per day: Progressive Recruitment: Java Developer - Urgent Requirem...
BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE ARCHITECT, SAP
£70000 - £95000 per annum + Bonus, flexible working hours, remote work: Progre...
SAP BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE SENIOR CONSULTANT
£50000 - £56000 per annum + Benefits package, flexible working hours: Progress...
Java Developer
£200 - £250 per day: Progressive Recruitment: Java Developer- £200-£250 London...
Day In a Page
The price of pacifism
Jason Isaacs: Groupies, theatre bores and James Bond
Sealand: 'Micronation' or illegal fortress?
Legend of James Hunt has set Hollywood hearts racing
Macklemore: 'I don't have moderation'
