Get Red Pepper's email newsletter. Enter your email address to receive our latest articles, updates and news.

×

AV: Yes or no?

Hilary Wainwright and Kevin Blowe debate the alternative vote

April 14, 2011
8 min read


Hilary WainwrightHilary Wainwright is a member of Red Pepper's editorial collective and a fellow of the Transnational Institute. @hilarypepper


Kevin BloweKevin Blowe is a community centre worker and activist in Newham, east London.


  share     tweet  

When Keir Hardie joined up to the forerunner of the Electoral Reform Society when it was founded in 1884, it is unlikely that he did so with the expectation that MPs would continue to be elected by a crude first-past-the-post system in the 21st century. Not that the British public has ever been consulted on this before now of course. But this will change on 5 May, when the first UK‑wide referendum in 36 years will give voters an opportunity to change the system, albeit only by delivering the relatively moderate reform represented by the Alternative Vote.

Here, Red Pepper regulars Hilary Wainwright and Kevin Blowe put forward their different positions.

Kevin Blowe argues that we should vote ‘No’ to help break the Tory-Lib Dem coalition

There are many more important expressions of democratic involvement than voting. There are inherent dangers in placing our limited reserves of hope and energy into handing politics over to a professional class – one that has repeatedly sought to maintain the status quo – and then blindly legitimising their control over our lives by turning up at a polling booth every few years.

That’s why I feel distinctly underwhelmed by a referendum to tinker with the way we choose between competing Westminster professionals.

At least, tactically, a genuine proportional representation system might allow more space for voices from beyond the mainstream. But the proposed Alternative Vote (AV) system isn’t proportionate. Instant run-off voting is designed to make the current ‘first-past-the-post’ system seem more acceptable, but like all elections where the winner takes all, it only creates the false impression of majority support. In fact, AV is more likely to squeeze out any minority parties, reduce the impact of protest votes and reinforce the blandness of political debate.

Even commentators such as Martin Kettle in the Guardian, who is supporting the Yes campaign, acknowledges that AV is a system that no one supports. But it was central to the coalition negotiations last May, ‘the prize that finally persuaded the Lib Dems they could go in with David Cameron’.

Politically, this leads to an obvious conclusion for those of us who don’t much care which of the mainstream parties stand to gain or lose from AV. The outcome of the referendum will, one way or another, have an impact on the increasingly fragile bonds between the two governing parties. A ‘Yes’ vote will strengthen the coalition, while voting ‘No’ against a voting system that isn’t proportionate and that no one supports may help to break it.

So perhaps, for once, there’s a reason for voting in this one after all. The arguments put forward by the No2AV campaign may represent a reactionary endorsement of the current electoral system, but the same isn’t necessarily true of every individual ‘No’ vote. Rejection of AV can also represent a deliberate act of mischief, a considered rejection of Tory attempts to buy the complicity of Clegg’s Lib Dems in their destruction of public services.

Hilary Wainwright says we should vote ‘Yes’ to help break

our undemocratic system

Why should someone deeply sceptical about parliamentary politics, at least as we know it, lift a finger for AV? My starting point is Thomas Rainsborough’s powerful argument for extending the franchise, irrespective of wealth and property: ‘The poorest he that is in England hath a life to live, as the greatest he . . . every man that is to live under a government ought first by his own consent to put himself under the government . . . the poorest man in England is not at all bound in a strict sense to that government that he hath not had a voice to put himself under . . .’

Four centuries from Rainsborough’s declaration, eight decades from the suffragettes winning the universal franchise, UK prime ministers govern without a mandate of the majority, and governments regularly implement policies that benefit the rich or the corporations and over which the poorest effectively have no say – the dismantling of the NHS being the latest such contempt of the voter.

In other words, a democratic victory – the winning of the universal right to vote, opening a dynamic towards more radical democratic reforms, has been turned into new system of elite rule.

The ‘winner takes all’ electoral system has been important in this process, contributing to the mythologies of democratic rule that have veiled the nature of the UK’s unwritten, monarchical constitution.

These opaque arrangements in turn have protected the financial interests of the City that have shaped what are and aren’t allowed as policy options in public debate. No wonder the financial and political establishment is now closing ranks to ensure that this guard against genuine public accountability stays in place.

Evidence of the mass disenfranchisement that is part of this electoral system is overwhelming and well publicised. But another, less publicised consequence of first-past-the-post voting has been the slow death of a critical political culture. It underpins the pull of electoral competition towards the political centre. Instead of enabling representative democracy to, as Raymond Williams put it, ‘re-present’ the plurality of views held by the population, it effectively excludes or politically kettles the wide range of alternatives to ‘the mainstream’.

This has got worse under corporate globalisation, which has transformed the hidden rules of political debate. The power of the global market has meant that policies in its favour are presented as unavoidable, turning politics into a process of technical economic management.

A challenge to this process requires a concerted expansion of the argument and debate that is necessary for political creativity. Instead, the New Labour leadership – whose legacy is proving difficult to dismantle – treated open debate as beyond the bounds of legitimate politics. Now, sucked into the quicksand of the centre ground, the Lib Dem leadership does the same.

So I’m viewing the referendum as an opportunity to open up a process of structural political change, an opportunity that is a result of us, the voters, refusing to place our trust in existing political options. In answer to Kevin Blowe, it’s far more important than punishing Nick Clegg. Clegg’s clinging to the coat tails of Cameron is a product of the present system, and he and the Lib Dems will not be able to control the dynamic of change that even the minimal opening of AV represents.

AV is not proportional and it’s not the solution. But it will force an opening up of political debate. Alternative views, previously marginalised or excluded, would become a legitimate part of the political process – perhaps in a minimal way at first, but with an angry, alienated and determined electorate there would be a real possibility of it opening up an uncertain dynamic. AV will enable voters to demonstrate their true first preferences, which currently are masked by the absence of alternatives and because many people have to vote tactically or abstain.

For example, the growing resistance to the idea that ‘there is no alternative’ to the cuts could, through AV, make itself directly part of the political process. The kind of electoral challenge made by Dr Richard Taylor in Worcester could become a powerful political force, since such campaigns can attract support from broad stretches of the community. True, smaller left parties would continue to find it difficult to win seats: that would require genuine proportional representation (PR). But AV could challenge the main parties to relate to forces outside of Westminster, strengthen the ability of parties like the Greens to better identify their support at local level, and lay the foundations for new progressive alliances in the future.

A ‘No’ vote to electoral reform would send out all the wrong messages, and be trumpeted as evidence that the British public is broadly content with our politics. Worse still, it might derail existing commitments to see PR introduced for the second chamber. It wouldn’t so much weaken the coalition as confirm our own powerlessness in the face of the interests that guide its agenda. It’s not for nothing that the head of the Taxpayers’ Alliance has given up his time to lead the ‘No’ campaign.

I will grasp the opportunity of the referendum to vote for AV as a vote for change, to initiate a dynamic of change driven from below not just for genuine proportional representation at Westminster but for a participatory constituent assembly to produce a democratic written constitution, the objectives of which could well incorporate the egalitarian spirit of Rainsborough.

How does AV work?

  • You rank the candidates in order of preference (1, 2, 3 and so on, selecting as many as you like). A single ‘X’ remains a valid first preference vote.
  • When all the first preference votes are counted, if anyone has more than 50 per cent they are automatically the winner and therefore elected.
  • If no-one has 50 per cent, the candidate with the fewest first preferences is eliminated and the remaining preferences of their voters re-allocated accordingly.
  • This continues until one candidate has more than 50 per cent and is elected.Lefties in the ‘Yes’ corner

    Ed Miliband, Caroline Lucas, Ken Livingstone, Billy Hayes, Mark Thomas,

    Tony Benn, John McDonnell, Billy Bragg

    Lefties in the ‘No’ corner

    John Prescott, Derek Wall, Liz Davies, Dennis Skinner, Simon Munnery, Austin Mitchell, the Morning Star

  • Red Pepper is an independent, non-profit magazine that puts left politics and culture at the heart of its stories. We think publications should embrace the values of a movement that is unafraid to take a stand, radical yet not dogmatic, and focus on amplifying the voices of the people and activists that make up our movement. If you think so too, please support Red Pepper in continuing our work by becoming a subscriber today.
    Why not try our new pay as you feel subscription? You decide how much to pay.
    Share this article  
      share on facebook     share on twitter  

    Hilary WainwrightHilary Wainwright is a member of Red Pepper's editorial collective and a fellow of the Transnational Institute. @hilarypepper


    Kevin BloweKevin Blowe is a community centre worker and activist in Newham, east London.


    Labour Party laws are being used to quash dissent
    Richard Kuper writes that Labour's authorities are more concerned with suppressing pro-Palestine activism than with actually tackling antisemitism

    Catalan independence is not just ‘nationalism’ – it’s a rebellion against nationalism
    Ignasi Bernat and David Whyte argue that Catalonia's independence movement is driven by solidarity – and resistance to far-right Spanish nationalists

    Tabloids do not represent the working class
    The tabloid press claims to be an authentic voice of the working class - but it's run by and for the elites, writes Matt Thompson

    As London City Airport turns 30, let’s imagine a world without it
    London City Airport has faced resistance for its entire lifetime, writes Ali Tamlit – and some day soon we will win

    The first world war sowed the seeds of the Russian revolution
    An excerpt from 'October', China Mieville's book revisiting the story of the Russian Revolution

    Academies run ‘on the basis of fear’
    Wakefield City Academies Trust (WCAT) was described in a damning report as an organisation run 'on the basis of fear'. Jon Trickett MP examines an education system in crisis.

    ‘There is no turning back to a time when there wasn’t migration to Britain’
    David Renton reviews the Migration Museum's latest exhibition

    #MeToo is necessary – but I’m sick of having to prove my humanity
    Women are expected to reveal personal trauma to be taken seriously, writes Eleanor Penny

    Meet the digital feminists
    We're building new online tools to create a new feminist community and tackle sexism wherever we find it, writes Franziska Grobke

    The Marikana women’s fight for justice, five years on
    Marienna Pope-Weidemann meets Sikhala Sonke, a grassroots social justice group led by the women of Marikana

    Forget ‘Columbus Day’ – this is the Day of Indigenous Resistance
    By Leyli Horna, Marcela Terán and Sebastián Ordonez for Wretched of the Earth

    Uber and the corporate capture of e-petitions
    Steve Andrews looks at a profit-making petition platform's questionable relationship with the cab company

    You might be a centrist if…
    What does 'centrist' mean? Tom Walker identifies the key markers to help you spot centrism in the wild

    Black Journalism Fund Open Editorial Meeting in Leeds
    Friday 13th October, 5pm to 7pm, meeting inside the Laidlaw Library, Leeds University

    This leadership contest can transform Scottish Labour
    Martyn Cook argues that with a new left-wing leader the Scottish Labour Party can make a comeback

    Review: No Is Not Enough
    Samir Dathi reviews No Is Not Enough: Defeating the New Shock Politics, by Naomi Klein

    Building Corbyn’s Labour from the ground up: How ‘the left’ won in Hackney South
    Heather Mendick has gone from phone-banker at Corbyn for Leader to Hackney Momentum organiser to secretary of her local party. Here, she shares her top tips on transforming Labour from the bottom up

    Five things to know about the independence movement in Catalonia
    James O'Nions looks at the underlying dynamics of the Catalan independence movement

    ‘This building will be a library!’ From referendum to general strike in Catalonia
    Ignasi Bernat and David Whyte report from the Catalan general strike, as the movements prepare to build a new republic

    Chlorine chickens are just the start: Liam Fox’s Brexit trade free-for-all
    A hard-right free marketer is now in charge of our trade policy. We urgently need to develop an alternative vision, writes Nick Dearden

    There is no ‘cult of Corbyn’ – this is a movement preparing for power
    The pundits still don’t understand that Labour’s new energy is about ‘we’ not ‘me’, writes Hilary Wainwright

    Debt relief for the hurricane-hit islands is the least we should do
    As the devastation from recent hurricanes in the Caribbean becomes clearer, the calls for debt relief for affected countries grow stronger, writes Tim Jones