David Cameron: Vote 'No' to AV today

Today is a big day for our country. It's AV referendum day and you need to make your voice heard. Unless enough people go out and vote, Britain could sleepwalk into a system that damages our democracy permanently. So I urge you to get down the polling station and vote 'No' to AV.

Remember, there are five big reasons why:

One - AV is complex. First Past the Post is so simple you can sum it up in seven words: the person with the most votes wins. AV is so confusing that when I was recently interviewed on the BBC, it became clear that one of their most experienced broadcasters didn't understand how it worked.

Two - AV is unfair. With First Past the Post, everyone gets one vote, and that vote is counted once. That's fair. But under AV, supporters of extremist or fringe parties can get their votes counted again and again and again. That's unfair. It's simply not right that the fifth vote of a Monster Raving Looney supporter counts as much as your first vote.

West Lindsey District Council Move to Whole 'All Out' Elections

Yesterday evening Conservative-led West Lindsey District Council voted to change the electoral process by which elections to the local authority are conducted.

Since the authority's creation in April 1974 the district has elected councillors by the 'Thirds' principle - that is to say that every year an election is held for one third of the seats on the council and in the fourth year an election takes place for Lincolnshire County Council. Councillors are elected to serve a four year term of office.

 

West Lindsey District Council is one of the two hundred and one local authorities that are part of the two-tier system of local government - with a county council and district council. Of these councils sixty-nine elect their members by the 'thirds' method, currently used by West Lindsey District Council to elect one third of the membership every year excepting the year when elections are held for the county council. The majority, one hundred and twenty-three elect their members in 'all out', whole council elections, whereby every councillor is elected at the same time. The remaining seven authorities elect by the 'halves' method where half the councillors are elected at any election, in one year the county council has an election and one year no election takes place.

 

The West Lindsey district is divided into twenty five wards the wards vary in terms of the number of councillors returned and a number of other factors. Gainsborough North and East both return three councillors, the South West ward returns two councillors together with the Caistor, Cherry Willingham, Market Rasen, Nettleham, Saxilby, Scotter and Welton wards. Finally, the Bardney, Dunholme, Fiskerton, Hemswell, Kelsey, Lea, Middle Rasen, Scampton, Stow, Sudbrooke, Thonock, Torksey, Waddingham & Spital, Wold View and Yarborough wards all return one councillor.

 

In total there are thrity-seven councillors elected as members of West Lindsey District Council.

Across the non-metropolitan district councils (both in single-tier and two-tier areas) in England twenty-four percent of the wards are single-member wards, forty percent are two-member wards and thirty-six percent represent three-member wards. (Following the creation of a unitary authority in Central Bedfordshire there will be six four-member wards for a transitional period between 2009 and 2011.) As a general rule a two-member ward contains around twice as many electors as a single-member ward and a three-member ward contains three times as many electors as a single-member ward.

 

Where a district council holds elections by thirds a third of the councillors for the whole council will be elected at each annual election. Electors in a three-member ward will vote in each of the elections, electors in a two-member ward will vote in two out of three and electors in a single-member ward will vote in one of the three elections. The particular year that those electors will vote varies from authority to authority.

As of yesterday's meeting elections for all councillors will take place once every four years - with the first whole council election on Thursday, 5th May 2011.

 

Some of the benefits of the Whole Council system are listed, although not an exhaustive list:

• A Council has a clear mandate from the electorate for four years.
• An elector can vote for the whole Council as well as a Councillor. It creates greater stability over the four year period with no chance (subject to by-elections) of a change in political control.
• Greater propensity for change in political control.
• It avoids a situation where political control of the Council can change in election by thirds when some electors in single member wards have no opportunity to vote.
• All electors get an equal opportunity to vote and vote together (currently some only vote once or twice in the three yearly cycle if they live in a one or two member Ward).
• Greater publicity for whole Council election may generate higher turnout.
• Evidence suggests that there is slightly higher turn out in whole Council elections
• Evidence suggests that electorate associates more clearly with whole Council elections.
• There is likely to be reduced expenditure for the Council because of running fewer elections.
• Correspondingly a reduced expenditure by political parties because of fewer elections.
• Less campaigning needed by parties.

NO2AV Welcome Electoral Commission Report

In the wake of the release of the Electoral Commission’s report to Parliament on the wording of the question for next year’s referendum, NO2AV – The Fight for Fair Votes – is pleased to see that several of its proposals are used in the Electoral Commission’s final recommendations.

The top lines from the Electoral Commission report include:

1. They agree that the question has to be re-written, as requested by NO2AV
2. They endorse the NO2AV argument that the word "adopt" should not be used in the question; a term such as ‘replace’ should be used instead
3. They are going to provide an explanatory leaflet to voters, as requested by NO2AV
4. Although several groups submitted responses to the Electoral Commission around the question, the Yes Campaign did not, raising concerns of bias in the question as it is currently drafted

Matthew Elliott, Campaign Director of NO2AV – The Fight for Fair Votes, said:

"We welcome this report by the Electoral Commission which echoes the concerns we expressed to the Commission over the wording of the question. It is vital that the British public understand the important decision they have to make, and we hope that Parliament and the Cabinet Office take note of the Electoral Commission’s findings when drafting the eventual question."

Referendum on Electoral Reform Bad Idea with a General Election

I am very surprised that proponents of electoral reform are supporting the idea of a referendum on election day.

Campaigners pressing for a vote on electoral reform have welcomed news from Culture Secretary Ben Bradshaw MP that:

"it would be a missed opportunity not to have a referendum on Election Day."

In an interview with the New Statesman the Mr. Bradshaw broke with the government’s stated policy of pushing talk of a referendum into the next parliament. Mr. Bradshaw said:

"if we’re serious about the voters as grown-ups, then let them decide, and I think they’d be perfectly capable of making a decision."

The Vote for a Change campaign and the Electoral Reform Society, two organisations that have been leading calls for a change in how Britain elects parliamentarians have said

"there’s all to play for."

Tessa Jowell MP was among a number of cabinet ministers who earlier in the week mounted a last-ditch effort to include a referendum on electoral reform in the Queen's speech next Wednesday. It is understood that she saw the reform as part of a wider package including directly elected mayors, votes at 16 and primaries for the election of parliamentary candidates.

Mrs. Jowell, the Cabinet Office minister, urged her colleagues

"to recognise that the prize to be won is as the progressive party. The challenge is which party is going to be brave enough and foresighted enough to say we are going to go with these issues.

"If we show that boldness, Labour will be seen as the change maker. It takes brave politics to give power away, and helps people feel more powerful."

However, it will not be an easy referendum to win at the best of times. There isn’t a large majority in favour of Alternative Votes as a poll from YouGov this week indicates that 39% thought we should keep the traditional First-Past-The-Post system whilst 22% favoured Alternative Voting a further 22% favoured another form or Proportioal Representation and 18% said Don't Know (YouGov figures here). With the suggested timing it would be extremely vulnerable to a narrative that it is Labour gerrymandering (c. 1812, American English, from Elbridge Gerry and [sala]mander. Gerry, governor of Massachusetts, was lampooned when his party redistricted the state in a blatant bid to preserve an Anti-federalist majority. One Essex County district resembled a salamander, and a newspaper editor dubbed it Gerrymander) the system before they lose office.

Furthermore, it will get tangled up with the election campaign itself – the referendum will influence the election, but the election will influence the referendum too, and the election is by far the bigger game. A 'Yes' vote will be associated with a moribund and unpopular Labour government, a 'No' vote with an energised and resurgent Conservative party. Further it would be very difficult for the 'Yes' campaign to win the referendum if was held on election day, probably killing the issue for at least a generation.

The image questions in the poll show why it is a attractive idea to the Labour party, but I am surprised the Electoral Reform Society (a group I have had some affinity with in the past - good receptions at party conference) are pushing for a referendum under what would probably be very disadvantageous circumstances for the 'Yes' vote. The alternative, if rumours are to be believed is what John Denham MP is suggesting: Passing legislation now for a referendum on Proportional Representation in a year. The 'Yes' campaign would probably stand a much better chance of winning it then, but the Electoral Reform Society would face the the risk that David Cameron would win power and cancel the referendum - politically damaging, but maybe a price he is willing to pay to keep First-Past-The-Post.