Electoral reform was in Labour's manifesto, although admittedly only Alternative Vote. So in fact at least 52% of the votes were for parties in favour of reform.
I'll take AV at the moment. It's a nice first step towards a fairer system and less likely to come up against the full ire of the main political parties and their respective newspapers.
It's all about progression. I doubt that either of the big two are going to offer STV or PR at the moment. Once we start down the road of making the system fairer, it opens the door to further reform. Personally, having discussed most of the available alternatives with people over the last few weeks, I've come to the conclusion that partial PR is the best approach which would allow for larger constituancies but still retaining local politics and reducing the political tourism of putting MPs from outside of a constituancy in because it is a safe seat.
Depending on how difficult it is (made) to change systems, one change may be all that happens for a long time, making it important it's the right one. There could be the argument "we've already done this issue once, there isn't the parliamentary time to revisit it this parliament", which happens with other issues from time to time.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
andrewducker) wrote2010-05-11 09:04 am
no subject
no subject
no subject
But does anyone really want AV? By all accounts, it seems to make little difference in terms of fair representation for smaller parties.
no subject
no subject
no subject