A cursory glance at the history of leftwing politics in the nineteenth century might suggest a struggle for enfranchisement. This appears to have come to a halt in 1918. Democracy comes in a number of shapes and sizes. I believe ours presents a quite unattractive figure.
The struggles of the Victorian era were successful in that there now is a voice for all. Yet, somehow, this is not being exercised with anything approaching enthusiasm. Compared to much in modern life, voting is both arcane and inconvenient.
Something can be done about making our democracy more accessible. The mechanics of when and how we vote needs reassessing; technology has a role to play here. We also need to make politics relevant; the ‘does my vote really count?’ argument must be dealt with.
A vote that counts is a vote that has influence. A system where candidates are virtually guaranteed victory in many seats marginalizes great swathes of the electorate. No wonder strange things happen in byelections; it may be the only time a constituency gets any real attention. Increasingly fewer seats are won with 50 per cent or more of the votes cast.
The Labour party, borne out of a sense of injustice and existing to make society better, has shed its radical clothes when it comes to electoral reform. It has done so, not through conviction but through self-interest; we are gainers in the unfair nature of the existing system. Yet, 18 years of Conservative rule even made Tony Blair seriously consider the benefits of proportional representation, only to unceremoniously drop them when given his landslide. Should we enter another long spell of opposition we may regret that.
The current system does have its advantages: the mechanics are easily understood by everyone and first-past-the-post is perceived to give a clear result and strong government.
However, voters cope with quite sophisticated opinion polling and advertising questionnaires far more complicated than any ballot paper. Besides, a form of PR already exists in many of our elections. The Welsh and Scottish parliaments are elected this way; I do not believe the English could not cope.
PR may result in coalitions. I would prefer that to opposition. Besides, the nature of our political reporting and the constant stream of opinion polls have eroded somewhat the concept of strong government.
Until the future of the House of Lords is settled, reform of the Commons is likely to be put on hold. This does not stop reform progressing in local government. Making votes count in council elections will kick-start the re-engagement process.
It strikes me that with multi-member wards local government already lends itself to a form of proportional representation. Labour would inevitably lose councillors in some areas, but would gain in others, like Castle Point where even in a bad year something like a quarter of the electorate votes Labour, yet only one of the 41 in the council chamber wears a red rosette.
Elections by thirds would disappear, thus giving a financial saving.
A result of this would be for a better spread of councillors across the whole country. At present we can look like the party of the north. This is unhealthy and does nothing to counter arguments about us ‘looking after our friends’. Representation in more areas would encourage greater activism. I know what it is like to live in an area disproportionately over-represented by our political opponents, and the demoralising effect this can have. It can become a self-fulfilling prophesy of the ‘we can never win around here’ kind. Local representation would be an effective counter to this.
Small swings making huge differences would also go, giving stability and making all voters targetable.
It must be true that our democracy will evolve in the centuries ahead. As a radical party we should be at the vanguard of change. An ‘every voter matters’ campaign with real legislative results would see Labour grab the initiative in an area of real concern.