Today the Prime Minster fired the starting gun on what we hope will turn out to be a transformation of our politics. Gordon Brown’s call to “seize the moment” and “stand together” to achieve consensus on a number of constitutional reforms suggests that he has listened to a wide range of voices in the Labour Party who have been champing at the bit to finish the constitutional revolution we started all those years ago. It’s not going to be easy – parliamentary days are in short supply and Cameron wasted no time in showing he intends to be an obstacle to reform. But it’s good to see that the areas chosen work well as a package as reforms and that even tricky proposals such as a written constitution have been put on the table.
Now we must wait for the details of the specific reforms, and that, as ever is where there is most potential for rowing back, fudging and quietly ditching the more interesting aspects of change. So we still have to keep the pressure on the Government to think creatively about how the programme can be moved forward quickly. We need to get the Liberal Democrats on side, and work with the Greens, SNP and Plaid too, where we agree.
Electoral reformers who believe in serious proportional representation should continue to push for a citizens’ assembly to determine a new voting system, and any change will not have any legitimacy if it is introduced before the next election. The Tories will be immediately able to label it as gerrymandering. Let’s hold a referendum on a new voting system on the same day as the next election so that supporters win on principle rather than because it might benefit them electorally.
And the widest possible consultation, which the Prime Minister alluded to, should include a citizens’ convention. Mere consultation will not be enough. There isn’t time for the whole package of reforms to be considered by such a body, but issues such as voting reform, recall and giving the public more powers to engage in democratic life such as open primaries could be good candidates.
Finally, it was a shame that there was no mention of changing party political funding. It might have been caught by one or other of the categories, but the link between filthy lucre and political power is too raw after the expenses disgrace to be ignored. State funding may not be popular, but politicians should be focusing on reconnecting with their beleaguered electorate rather than chasing the rich magnates.
These have been a horrendous few weeks for politics, and the Labour Party in particular, but combined with bold announcements on public services and the economy, today’s proposals could mark the start of Labour’s climb back into the political contest.
This all makes sense. But it will have no credibility unless Gordon Brown goes. He has to resign if Labour is to be taken at all seriously on reform (and wants to avoid obliteration at the election). New times, new faces. It doesn’tmatter how well organised the counter-revolt was – Brown must go if he cares about Labour
I’m keen on constitutional reform, particularly to change the Lords – but wouldn’t want it to merely replicate the commons. I do think there should be some framework which governs the way in which non elected people can be placed in influential positions – which can be useful, but is open to criticism (eg. Peter Mandelson, Alan Sugar).
PR worries me in that it appears responsible for the election of extremists like the BNP, which I think is a high price to pay. I would though welcome a way in which voters in ‘safe seats’ can still influence the outcomes of elections – which are largely won and lost in few key marginals.
Finally, is there any research/information on the effectiveness of compulsory voting ? – I feel that this would combat apathy, but would require a “None of the above” category, and raises questions about what would happen if there was a majority “abstain” vote. Is this likely ? has it happened elsewhere ?