AV. What’s The Alternative?

There will be a referendum on Thursday 5^th May 2011 in which the following question will be put:

 

“At present, the UK uses the ‘first past the post’ system to elect MPs to the House of Commons. Should the ‘alternative vote’ system be used instead?”

 

If AV is introduced the only difference for voters will be that they will be able to list their preference for candidates in numerical order instead of putting an ‘X’ against the name of one candidate. There is no requirement to choose between all of them. If you only want to select one candidate you just put ’1′ for that person instead of ‘X’. You can also stop at any stage. For example if there are six candidates and you only want to rank three of them, you can do that.

 

The ‘no’ campaigners who have claimed that AV is too complicated are either insulting the electorate or demonstrating their own serious inadequacies.

 

The difference that AV would make is that MPs would usually have the support of more than half the people who have voted in their constituency. With ‘first past the post’ (FPTP) it is more often the case that more votes have been cast against the winner than in their favour.

 

This is not very much progress and AV could not be considered to be an ideal way of choosing our politicians, but electoral reform has been very rare in England and we should not let this opportunity pass, despite its shortcomings.

 

What is more important about AV than the MP having at least some support from the majority of voters is that it will make it more possible for small parties and independents to be able to get their viewpoints considered by voters. With FPTP every vote for a minority candidate is not only wasted, there is the fear that by dividing the vote a candidate that you strongly disapprove might get in. This leads electors to put their ‘X’ against the lesser evil rather than voting for the person they really want. With AV there is genuine choice in which number 1 can go to the best candidate and 2 to the lesser evil while reserving last number for the most disapproved candidate. There is no longer the problem of dividing the vote.

 

A large part of the battle for Parties like ours, which are unknown by many electors, is break the barrier into credibility. We have strong and coherent arguments that would be attractive to many voters if they were aware of them, but they will not take any notice of those policies so long as they think that voting Libertarian would be pointless.

 

The only choice you will have in the referendum is to put an ‘X’ in the yes or no box. That is a pretty poor choice. We should be given an opportunity for a properly proportional electoral system that applies to local as well as national government. England is entitled to as much democracy as has already been given to citizens of Scotland, Wales and northern Ireland for their parliament and assemblies, but that is not on offer. In the circumstances, Libertarians should vote yes.

 

It is not that democratic systems are the be all and end all. They are not. What we want to do is to reduce the abuses of wasteful, incompetent and intrusive governments. We cannot achieve that without getting a tighter grip on power seeking politicians.

 

www.lpuk.org

 

Electoral Reform

Opportunities for meaningful political change do not come often, but there is one now and it must be seized.

The situation is clear although it is complicated. The Tories did not win the right to form a government, but Labour most definitely lost the election. The bizarre effects of a First Past The Post (FPTP) election means that many people who do not support Labour or the Tories either do not have any opportunity to vote for a party that they do support or they vote tactically for one of these two in order to keep the other out.

This means that although the Lib Dems (LD) had 28% or 29% popular support before the election, only 23% of voters turned that support into a real vote. In addition to this, the LD vote was more evenly spread than that of the two major parties so they had lower chances of their votes being converted into seats. The consequence is that with 23% of the vote the LDs have only 10% of the seats. That is profoundly undemocratic and it is worse when you consider that 28% of voters may have wished to vote LD.

For Libertarians, the situation is far worse. We are in the position that the Green Party were in a generation ago. Despite the Greens standing hundreds of candidates and having a massive public profile for their policies, they have only just been able to secure a single seat in Parliament for their leader. This is a democratic disgrace.

For a new party with good, clear policies that would appeal to many voters, but lacking big financial backers and the army of backers of the big institutional parties, FPTP prevents any chance of even the smallest success in either national or local elections. That is not democracy and it must change now.

The Labour Government has taken this country into such massive debt that our economy is on the brink of collapse with all the terrible consequences that are beginning to unravel in Greece. This means that we must have a new Prime Minister and the prospects of reasonably stable government in the short term established very early this week. If that is not achieved, there will be great volatility in the currency markets and it will become harder every hour for all of us to be saved from very serious damage to our quality of life and financial future.

The tasks for today for our political leaders are these:

Gordon Brown.

Resign immediately. You were never elected as leader of the Labour Party, you were never a legitimate Prime Minister, your performance in office has been disastrous and in the only leadership election you have ever faced you have conclusively lost. The Labour Party cannot maintain any credibility so long as you remain Prime Minister and the interests of the country require Labour voters to be adequately represented in the negotiations to form a government.

Nick Clegg

Do not make any deal that does not include a commitment to the introduction of electoral reform with a timetable for completion before the end of this year. You stood on a platform of fair votes and your present bargaining position owes everything to that undertaking. Failure to deliver electoral reform would be a betrayal of the worst kind and would not be forgiven.

David Cameron

You did not win a mandate to form a government and the economy of this country is in such a perilous position that you have a duty to reach agreement without delay on the formation of a government that can command a clear majority in Parliament so that effective decisions can be taken without delay. There is no Parliamentary majority among parties of the political right. Differences between Tory and LD memberships mean that a coalition is unlikely and a supply and confidence arrangement will be fragile. In these circumstances you should present a simple draft Queens Speech and emergency budget to all Parties and seek agreement to them being allowed to pass. Despite the opposition of your party to PR, there is clear demand from the public for electoral reform and it must be offered within a strict timetable that does not extend beyond this year. All other Parties should allow your minority government to function until a reformed electoral system is in place and a new General Election can be held.

The chaos of queues outside polling stations as polls closed; the disgrace of stations running out of ballot papers; the nonsense of an unelected second chamber and the absurdity  of not having fixed term Parliaments, all contribute to Britain being seen as a country with third world election standards and grossly outdated democracy. All our leaders have an urgent responsibility to resolve these matters with the urgency that is necessary to prevent us collapsing into a third world economy as well.

Wirral Libertarians New Year New Party

 

Yes it is something to get really excited about. Not just a drink and the company of good friends although it will be that I am sure.

What this is really about is getting together to discuss the problems of Wirral and finding solutions through clean, decent, honest politics. In recent times our politicians have disgraced themselves by their secrecy, deception and fiddled expenses, but the truth is that we cannot do without government or politics. We have to do politics differently.

Instead of Party puppets who vote however the whips tell them, Libertarians believe in independence and individuals who are happy to be held to account for everything they do and say. The Government that has bankrupted this country is probably in its last weeks, but there will be no solution from Caneron’s Tories who offer nothing other than Blairism with a blue rosette. The Liberal Democrats are a directionless irrelevance who will be used by one of the two big parties as crutch to help them cling onto power.

What has been happening to us for too many years now is that government has grown and taxes have been increased by stealth until the state now directly controls nearly half of the economy and you cannot move without being on CCTV, needing a Police check or permit, or having to follow endless amounts of expensive and useless red tape.

Libertarians know the way to get lower taxes, safer streets, full employment and freedom from officials interfering in the private lives and decisions of adult citizens, but I can’t deal with all that in this note. We need to get together and discuss it.

Please come along and join us at 8pm on Wednesday 13^th January 2010 at:

Punch Bowl Hotel
77 Market St

Hoylake
Wirral
Merseyside
CH47 2BH

The pub is a five minute walk from Hoylake railway station. If you are unsure how to find it please contact me for further directions.

Everyone is welcome. You do not have to be a member of the Libertarian Party UK. The meeting will be relaxed, friendly and informal. At this first meeting we will be getting to know each other and having a chat about what Libertarianism is. I am delighted to tell you that Councillor David Kirwan, Prospective Independent MP for Wirral West, is in agreement with the Libertarian approach and will be coming to our meetings. This is your opportunity to meet the man who will break the grip of the failed Parties in Wirral and take a truly independent, honest voice to represent us at Westminster.

We look forward to meeting you.

Best regards

Malcolm Saunders

malpoet@hotmail.co.uk

Childcare Vouchers

 

Two parents who are both higher rate tax payers can receive up to £2,400 per year of public money towards their child care. Who is paying for these wealthy families to bring up their children while they follow their fulfilling lives? All of the rest of us of course, but the burden falls hardest on people with low incomes who still have to buy clothes, furniture and all the other necessities of life and for whom VAT is a bigger proportion of their commitments than it is for the wealthy.

 

In a cynical attempt to buy middle class votes the Labour Government introduced this mad scheme and now he has bankrupted the economy Gordon Brown is trying to stop it. His big problem is that he doesn’t command any authority in his own party and the Labour MP’s who are scared of losing their seats are threatening to vote against him.

 

Face up to it Gordon, you do not have the remotest chance of winning a general election whenever you call it. Having wrecked the economy, crippled business and swamped us with a multitude of idiot laws in your periods as Chancellor and PM you must spend your last months making sure that the debt burden you pass on to our children and grandchildren does not get any worse.

 

You must scrap the childcare vouchers. It will go through parliament because the Tories will have to support it. You have to ignore Caroline Flint and her mates, the country cannot afford to feather bed the wealthy. If they threaten to throw you out as PM just say thank you. Months of misery from the revolting Sun followed by a humiliating defeat at the polls will do your family and health no good. Better to go down now by doing the right thing.

Phony mortgage interest

So Ben Chapman thinks it OK to claim non existent expenses if the fees office will agree. An attitude you want in your MP Eh!

Your time is up Martin

Michael Martin your apology is worthless RESIGN NOW! Gordon Brown call an immediate General Election.

Election ’97

 

Mayday, Mayday, Blairs the news,

‘Landslide brings Major fall’.

For eighteen years we’ve had the Blues.

Now comes the Red Rose ball

Electoral Reform – Proportional Representation

Government should be elected by proportional representation

The nature of government is that it has coercive power. Ultimately the only thing that distinguishes a government from a private security organisation, or even a gang of armed robbers, is that it has legitimacy. Governments claim legitimacy from a whole range of different sources. Historically they tended to say that they had been appointed by God or that they had the approval of God. This is the divine right of kings and all its similar forms throughout the world. Alternatively the government may accept that it achieved power by force of arms, but that battle is a legitimate way to government. Not surprisingly, I do not accept such justifications. Most people would accept that a government must have some degree of approval from the citizens that it governs.. This approval is expressed in a host of different ways including democratic elections by secret ballot which I believe to be the appropriate form of representative government at this stage in the twenty first century.

Changing the system of democratic election will result in different outcomes in terms of the nature of the political parties and composition of government. With the first past the post (FTP) system in the UK, we have a small number of parties with a prospect of gaining members of parliament and usually a government of one party that represents fewer than half of the people who cast their votes in a general election. The main parties are very broad coalitions rather than being expressions of a specific ideology.

Where very proportional systems of election exist, there are usually many more political parties representing the different nuances of political opinion and there is a much greater likelihood that the government will be composed of a coalition of two or more of the parties. For a government to be able to genuinely claim legitimacy, it is my view that each representative in a parliament should be there by virtue of a majority of those voting and the government should be representative of more than fifty percent of the votes cast overall. Neither of these conditions appliies in our system so I do not accept that we have an adeguate democracy to give our government legitimacy. That means that I want to see constitutional change, but we should only be pursuing it by democratic and peaceful means.