Make Voices Matter
Promoting Participatory Democracy
over
Neoliberal Technocracy
Promoting Participatory Democracy
over Neoliberal Technocracy
Promoting Participatory Democracy
over
Neoliberal Technocracy
Is Proportional Representation the Solution to Labour's and Britain's Problems?
The Left case for PR, as in the campaigns of Make Votes Matter and Compass is that changing from the
First Past The Post (FPTP) system would reduce the present hegemony of Conservative governments and
hence the continuation of regressive economic and social policy making. It is also argued that PR would
enable the implementation of other urgent democratic reforms. To obtain a government that would adopt
PR reforms, campaigners advocate electoral agreements or pacts: a 'progressive alliance' between
Labour and other left-of-centre parties based upon a shared platform of electoral reform. These are
worthy aims and plausible strategies but they could well be thwarted by equally likely pitfalls and flaws.
Consider firstly the electoral strategy.
Would electoral cooperation ensure more Labour-LibDem-Green seats in Parliament?
Compass says that when pacts or deals are ‘considered . . . there are a range of options available, from
tactical electioneering or campaigning around joint issues, all the way through to open primaries
and stand asides.’ https://www.compassonline.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/wedividetheyconquerv7-1.pdf
Maybe, but in the eyes of opponents, the media and voters these all amount to electoral pacts. Electing a
left-of-centre majority through such arrangements would face two big problems.
The first is getting sufficient voters who are highly motivated to 'lend' the vote they normally give to their
preferred party to another party in a pro-PR pact. This of course depends on whether voters rate
electoral reform highly enough to displace their other policy priorities. Opinion polls do show consistent
but small majorities would favour a switch to PR. However polls haven't asked voters whether they would
rank electoral reform higher than other concerns. In the 2011 referendum on a possible Alternative Vote
(AV) system to replace the present FPTP one, only a third of voters voted yes. Some may have been put
off because AV is not strictly a proportional system. But more importantly, only 42% of voters were sufficiently
interested to vote in the referendum.
That's problem number one: most voters do not rate electoral reform as important. In an electoral pact,
this factor could probably influence many voters not to opt for the pro-PR candidate. For example,
many less 'progressive' LibDem voters would probably vote Conservative rather than for bogeyman
Labour. Dyed-in-the-wool Labour voters could well abstain from casting any vote rather than vote for
a Liberal Democrat candidate.
The second problem involves the scope electoral agreements for PR give for Tory and mainstream
media attacks. Unless Labour, LibDems and Greens could agree broadly common positions on
major social and economic policies the Right would be able to destroy the credibility of the left
parties by claiming that voters would be electing an uncertain mishmash of policies, a pig
in a poke; parties only interested in obscure constitutional reform. Alternatively the Right and
MSM could say that if these parties can agree a common policy under FPTP, there is no need for PR.
Assuming a House of Commons’ majority in favour of PR, its introduction would almost certainly
need to be mandated by a public referendum. Previous failures to win progressive majorities in
referendums (AV in 2011, NE regional government in 2004) show, that it is very difficult to get
majorities to favour constitutional reform. But if PR was backed and introduced what would be the
consequences for left politics and policies?
Electoral Outcomes of a PR System
Evidence from other countries.
Most other European nations have some form of PR but in recent decades this has not led to
radical left governments. Countries such as France, Germany and Italy continue to have
governments operating neoliberal socio-economic policies. Sweden, once a bastion of
social democracy endured centre-right pro-austerity governments for 14 years until
a Social Democrat-Green alliance won power by a single seat in 2018. But it depends
on the support of the neoliberal Centre Party to stay in power. Similar developments have
occurred in other EU countries with PR systems. Clearly, PR itself does not, as some of its
advocates claim, correlate directly with progressive left policies.
One of the reasons is that elections under PR systems make coalition governments much
more likely. They can result in left of centre coalitions. Equally, but more usually in Europe
centre-right coalitions occur. This has been the case in Germany, Austria and the Netherlands;
and in France and Italy for all except five of the past 30 years. What would happen in the UK?
Scotland would continue to return SNP MPs. Depending on the type of PR adopted, the Liberal
Democrats would probably become kingmakers as have their sister parties in Austria and
Germany. In tight elections LibDems might agree to a coalition with, or support for Labour.
Equally, bearing in mind their past preferences they might ally with a Tory government.
What Could Happen in Britain?
As is claimed, but depending again on the type of PR system adopted, smaller parties, could
make electoral breakthroughs. On the 2015 election figures modellers predict the most favourable
of a range of outcomes for minority parties would be: LibDems’ seat count increasing to 46 seats
and a UKIP-style party 44 seats. Labour and the Tories would lose around 40 to 50 seats between
them. On other forecasts (on 2017 and 2019 data)Tories lose about 40 seats, Labour gain a
handful as do UKIP and Greens with LibDems, again the biggest winners with 30-odd more seats.
Modelling for 2019 suggests that, in some PR systems, the combined vote of the two main
pro-Brexit parties would not reach 50% but in the number of seats won, support for Brexit would
still have had a majority!
https://theconversation.com/what-would-the-british-parliament-look-like-under-proportional-representation-128808
Adoption of PR might encourage splits within and formation of new parties from the Tory and
Labour parties; more likely in the latter. The predominance of centrist preferences, however,
would probably confine a leftist Labour splinter to the same kind of levels as occurs on the continent:
France Insoumise 3%; Germany’s Linke with only 10% of votes and 10% of MPs. Podemos – similar.
Contrast the half left/half right Five Star Movement (32% 2018; 15% 2019 EU elections).
Conclusion
The present FPTP is unfair and often wasteful of the energies of voters and parties. However its
reform is unlikely to be a sufficiently popular issue to help win a general election for the parties
that favour it. If it does have such importance for voters then one would expect a much higher
vote share for parties, as diverse as UKIP and LibDems, who favour it. Those advocating a
broad leftish electoral pact to avoid leaking votes from the pro-PR candidate most likely to
win a particular constituency must recognise that there is little or no evidence that this
strategy would create a pro-PR majority in a General Election. There is also little evidence
that PR alone would triumph in a special referendum.
If PR were to be adopted it would undoubtedly lead to ethically fairer and more productive
elections from the point of view of popular representation in the House of Commons.
However, evidence from European countries using PR shows that the most likely
governmental outcomes are coalition governments in which centrist and often centre-right
parties have a minority but crucial role. It is these kinds of coalitions that have helped to
maintain the neoliberal consensus on austerity and free market economies. There is thus
little reason to believe that coalitions under PR in Westminster would lead to different
policy priorities.
The current Left campaigns for PR argue that governments elected under this
system would also make other urgent constitutional reforms possible: decentralisation
of power from central government, House of Lords reform, experiments in participatory
democracy. However they offer no proof of cause and effect for this damn-breaking
theory. After a protracted process of political and emotional upheaval to secure a
referendum victory for PR, isn’t it as likely that a coalition government of the left and centre
would be unable or unwilling to press for further democratisation?
A less hazardous path to democratisation would be to campaign on the basis of, and
then establish, an ongoing national commission: charged with devising and proposing
regular and incremental reforms to the whole economic, social and political governance
of Britain (and Scotland if it remains in the Union). Make Votes Matter proposes a similar
exercise but, crucially, wants to limit it to ‘a specific focus on electoral reform’. Key sectors
of the population could participate in the wider process suggested above. Not only
to improve political representation, through electoral reform but also transformations
for participation and transparency in other critical areas of public life, such as health,
housing, transport and work.
The danger is that campaigns focussing on stand-alone changes to the electoral
system would absorb disproportionate political energy and elevate PR to the status
of a panacea against austerity and neoliberal governance. A status which the experience
of European countries with PR shows is unrealistic. The evocative slogan of ‘Take Back Control’
could be remodelled to apply to this broader transformation. One that could be reinforced
by demanding that after the upheavals and sacrifices of Brexit and the Covid catastrophe
the British people deserve and need to have a greater say in the processes that control and
limit their lives.
Bryn Jones January 2021
You’ve chosen a terrific way of integrating images and text into your website. Move the image anywhere you want in this container and the text will automatically wrap around it. You can display events team members new products and more easily and creatively. To start add an image from the Image Picker and edit it as you would edit any image in the system. For example you can link the image to existing pages in your site a website URL a popup or an anchor. After you’ve chosen the image add your text. You can add text that describes the image you’ve selected or simply use the image for decorative purposes. \nYou’ve chosen a terrific way of integrating images and text into your website. Move the image anywhere you want in this container and the text will automatically wrap around it. You can display events team members new products more easily and creatively. To start add an image from the Image Picker and edit it as you would edit any image in the system. For example you can link the image to existing pages in your site a website URL a popup or an anchor. After you’ve chosen the image add your text. You can add text that describes the image you’ve selected or simply use the image for decorative purposes.
Rent your own private yachtfor a perfect vacation
Discover the beauty of the open sea
Fill in your details below and we'll get right back to you.
Hello, I am
Todd Thomas
Web and UI designer based in Paris with more than 10 years of experiences.
