The Scotsman

Henry Mcleish says a fairer approach to politics is needed

-

For the majority of people, voting is their only link with the complex structure, of democracy, politics and governance that helps shape our society and makes sense of the tough process of arriving at collective decisions out of a bewilderin­g array of multiple and competing, interests, opinions, ideas, and life styles.

The two Greek words, “demos” and “kratos”, the rule or power of the people, have become symbolic of an inspiring and powerful but remarkably difficult idea to deliver. It was Abraham Lincoln in his Gettysburg address who said, “that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from this earth”.

How do these lofty ideals reflect what is happening at Westminste­r, post-election? How can a Conservati­ve Party with 29 per cent of the eligible votes cast on 8 June, form a government? Why do 60 per cent of those who did vote, but voted for other parties, end up having little influence on how Britain is run in the next five years? Can it be right that the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) with 279,000 votes and ten seats, be influentia­l in shaping the future of Britain future?

More to the point, we are seeing government of the party, by the party, for the party, where narrow partisan party politics eclipse any notion of the national interest, further diminish the credibilit­y of our democracy, and allow an “elected dictatorsh­ip” to function when 71 per cent of all voters did not support the Conservati­ves or the DUP! The injustices and inconsiste­ncies of our electoral system run deep.

The struggle for universal suffrage, or the right to vote, was a great victory for working people and remains the most important means at their disposal to influence their own lives, the fortunes of their families and indeed the course of history.

Despite the efforts of the Whigs and Tories, privileged elites, the power of “nobles, burgesses, and shire commission­ers” before them, and ideas such as the “40 shilling free holders”, the struggle for universal voting rights became unstoppabl­e, but was only completely achieved in 1969. For the founding fathers in the US and the privileged classes in Britain, extending the franchise was fraught with problems. More fear of the people, than power of the people, where the idea of “mobocracy” and the “behaviour of the masses” was a threat to elites.

In the modern era, the “first past the post” system for Westminste­r elections is archaic, politicall­y repressive, unfair and unrepresen­tative.

The lack of a written constituti­on means that absolute power remains with Westminste­r, not the people.

The younger generation is crying out to be listened to, but Westminste­r will not extend the franchise or give a voice to 16year-olds.

The ideas of consensus, co-operation, and coalition, unlike Europe, are not part of the Westminste­r discourse.

Proportion­al representa­tion would help fix our broken politics, strengthen a weak democracy, and tackle the remoteness of governance.

Reforming the voting system for Westminste­r is however not on the agenda. The status quo has preserved the dominance of Labour and the Conservati­ves, reinforced partisansh­ip, and, despite the emergence of a multi-party system, made millions of votes worthless in terms of political impact and fairness. This is a rigged system.

Continenta­l Europe is showing the way forward. Post-war forms of proportion­al voting have overcome much of the tribalism that is the hallmark of Westminste­r and has resulted in a better match between votes cast, political party representa­tion, the compositio­n of government and successful coalitions.

The defeat of the modest “Alternativ­e Vote” system in a referendum in 2011 is only of significan­ce to the point that this was a sham, a concession to the Lib Dems in the Tory coalition, with little support from the two major parties.

Voting is a powerful and undervalue­d democratic right in Britain. Often the media, right wing politician­s and those obsessed with the “market” ignore the importance of our democracy, our politics, and our governance and remain content with first past the post, which dominates and distorts the consequenc­es of voting and ensures millions of votes don’t matter.

Mark Twain quipped, “if voting made any difference, they wouldn’t let us do it”. In Britain millions of people may have taken this to heart. From 1997, 30 to 40 per cent of the electorate haven’t bothered to vote in Westminste­r elections. In 2015, the SNP won 50 per cent of the vote but picked up 95 per cent of the seats in Scotland.

In similar vein, Ukip received nearly four million votes and only one MP. This doesn’t make any sense. The Tory victory in the 2015 general election meant they formed the government with just over a third of the votes cast and only slightly over a quarter of those eligible to vote in the UK. This was repeated a few weeks ago. There is now an undeniable case for change: the worth of a vote and the value of voting are at stake.

In today’s volatile political climate, the political, social, economic and cultural challenges demand a more inclusive, fairer and representa­tive system of voting. Our politics are crying out for a civilised approach, cooperatio­n, progressiv­e coalitions, and consensus. It beggars belief that in 2017 we hold on to the ideas that each manifesto is unique and precious, that each party has a monopoly of wisdom to solve every problem, and that supporting or working with another party is a sign of weakness. People don’t think like this. This is not the European way. First past the post only reinforces this state of delusion.

But change is difficult. The status quo serves the self-interest of the two big parties. Their case against change is plausible but flawed. Simplicity, speed, Mp-voters link, decisive results, and strong and stable government, are seen as advantages. First past the post has substantia­l weaknesses. MPS and government­s elected without majority votes, parties that win large numbers of votes but obtain few seats, and smaller parties under represente­d or not represente­d in the House of Commons. Key institutio­ns of our democracy – parties, parliament­s, and elections – do not command enough trust or respect.

Our politics and our electoral system are not coping. Proportion­al representa­tion voting, votes for 16-year-olds to give them a greater say in the intergener­ational debate, and transferri­ng power to the people in a written constituti­on are long overdue.

Voters are serious people, and as citizens not consumers, recognise the fact that politics, democracy, and governance have profound consequenc­es for their lives. Abandoning first past the post for Westminste­r elections is the next step in the struggle for voting rights. Let’s learn from Europe.

The worth of a vote should never be underestim­ated or abused.

Politics here is crying out for a more civilised, fairer approach, co-operation, and consensus, writes Henry Mcleish

 ??  ??
 ??  ?? 0 Proportion­al representa­tion and votes for 16-year-olds are just two of the changes needed to our voting system
0 Proportion­al representa­tion and votes for 16-year-olds are just two of the changes needed to our voting system
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom