Andy Burnham says "It would be a recipe for chaos and confusion if Labour candidates were also supporting AV in their literature." He's wrong - the party should campaign for AV.
Late on Friday afternoon, the Guardian’s Patrick Wintour revealed that Labour would not be campaigning in the alternative vote referendum. Aside from John Rentoul’s Independent on Sunday column, which lamented the death of electoral reform, the story sunk without a trace. The media may not be interested but progressives should urge Labour’s leadership to have a rethink.
The Guardian quoted Labour’s election coordinator, Andy Burnham, arguing that:
“The referendum should have been held on its own day, when the yes and no campaigns could have argued it out. Our sole priority has to be, and will be, winning in Scotland, and Wales, and doing well in the local elections.
“It would be a recipe for chaos and confusion if Labour candidates were also supporting AV in their literature. The election and referendum campaigns have to be separate and distinct.
Burnham’s pronouncement is counter-productive for five reasons.
First, it belies the spirit of Labour’s existing policy at a time when the party is (rightly) criticising others for veering from their previous objectives. Labour’s manifesto said:
“To ensure that every MP is supported by the majority of their constituents voting at each election, we will hold a referendum on introducing the Alternative Vote for elections to the House of Commons.”
During the leadership campaign Ed Miliband went further and told Left Foot Forward, “I support AV for the House of Commons and will campaign for it.” Little wonder, when the system worked so well for him during his own leadership contest. Reversing this position now will look to political and constitutional reformers like rank opportunism.
Second, given the likelihood of future hung parliaments (perhaps even next year in the Scottish Parliament and Welsh Assembly), Labour has to show that it can work across party lines on areas of shared interest. Labour’s new leader recognised this during his conference speech so it seems odd that he should abandon this position at the first significant opportunity presented to him to work with Lib Dem colleagues.
Third, there is no obvious reason why Labour can’t, in LBJ’s words, “walk and chew gum”. Why shouldn’t Labour’s candidates support AV in their literature? After all, there is no additional cost to including a line in a direct mail or leaflet that is already paid for. While the party can be excused for prioritising victory in Scotland and Wales, campaigning for AV need not be a huge drain on resources or time.
Fourth, from a narrow party interest perspective, AV is in the Labour party’s interest. A projection by the Electoral Reform Society suggested that Labour would have won four more seats in 2010 under AV while the Tories would have won 26 fewer seats. Analysis from the BBC suggests that Labour would have won more seats in 1997, 2001, and 2005 (although it would have had fewer seats in 1983, 1987 and 1992).
Finally, those hoping that the defeat of the AV referendum will deliver a hammer blow to the Coalition are misguided. Nick Clegg has already told activists that he will remain Deputy Prime Minister regardless of the result. Clegg, as has often been observed, looks comfortable with his Conservative colleagues. Hours spent sitting around the Cabinet table adjudicating on the cuts has left a strong bond between the Lib Dem leader, Danny Alexander, George Osborne and David Cameron. A “little local difficulty” in May’s elections will hardly puncture those relationships.
NB: I look forward to Tom Harris’ fisking!
121 Responses to “Labour should campaign on AV”
Robert
Winston Churchill described AV most accurately as ‘the most worthless votes for the most worthless candidates’. Here in my constituency AV would literally see a fine Labour candidate ousted in favour of a LibDem from the Phil Woolas school of electoral integrity, via the second or even third preference votes of BNP and UKIP voters. I accept in the name of democracy that a foul, neo-Nazi party like BNP can legally stand and that people can vote for it. But Will Straw and AV supporters are now advising me that we should go further – indeed that Labour should support a new system whereby the ignorant, racist morons who support BNP are awarded a second or even third vote (to be exercised BEFORE Labour, Tory or Libdem second or third preferences by the way) under which they will put out a Labour candidate who has polled the highest number of (1st preference) votes ! My dear Father didn’t lead a tank squadron across Germany in 1944-5 to facilitate that, Will. For once the Tories are absolutely right on this. Vote against AV and save British decency and democracy! Gordon Brown should never have supported AV. Like Iraq, tuition fees, economic liberalism, triangulation, pandering to bankers,retailers and Murdoch, crypto-racism, excessive spending on NHS luxury programmes, overpaying doctors and dentists, wasting money on overseas military and corrupt UN programmes, bashing the unions and unemployed and failing to build council houses (phew, long list, sorry), the quicker we dump AV and other poisonous elements of the Blair/Brown legacy, the faster we will have a Labour Government again. By FPTP with a majority of 100+ if Ed listens to Andy Burnham on this one!
Chris
@mousey the tory press officer
Yet again mousey you turn every thread into a meaningless, rabid anti-Labour rant.
“I almost hate to use EVIDENCE to prove you are wrong.”
It is a real stumbling block in your treatment that we can’t get past your stubborn belief that just because you imagine something necessarily makes it true in reality.
“So once again you have smeared and ranted and lied about someone in a public forum and the subject of Ed Miliband you might want to check how he actually became a property millionaire and his tax status.”
LOL, your accusing be of smearing your sock puppet then you smear Ed by questioning his wealth and tax status.
“Who owns the house he lives in Chris?”
His wife, she has the money as she’s worked hard to become a highly paid barrister, isn’t that what you tories are all for?
“As for your last paragraph you are living on a different planet. Have you not realised Labour lost the election Chris?”
Yawn, how do you think the ref can be won? Maybe your focus group work will throw up the answer, how is your mum?
“For the reasons I gave previously: The Tories are closer to the Lib Dems than Labour ever were”
I agreed with you on that, the orange bookers are proto-tories and the social libs seem to have disappeared. But how will the ref be won? The core lib voters, i.e. the 10% still supporting them aren’t enough to win the ref.
“New Labour Lick Spittles like yourself are alive and well but unlike you I am too polite to be rude in a public forum….”
Yawn. Yet again your displaying the inconsistency that characterises your every argument.
“(Have you never wondered why you alone make the remarks you do Chris?)”
Because hardly anybody else comments except your sock puppets. Its unfortunate that this actually rather good blog is inhabited mostly by a tory troll and his sock puppets.
Chris Bramall
RT @wdjstraw: 5 reasons why Labour should campaign on AV (as @Ed_Miliband said they would) http://bit.ly/c7psx3
Anon E Mouse
Chris – Public forum. People watching. You telling lies and smearing people. Sound familiar? You said none of the following was true so let’s try again:
1. Ed Miliband is rubbish so far.
2. Property property millionaire champagne socialist is also true.
3. Primrose Hill is true.
4. His Marxist (Jewish I don’t care about) father was given sanctuary by us.
5. He preached Marxism in the UK and considered Tony Benn too right wing at one point.
Case closed (again).
merthyr_bill
If I can just add that Miliband senior spent his life leaching off the public purse. And his real name was Adolphe. That should have set alarm bells ringing for us!