An exhaustive academic report shows why Labour would benefit from the Alternative Vote. The report argues ""By opposing AV ... the Labour Party is likely to deprive itself of a chance to gain seats"
The principled arguments for a ‘Yes’ vote in May’s referendum on the Alternative Vote have been well documented by Next Left among others. But the partisan case for Labour to campaign for a ‘Yes’ vote has now become clear in an exhaustive academic report (pdf) by the “world’s leading expert on referendums“, Dr Matt Qvortrup of Cranfield University.
“In every election since 1997, the Labour Party would have gained more seats under AV than under First-Past-the-Post. There is only one academic study that gives Labour fewer seats than actually won under First-Past-the-Post, and this was in an unrepresentative year.”
Reiterating research published in The Guardian, the academic outlines that Labour would have gained four more seats in the 2010 election under AV while the Conservatives would have won 26 fewer seats.
Dr Qvortrup rebuts a recent article by Strathclyde University’s John Curtice which suggested that the Tories could benefit from the introduction of AV by outlining that the argument was “not based on empirical evidence” but on “assumptions” and “conjecture”. The article was:
“a journalistic comment, not a solid piece of political science … If we rely on the figures from surveys as provided by opinion polls the result is clear; Labour would gain from the introduction of AV.”
Referring to claims that the 2008 Mayoral election showed that Conservatives had an advantage, Dr Qvortrup writes:
“The myth that Boris Johnson’s victory in the 2008 suggests that the Tories have an advantage under AV is equally flawed. In fact, Boris Johnson polled fewer Second Preference votes than Ken Livingstone. Had had Ken Livingstone only won another 0.04 percent of the Second Preferences he would have beaten Boris Johnson although the Labour Candidate received almost 150.000 fewer first preference votes than his Conservative challenger.”
Dr Qvortrup concludes that:
“By opposing the Alternative Vote – or by campaigning half-heartedly for it – the Labour Party is likely to deprive itself of a chance to gain seats, and even of unseating the Government in the next General Election …
“AV is Labour’s best chance of ousting the Conservative-led government and for appealing to disgruntled Liberal Democrat voters who regret that their parties opted for an alliance with David Cameron rather than a partnership with the Labour Party.”
81 Responses to “Labour’s ‘no brainer’ case to campaign for AV”
The pole
This piece sums up most of that which is wrong with the Labour party – it is utterly self serving.
The reasons to chose (or not chose) AV should be related to a simple question – does it, or does it not improve the correlation between votes cast and MP’s elected.
If you argue for it for partisan reasons, you are making a case to reject it in the mind of the average voter. (Granted, the Tories are no better, and the Lib Dem’s are simply shameless on the point, but that doesn’t let you off the hook).
Éoin Clarke
I sincerely hope the AV referendum succeeds. But it won’t. In fact, it is likely to fail very badly. In NI, all the major parties are opposed to it. In scotland, Glasgow Labour are very unlikely to campaign for a yes, likwise in Edinurgh. In the NE of England, AV is unnecessary since reds have their votes so heavily concentrated…
where the AV system would benefit Reds the most would be in the Midlands marginals… Oldham, Nottigham, Tamworth, Derby, etc etc… the vote can be quite evenly split between red/blue in some of these constituencies and the benefit of yellow & green tranfers to red would aid them significantly…
The No campaign has been energised for months, and all polling indicates that support for AV declines by 5% once the arguments have been explained to voters…
Sadly, the % turnout of the blue rinsers will be very high indeed. we already no that they vote in higher numbers than reds… but this cause will motivate them like no other. The concept of a progressive majority equates to mob rule for some Tories, so I expect their turnout to exceed the yes campaign.
Most worryingly of all, Green voters, BNP voters, UKIP voters are all unlikely to vote yes to AV because it actually disenfranchises them even further…
The best hope the yes campaign has, is for Ed to put his foot down and insist that his party ups its campaign in favour of AV. If he turned it into a referendum on blue cuts [horrible politicking but effective] he might just manage to eek out a narrow yes…
Sadly with just 19 weeks to go, that is very unlikely to materialise. 🙁 🙁
Ben Donnelly
Éoin, I agree with a large amount of what you’re saying, but your comment on Green, BNP and UKIP voters being unlikely to vote Yes doesn’t make sense to me.
Of the three parties named only BNP are firmly against AV. The other two are officially backing the Yes campaign. Here’s why:
The BNP stand to lose from any preferential voting system especially one where you need to win 50% of the votes to win a seat. The BNP’s best chance of winning a seat is under FPTP by gathering a concentration of support in a single area, getting 30% of the vote and hoping that the remainder of voters are split between candidates so that they can sneak in front. They wouldn’t be able to do that under AV because of their extremist nature. The BNP fill a highly specialised niche and for that reason they’re no-one’s second choice. They’d never get 50% support and they no it.
The Greens and UKIP are a different matter entirely though. They would benefit from AV because AV benefits anyone who would reach beyond their core vote. Both those two parties are taken seriously as second and third choices by voters of mainstream parties, many of whom prefer the likes of the Greens and UKIPs to two of the big three parties.
What AV does is enables every voter to show their true 1st preferences. FPTP does not do that, as the X votes could be anything from 1st preference all the way down to 2nd last because of tactical voting. Once you see what the true 1st preferences are, you’ll see increases in support for any party who deserves it. Those statistics once made public will be used to spur on candidates of all parties and you may see the likes of UKIP and the Greens break into the top 3, especially with the Lib Dems attracting a lot of negativity at the moment.
Under AV anyone who works hard and listens to as many constituents as possible will benefit. Anyone who relies only on their core vote will be punished. I believe that is as it should be.
AltGovUK
RT @leftfootfwd: Labour's 'no brainer' case to campaign for AV: http://bit.ly/icErzf by @wdjstraw #Yes2AV
DrKMJ
RT @leftfootfwd: Labour's 'no brainer' case to campaign for AV: http://bit.ly/icErzf by @wdjstraw #Yes2AV