Remember that moment in 2004 when it became apparent that George W. Bush was going to defeat John Kerry and be re-elected President? Remember that “What The **** Are They Thinking?” moment? That’ll be how I feel if Britain votes to keep First Past The Post. Not anger, because it is not, after all, my country, and referendums have a tendency to throw up answers you don’t like. But just jaw-dropping mouth open disbelief.
See, AV isn’t perfect. I get that. But it is better than First Past The Post. But that’s not even the bit that would annoy me, because FPTP has its strengths and I accept that some people put more importance on some aspects of a voting system than others. Fair enough.
No, what would make me gnash my teeth will be if people vote No because of the ridiculous reasons put forward by some on the No side. The voting machines, the “complexity”, the “extra” votes for small parties, all that nonsense. If the British people vote No to AV because of that stuff, stuff that deep down No people in Labour and the Conservatives, who use forms of AV internally in their respective parties, know to be just plain untrue, well, that would be nothing short of heart-breaking.
A No vote is where the British people are convinced by professional politicians to vote against themselves. AV gives individual voters more power over politicians. FPTP restricts those same voters.
I recently met a Fianna Fail supporter at a social occasion who left me speechless, which, as friends will tell you, is a rare occurrence. We were discussing the new government, and she started attacking them for the “disgraceful” cutbacks they were making. At first, I thought she was being ironic, but then realised that she was serious. A mere two months after leaving government, this FF supporter had mentally switched over and disowned the FF legacy of the last 14 years. In eight weeks.
The funny thing is that I doubt she is alone in FF. I have no doubt, and it’s confirmed by many (but not all) FF people I speak to, that a fair chunk of the party genuinely believe that Election 2011 is just a minor blip, an unfortunately harsh swing of the pendulum, but that essentially FF is sound and can just sit and wait for the people to swing back. There is, it has to be said, a certain degree of truth in this. There is a section of the country who believe any old nonsense that agrees with their permanent sense of grievance, and will vote accordingly. They voted Fine Gael, Labour and Sinn Fein last time, and will no doubt swing away from the two government parties when the government does not push unmarked used euro through their letter boxes, but not all those votes will return to FF. Many will stay with Sinn Fein.
Fianna Fail needs to realise that the bitterness towards Fianna Fail will eventually lessen to a degree, but that it is not enough to give people reasons to no longer not vote FF. They must have reasons to vote for Fianna Fail, and that debate has the ability to be either fascinating, if FF reinvents itself, or tedious as the waffle emerges. Phrases like “returning to the values of 1932” mean what exactly? FF is going to do its best to leave as many pregnant shoeless women standing at rural crossroads as possible? Admittedly, given the gender breakdown in the FF parliamentary party, that’s not an impossible task. But my fear is that the window for debate is already beginning to close, as the party’s inbred regard of debate as disloyalty stifles formal internal discussion of options, and reduces it to embittered whispers in shadows and pub corners.
There’s a lot that needs done, but given the comment above that inspired this post, I think that Fianna Fail at least needs to pledge itself internally to an economic policy that is based in reality. No more of the populist “the cutbacks wouldn’t happen under us” crap that got us to where we are today. Should FF, for example, consider establishing a publicly indentified independent panel, separate from the party, to cost its proposals and revenue sources? Fianna Fail needs integrity not just in voice but in action.
Of course, I could be wrong about this. I am not, after all, a member of Fianna Fail. But I notice that every time I offer an uncensored place on this blog for FF members (who contact me privately in large numbers, espc in the run up to the election) to voice their proposals for change, it is very, very rarely taken up, and that tells us a lot about Fianna Fail. There was a time when being gay in Fianna Fail involved accepting a “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy. Now, the question is: Does that policy apply to reformers within the party?
In the British referendum on the Alternative Vote coming this Thursday, I believe that Britain should vote Yes, and here’s why:
AV gives you the choice to vote as you wish. If you want to vote for a single candidate, as you do under the current system, you can do that. Just put a “1” beside your favoured candidate, and that’s it. But the beauty of AV is that it is your choice: If you are afraid that your “1” choice won’t be elected, but want to stop some one else from getting in, then put a “2” beside your second choice, and so on.
This is the thing: It really is between you, the pencil and the ballot paper in the polling booth.
A Yes vote allows you to make that choice, to vote for the candidate you actually agree with without accidentally letting in someone you really don’t want. It puts that choice in your hands in a way First Past the Post doesn’t.
AV allows you to vote without wasting your vote.
If you are a eurosceptic, this allows you to vote for a eurosceptic candidate without splitting the eurosceptic vote.
If you’re a Labour voter in the south, this allows you to vote Labour and block Conservatives.
If you’re a Conservative voter in Scotland, this allows you to vote Conservative and block Labour.
A No vote is a vote to deny yourself that opportunity, and to retain a voting system that professional politicians want to keep because it forces voters to accept only the choices they want you to be able to make.
AV is the voting system that works the way people other than professional politicians think. It recognises that in life, people don’t make all or nothing choices, that people have second favourite beers and dishes, and beers and dishes they hate.
In short, AV lets you choose from the whole menu. Don’t throw away that choice. Vote Yes.
