Showing posts with label leaders debates. Show all posts
Showing posts with label leaders debates. Show all posts

Sunday, May 02, 2010

Don't hold your nose on election day. Vote for fair votes.


     When things go wrong in British politics they don’t half go wrong.  The collision near the launch of Labour’s final poster campaign on Friday was a headline-writers gift:  The Car Crash Election.  The final mishap in the worst Labour election campaign since 1983, when the late Michael Foot - a man of great intellect but little popular appeal - led the party to its worst defeat in half a century. Who’d have thought that Gordon Brown, one of Labour’s brightest young stars in 1983, would lead a campaign that compares unfavourably with that? 

   I recall Footie, with his stick and fly away hair, stomping round the country from botched photo-opportunity to heckled speech.  Manfully trying to defend “the longest suicide note in history” as the Labour manifesto was called.  He scarcely seemed to know where he was most of the time, and nor did his aides. But he never lost his dignity.  He might’ve got in a muddle with his microphones, but Footie wouldn’t have dismissed a loyal Labour supporter as a “bigot”, even in private,  and he wouldn’t have testily blamed his staff.    Nor would Foot have abased himself, and demeaned his office, by turning up with the world’s media in tow to beg for Gillian Duffy’s forgiveness.  (One of the explanations for Brown’s “bigot” remark, by the way,  was that he had thought Mrs Duffy had said “f@@king immigrants” not “flocking immigrants” - to which you can only say: that’s a flocking ridiculous excuse.)

    The 1983 general election almost destroyed the Labour Party and the question this week is whether Gordon Brown could finish the job.  I don’t think he will, not least because our unfair electoral system is designed to prevent parties like Labour expiring through natural causes because people stop voting for them.  It props them up like cadavers in a Frankenstein beauty contest of the damned.   In 1983, Labour plunged to 28% of the vote, only 2% ahead of the SDP-Liberal Alliance.  But Labour  ended up with 209 seats in Westminster and the Libdems only 23.  It was a brutal result, which made a nonsense of democracy.    By rights, voters should have taken to the streets, as they did in Eastern European countries where the electoral systems were similarly rigged.   But they didn’t, Neil Kinnock came along, and the rest is history.  

   In 1983, Margaret Thatcher got a parliamentary majority of 144 seats on only 42% of the popular vote -  a spurious mandate which she used to devastate industrial Britain. Thursday looks like being every bit as perverse as 1983, even though David Cameron is never going to win a majority like that. The poll of polls seems to be suggesting a hung parliament with the Conservatives on around 300 or so seats;  Labour coming second with 200 plus;  and the Liberal Democrats having to make do with under a 100 seats, despite winning more votes than Labour.  Any such result will be an outrage.  As someone put it: we can’t go on like this.  I find the alphabet soup of AV, STV, AMS as tedious as the next man - but after this election  something must be done to make this country a democracy. Actually, I suspect that the death knell for the present system tolled mid week when voters realised that that Labour could come third in this election and still win the most seats in parliament.  Never! Never! Never!

     But as the hours and minutes tick away, Labour are telling anyone who’ll listen that the way to achieve democratic change is to vote, not for the party of electoral reform, the Liberal Democrats, but for Labour.  The logic is thus:  If the Tories win, and the Liberal Democrats come second, Nick Clegg will have no choice but to support David Cameron.  It may be a hung parliament but if Labour is third there could be no chance of a Lib-Lab alternative.   A vote for the Libdems, then, is a vote for David Cameron.  Ergo, to give the Nick Clegg a sniff of power, and to halt the Tories in their tracks,  you must hold your nose and vote Labour.  Hasn’t Gordon said that Labour now accepts electoral reform?

    This argument is too clever by half.   For a start, Labour’s promises of electoral reform are generally forgotten the moment they gain power - they promised a referendum, remember, in 1997.  Even if Brown comes second in terms of seats, there is still no chance of a Lib-Lab coalition.  The British people will not accept a party that has been  defeated in an election hanging on to power. Nick Clegg would still have to let David Cameron form a government and, here’s the twist, so would Labour.   Yet, the democratic reality is that Labour and the Liberal Democrats will have an overwhelming majority of the votes cast on Thursday.  In any proportional system Britain would long since have had a stable coalition of the progressive forces of the centre left. 

 And right now, an overwhelming vote for the Liberal Democrats is - in England at least - seems the best way of demonstrating the central point: that Britain cannot be called a democracy so long as the number of seats in parliament bears no relation to the number of votes cast.  

  The time for holding noses is over.  Some Scots will vote  for the SNP to register their discontent on Thursday.  More are likely to vote Liberal Democrat.    This is not 2007, and the issue in this general election is not who governs Scotland, but how to reform Westminster.  Of course,  the vast majority of Scots will continue to vote Labour, as they always have,  especially in the West of Scotland, where hatred of the Tories is the driving force.  I fully respect that.  However, in those seats where it counts, I hope people will at least consider voting tactically for whichever party seems most committed to change. 
    
   We have one chance:  to end of this rotten, corrupt and unfair electoral system, which has deformed our political culture. Which has allowed leaders like Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair, with inflated majorities in parliament on 43%  or 42% of the popular vote, to push through policies like the Iraq war and the poll tax that the majority of British voters never wanted.  Voters have an opportunity to make themselves heard on Thursday:  Let’s open our mouths and scream. 

Saturday, December 26, 2009

Imagine: an X Factor Election.

  Simon Cowell, the evil genius behind the Prime Minister's favourite programme “The X Factor” has made clear that he'd like to extend the franchise to politics. The talent show mogul is offering to stage high octane debates on key issues during the general election campaign. But why stop there....?

Brash music. Stars. A giant X falls from the sky to land in the Palace of Westminster as Big Ben bongs with X replacing the clock face.  Cut to stage built like a huge ballot box with audience going wild, half holding huge red pencils and half blue ones. Dancers with big rosettes and bull horns do complex routine to rap version of “Climb Every Mountain”.

Dermot O'Leary: “Good Evening and welcome to the “Election Factor” your chance to decide the outcome of the 2010 general election. Tonight the future of the nation is in your hands. After country-wide auditions literally thousands of politicians have had their chance to live the dream. But now comes the big test. The pressure is on and there's nowhere left to hide.

Please welcome the Election Factor judges: Alistair Campbell, Jeremy Clarkson, Polly Toynbee and Simon Cowell”.

(Mastermind music thumps in as judges stand to attention to deafening applause)

Dermot: “And quiet now, please for our first contestant. He's the new kid on the block, after an amazing debut in the Westminster heats, with that great standard, It's Time For A Change, here he is. The Peoples Toff: David Cameron.”

( Lachrymose Tory leader nails the first big number of the night, ending his speech with a back-flip.)

Alistair Campbell: “Oh, is it over yet? I thought it was bollocks quite frankly, usual dirge. Posh git. Out of his depth”.

Jeremy Clarkson: “Well give him his due, he isn't Gordon Brown. If you have to have a politician in politics, you could do worse. But then again, you could do better.”

Polly Toynbee: “Total mistake by whoever gave him that material about inheritance tax and throwing everyone out of work. And where is the backing? Really, we've heard all this before and the public just aren't interested”.

Simon Cowell: “You know David. I had my doubts about you from the start, but I think you have really started to come good. You're likeable, you look good and you are singing my song. You deserve to go all the way to the top”.

Dermot. “Whahey the lad! David - what did you think of all that?”

David Cameron (burst into tears) “I'm just so grateful to Simon for letting me have this chance. It means the world to me and I want to thank my mother, the Queen, the Bullingdon Club and all the voters who've given me the chance to live my dream.”

Dermod: “So, ladies and genlmn. How can you top that? Well, don't go away, because - I can hardly believe it myself - here, live on the Election Factor stage, one of the greatest figures in modern British politics. Eleven years as Chancellor, three as Prime Minister. Five general elections, eight cabinet positions, total votes since entering politics: 120,000. Let's hear a great Election Factor welcome to.... The Right Honourable.... Gordon....Brown.

Boos echo around hall drowned by massive orchestral introuction as GB delivers off-key rendition of “Give Me One More Chance (To Show I Really Care).

AC: “Look, I've always liked you, Gordon, but tonight I think you have lost the plot. I can't see the public buying this one, quite frankly.”

JC: “Like a clapped out Ford Mondeo, it's the scrappage scheme for you my Scotch friend. Hoots mon the noo!”

PT: “It just didn't work for me Gordon. I used to be your greatest fan but somehow, I can't bring myself to vote. I'm sending you home.”

SC: “Hold on a minute guys. This is a talent contest and what you can't deny is that he's got it in him. Look Gordon, here's what I'm prepared to do. If you work for me, I'll work for you. One more chance. Ok mate?  Dermot. “Well Gordon. ~What about that Some pretty tough old messages there me old mate. What've you got left to say to the nation as they prepare to cast their final vote”.

Gordon Brown: “Well, Dermot, uh, I'm just so grateful to Simon, er or should I say Lord Cowell, uh, for giving me this chance to show the people at home what I can do. I've given it everything. It's my best shot. What you see is what you get. But at the end of the day, uh, it's the people who make the choice”.
 

Dermot. “That's dead right, mate”
 

(audence silenced, lights dim, roll of distant thunder)

Dermot, solemnly: “So what's it to be voters of Britain: Gordon Brown or David Cameron. It's time for the big decision. They say that every political career ends in tears, so whose career is going to end tonight. Who is going home and who is going to Downing Street...

“..And the winner of the Election Factor 2010 is...”

(Endless pause for effect during which several several audience members die of old age)

“....Simon Cowell”.

Tuesday, December 22, 2009

Excluding the SNP is unfair and undemocratic.

    The Scottish National Party has every right to feel aggrieved at being excluded from the proposed televised debates involving the three UK leaders during the forthcoming general election campaign.  The problem is what to do about it.  It is manifestly unfair for not one,  but three ninety minute debates to be shown in Scotland without the party of government in Scotland being represented.   Quite apart from the unfairness, the important Scottish dimension will be completely lost as the three UK leaders debate English health, English education, English policing and other issues like nuclear power and university tuition fees as they affect England.  Does anyone seriously believe that Brown, Cameron and Clegg are going to debate these issues as they apply to Scotland?  Of course not.

   I am not making a narrow nationalist point here.  It is, or should be, obvious to any fair minded person that this is a distortion of the democratic process in Scotland. Unfortunately, it is a very difficult problem to resolve.  Clearly, shoe-horning Alex Salmond into these debates will bemuse the vast majority of viewers who live in England.  Clearly, Alex Salmond has no chance of becoming UK leader.  His presence therefore, would be an unwarranted intrusion into the English political debate.

  But  if it is unacceptable to transmit these debates in England with Salmond, it is equally unacceptable to transmit them in Scotland without him.  There is no easy way round this, and I think it should be tested by law.  An important precedent will be established with profound implications for custom and practice of broadcasting during elections.   I suspect the SNP will not go to law far because they have little likelihood of overturning the UK networks who will fight fiercely against any attempt to block the transmissions.  But I still hope they try.

  Really, the only fair and representative solution would be for the debates not to be transmitted in Scotland or for there to be as four way debate north of the border including the UK and SNP leaders. Clearly, Brown, Cameron and Clegg are not going to want that, but they may just have to accept it.  They have agreed to have three separate debates to suit the demands of the three UK television    channels - well, the least they can do is suit the demands of the devolved United Kingdom.

   Unionists have been crowing at the thought of Alex Salmond being excluded from these debates, but they should have a care.  This kind of thing does not go down well in Scotland, where voters have an acute sense of fairness and democratic propriety.  I suspect many Scottish viewers will resent the way the SNP has been excluded, and more to the point, will resent the way Scottish issues are largely ignored, as they are on network television bulletins.  These broadcasts could do severe damage to the Unionist case in Scotland, and the SNP know it.

   The UK parties should think again.