Labour PPCs pressure PM on electoral reform

In the US you have a Democrat President and Democrat majorities in both houses yet they're split big time on healthcare reform. To me having an elected Lords is daft. Better to have the Commons alone or a Lords that can suggest ammendments but can be ignored. But so many want an elected Lords, at least those not involved in getting decisions through.

As for PR, getting elected by first past the post must give you a special feeling even if they weren't really voting for you as such, but for your party. Moreover a lot of MP's are in seats where it's easier for them to be elected by fptp than by pr. Also the local teams that help you get elected under fptp would be redundant under pr and if you support it you're suggesting to them you don't need them before you know whether pr will be adopted for certain. In 1997 the party didn't expect a large majority so they might have needed the libdems. Blair might like pr but he would have needed libdem support to get it.

There's also the issue of what you mean by pr. Most people equate pr with av but they're not the same thing. Perhaps we could have a referendum on fptp/av/pr (pr like the euros) so if there's no support for pr in Parliament at least we'd know which version the public prefer.

The cause of the expenses crisis is safe seats. Only true pr will solve that problem but you can't have pr and the constitiuencies MP's so like. Perhaps constitiuencies could be twinned, one safe, one marginal, one vote for constitiuents in both constituences so the MP's have a link with their constitiuencies but less certainty of victory.

Nice point, John! I just looked up the 1997 Labour manifesto which says: 'we are committed to a referendum on the voting system for the House of Commons'. No if & buts, no conditional clauses, no wiggle room.

Well if like me you distrust politicians you always look for the motive. A short spell on Electoral calculus turned up the following:

Alex Hilton Chelsea and Fulham Predicted Tory majority 45.61%
Andrew Pakes Milton Keynes North Predicted Tory majority 15.24%
Andrew Skudder Horsham Predicted Tory majority 34.68%
Cath Arakelian Chingford and Woodford Green Predicted Tory majority 45.37%
Colin Swindell Derbyshire Dales Predicted Tory majority 44.04%
Damien Welfare Chipping Barnet Predicted Tory majority 29.33%
Daniel Zeichner Cambridge Predicted Tory majority 11.41%
Darren Barrenger Harwich and North Essex Predicted Tory majority 25.85%
Dave Rowntree Cities of London & Westminster Predicted Tory majority 40.42%
Ian Saunders Beverley and Holderness Predicted Tory majority 22.87%
Jack Scott Sheffield Hallam Predicted Lib Dem majority 1.95%
James Alexander York Outer Predicted Tory majority 9.18%
James Normington Sleaford and North Hykeham Predicted Tory majority 40.58%
John Piasecki Bracknell Predicted Tory majority 38.36%
John Tizard Mid Bedfordshire Predicted Tory majority 38.62%
Jon Tandy Shrewsbury and Atcham Predicted Tory majority 21.81%
Jude Robinson Camborne and Redruth Predicted Tory majority 1.77%
Julian Ware-Lane Castle Point Predicted Tory majority 34.55%
Kathryn White Aylesbury Predicted Tory majority 31.76%
Kevin Bonavia Southend East Predicted Tory majority 30.91%
Liam Robinson Fylde Predicted Tory majority 42.84%
Matthew May South Northamptonshire Predicted Tory majority 45.61%
Michael Castle Norfolk South Predicted Tory majority 27.18%
Nancy Platts Brighton Pavilion Predicted Tory majority 4.92%
Pat Merrick Eddisbury Predicted Tory majority 33.72%
Robert Smith Havant Predicted Tory majority 33.83%
Sharon Carr-Brown Bournemouth West Predicted Tory majority 15.07%
Simon Brugess Brighton Kemptown Predicted Tory majority 12.24%
Stephen Morgan Orpington Predicted Tory majority 21.48%
Stephen Twigg Liverpool West Derby Predicted Labour majority 35.23%
Steve Terry Hertford & Stortford Predicted Tory majority 43.99%
Swatantra Nandanwar Maldon Predicted Tory majority 49.39%
Tim Shand Guildford Predicted Tory majority 10.74%
Tom Flynn Southend West Predicted Tory majority 36.19%

Only one candidate who will definately get elected (Mr Twigg has a good bio too). Read into this what you will.

You do wonder why, after 12 years in government, the Labour Party have not sorted out the House of Lords - or honoured its 1997 pledge to have a referendum on PR. Why have they been so feeble?

As a prospective Labour MP, I don't agree with this letter. Voters want an end to MPs' expenses abuses, and employing family members; they are not calling for electoral reform. Much more important to move to an elected second chamber - voters see hereditary peers as an anachronism and unelected Party nominees as part of what must now change and modernise. A referendum on polling day would not encourage voters to switch to Labour - they could vote 'yes' in a referendum and for a candidate of any Party who pledged to support electoral reform if (re)elected as MP.

Thanks Alex

VS

Sorry to Jack Scott, I misread "PPCs" for "MPS"

Hi Vicky,

These are all (except Derek Wyatt) PPCs - parliamentary candidates - rather than MPs.

Alex

Good to hear that this has gone and it would be great to hear that Gordon has taken note and says something in the Queen's Speech. If not a referendum on voting day, then at least something that says Labour will put its money where its mouth is on voting reform. A quick bill that will commit whoever wins the election to promote a referendum.

But also, what kind of voting reform should not be decided by politician alone. The successful experience in Scotland, before the 1997 election, of calling a people's convention to come up with a consensus view of what needed to be done to set up a Scottish Parliament, could usefully be copied.

As for Jack Scott, I don't know who he is he is certainly not the MP for Shefeffield Hallam. It is Nick Clegg. Important to get the details right so that you cannot be discredited.

And the New Labour pigs will fly........

Riki FPTP only benefits party donors - compare the legislation that has gone through vs New Labour's manifesto pledges.

This is the sort of thing conference should have been discussing in Brighton, on the floor and voting on. Problem - Brown and his buddies would not want something like this in open forum as it shows up the total ineptitude of the promised 'Lords' reforms.

Now compare this with the experience in Scotland at Holyrood with its transferable vote and party list system. The Scots voters now know how to keep their politicians in check and use their vote to give us the best chance of getting the policies we need in place, by consensus. Electing the SNP in May 2007 has had a very positive effect on how Scotland views itself while ensuring the SNP's wilder excess can not take flight in legislation. The Scots Tories have gained an advantage by playing this new game of voting with the SNP on those policies it would put in place where as Labour and the Libdems have been seen to vote down their own ideas because they were being put forward by the SNP and no other reason. Many Scots see the SNP as a breath of fresh air in the political stodge that was Labour in Scotland dominance. Those Labour councillors with the wit to see this were much maligned by Westminster Labour for agreeing to the concordat but the advantages for CoSLA are far greater than opprobrium of their Labour Westminster FPTP troll colleagues.

The problem for Scottish MP's is increasingly what is their point? The flip side of the West Lothian Question. All of the major decisions taken in Scotland about how Scottish society works, is funded and is to be taken forward are made at Holyrood or within CoSLA.

Bain's campaign may have been 'local' and riding on the Weegie apathy to soap and Edinburgh but the reality is he has little if no ability to impact on decisions on crime, transport, funding as these are the remit of Holyrood and Glasgow Council's Police or Transport Authority, that is the local Labour Council.

That 36 PPC's have raised this directly with Brown either shows how much Millbank control is breaking up or that there are more activists waking up to the real danger of Brown taking the party to the point of no return and a re-run of the Liberals in the 1920's. A once powerful party reduced to a rump for the last 90 years.

It is a small stone causing ripples in a big pond but the wholesale reform of Westminster is required to prevent the SNP independence band wagon rolling for real. Ironically I see the political advantage in voting SNP as the best way to force true reform of Westminster through.

Wee Eck has been across at the EU finance meeting putting out more feelers with regards an independent Scotland in the EU and the EU will be more at home with Scotland's unicameral approach at Holyrood than the Democratic Dictatorship of Westminster's unelected elite.

The danger for the Westminster parties in May 2010 is that without real movement forward on fiscal autonomy for Scotland, a concept popular with 80% of Scots in surveys, Wee Eck and his SNP will have a field day.

Forget Glasgow NE - the SNP kept their powder dry over how much additional investment they have put into Glasgow since May 2007 and bailed out Glasgow Commonwealth Games the next day with an additional £81 million to cover the BBC's reduced offer and the reneging on the agreed deal made for terrestrial broadcasting of the games by them.

The electorate would see it for what it is, a brazen attempt to change the system to ensure "that Labour will benefit".

FPTP was fine for 12 years so long as Labour kept winning but the first sign of the electorate wanting Labour out and the system needs changing out of "fairness".

What an excellent letter and proposal I hope the Prime Minister takes note of.

Reform allowing a better reflection of society represented in parliament is something Labour with our values of representation and equality and diversity can champion and be seen as the leaders in. Its an issue where we really have the high ground and the Torys would be fighting to stay afloat. This seems like an election winning idea and one we need to push ahead with.

Hi Labourlist

No to reform , This should only be taken in a first term , Othwise it will look like playing the system and get the result you want , If a vote come to us voters i would vote (if allowed) for fptp , It has served us for this long .

What needs changing is the way the house runs and if PMQS really happens , That is the problem , The leadership have turned the house into a joke , No answers ,soundbites and it puts voters of , Planted questions make the MP who asks them a (i dont know the word) , It makes the house a stage production , Bills get passed with out scruntiy.

The House is a sham .

ricki