I heard a curious interview with Alex Salmond on the Today programme this morning. Curious in the sense that it shows the perils of the proportional representation system of government. Salmond confirmed that if they formed a government, the SNP would expect to hold a referendum on independence by 2010. He couldn’t go into more detail because, as he admitted on air, it is difficult to know what will happen after the election in proportional representation systems of government. He said that it was highly unlikely that his party could form a government on their own and would therefore have to negotiate with other parties.
So the people of Scotland, on an issue as fundamental as breaking away from the United Kingdom, will not know what the future holds when they go to the polls in May. Next time you read another rant about the “fairness” of PR, have a think about that for a minute.
12 comments ↓
Nobody knows what the future holds when they go to the polls. What is your point?
Come off it Tom the FPTP system can throw up the same results, but under PR you won’t get the situation Labour found itself in – winning the popular vote but the Tories getting more seats.
GC-M: I think the point I made was perfectly clear. Unlike the independence question in Scotland right now.
David: It comes down to the question about whether you want decisive government with an executive that can make a half-decent decision on the issues that count. Granted, PR might distribute seats evenly in proportion to votes cast but it certainly does not distribute power proportionately. If the SNP “win” the electins in Scotland, the future of the indepenence referendum will be in the hands of the minority partners in their admnistratioin. I can’t see too many people wanting that.
Tom, Dictatorships are of course ultimately the most decisive administrations. PR means people will have to work in a more co-operative fashion, and less adversarial way, it doesn’t stop administrations being decisive. Still FPTP has served the Lib Dems well in Devon.
But equally FPTP only delivers “decisive government” when the votes are spread across the country in such a way that at least two parties are in a position to win a majority of seats. It does not in and of itself ensure stable government – that relies on many other factors.
Tom, you make a very good point. We have also seen a smilar situation in Germany with the Merkel government. The constant post election bargaining means that ‘key’ mainfesto policies are almost always watered down, or thrown out with PR systems.
By giving undue power to coalition partners, PR systems also undermine the very principals which they seek to ‘correct.’
Yet more intelligible guff from the Brownies.. the only thing you need to learn at this stage matey is that Labour is heading for meltdown.. Bliar’s premiership will end and Brown’s starts on a low, with both fighting over who to blame. Maybe one day the penny will drop that it isn’t either of them personally (well not 100%), but the fact people are fed up of London government (just as they are in Newcastle, Cardiff, and Truro)..
Likewise in Wales, Tom – everyone knows there will be a coalition here after May 3. The question is which party is prepared to get in to bed with another, and none are prepared to admit openly which way they’re swaying.
There was a Lib/Lab coalition here previously, which worked well for both parties. One thing’s for certain – the nationalists are the least favourable to the other three parties when the leaders start looking around for potential government partners.
Thing is though Tom, if FPTP was used in Scotland, it may come to pass that in a future election the electoral mathmatics might be such that the Nats could have a majority while having a minority of the votes, like Labour in England. That would be even more disasterous, having a minority decide on independence. At least with the current system, the nats have to be collegic.
An alarming article in the Guardian today (‘Labour’s gift to the SNP’) highlighting how proportional representation in Scotland will probably lose Labour 13 councils. PR will double the SNP council representation and we could be left running outright a mere 3 councils.
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/scotland/story/0,,2053443,00.html
All those in the party that favour PR need to ask themselves at what point does their support for electoral reform supercede their commitment to getting Labour candidates elected to office? Electoral reformers should reflect on that if/when bad headlines emerge from Scotland on May 3rd.
[...] He may be comforted to find he has an ally in Tom Watson, who appears to think that the fact that PR is preventing the Scots from having independence foisted on them without their consent is a bad thing. [...]
Surely commitment to a fair electoral system should outweigh commitment to your own party’s performance?
Leave a Comment