I have published this video this morning. In it I argue that Scotland already has proportional representation for its local authority elections. England needs it, and Labour would win as a result. If we're to have a pathway to better democracy in the UK as a whole, this is a place to start. It's time Labour gave us PR in local elections.
The audio version of this video is here:
The transcript is:
I'm talking about the changes that Labour could make to the UK that would cost very little in terms of government spending, but which would make life better.
I am going to propose something which is a little bit off the wall, but it's a good idea - the introduction of proportional representation into local elections in England and Wales.
Scotland already has this. They don't need to change.
But if we were to have proportional representation, most especially in England, for all local elections, and that that voting took place on a single transferable vote system with bigger wards than exist now so that there was a greater chance of a broader range of representation of people to really reflect the views of local communities on the councils that serve their interests then two things would happen
One, Labour would actually fulfil the pledge that its own membership demanded of the party to introduce proportional representation in this country. More than 80 per cent of its members voted for that idea in a recent party conference.
Secondly, Labour would begin the pathway towards proportional representation for the whole of the UK when it came to parliamentary elections.
It's fair to say that people will take time to get their heads around the whole idea of PR. I don't know how long it would really take because in Scotland they've done this already, they have no difficulty with the concept, and it clearly works. But in England apparently people do have difficulty with understanding this and comprehending how it will work. So, we need trial runs in proportional representation to pave the way for its use in general elections.
Labour could keep a lot of people, including its party membership, happy if they did this, because they would improve the quality of representation of Labour members in many councils across the UK and ensure that it had a voice in places where sometimes it has none at all. That surely has to be to its advantage. And, surely Labour wants to make sure that it's represented on every council and that those who align with its interests do get a voice in those places? Labour could guarantee that.
This is an almost no cost change, but which will improve the quality of local government and the relationship of people in England, in particular, to that local government so that it delivers better for the people of this country.
Come on, Labour, you can do this. The people of England should be able to do this. The people of Wales want it. The people of Scotland have got it. Let's do it now.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
Of all creatures on this planet human beings are uniquely prosocial in that they have the capacity to extensively think about how they can balance their needs as individuals against those of others and in doing so achieve much greater control over how they lead their lives through cooperation.
However, what many human beings fail to recognise is that this balancing requires accountability in key areas.
So for example, it requires knowing that democracy requires high levels of accountability, market capitalism and using the resources of the planet does too, and since money is widely used to be prosocial particularly caring then being accountable means voters understand fiat money reality, how it works and can best be regulated.
In the UK voter accountability in understanding the above is at low levels which is why the country is moving towards fascism. Fascists don’t like to be accountable and the less voters fail to understand the criticality of certain ways human beings need to go about their lives for well-being of the many the happier fascists are.
I think this is a great idea.
Expanding a system already used successfully in the UK (but not to Westminster) shouldn’t be too controversial. Also, I suspect it could be done without a referendum.
Once this is operating it will soon become apparent that Westminster is the “anomaly”.
Quite so
Using STV rather than the d’Hondt system imposed on Scotland under Devolution would be a smart move: it’ll produce results that more closely reflect how the people have actually voted. The d’Hondt system was imposed in Scotland to produce a parliament where no one party would prevail and so compromise by all would be required. This was done deliberately to hobble the pro-Independence parties and those who vote for them and as a result it doesn’t accurately reflect how the public has actually voted.
@ Ken Mathieson
I agree for the most part with what you say on this, and other subjects, but I don’t entirely agree that the D’Hondt system serves Scotland badly. Where I would like to see change is in the repeated ‘election’ of representatives, via the list system, with no constituency support.
I find this unacceptable and would like to see a limit of at most two terms of office for any candidate without constituency approval. I’d be happy to accept only one term. In which case we wouldn’t have had Ruth Davidson as Scot-tory leader and therefore probably never have had the embarrassment of Theresa May as Prime minister of the UK.
On constituency only basis the SNP would have been ruling Scotland with no opposition representation in Holyrood. This may have been pleasing in some respects, but I doubt it would have made for responsible, or accountable government (even given that Holyrood operates in reality as a glorified county council)
A fair and proportional voting system is desperately needed. Inceasing the size of wards creates its own challenges.
In Sheffield there are 28 wards, each ward represented by three councillors elected to serve for four years. Each ward has about 18,000 voters. Adequately trying to make councillors visible and accessible to as many of the strands of local people in their own neighbourhoods on a year round basis, on top of the heavy workload of ensuring the local authority delivers a good, and responsive service is enormously challenging.
We need more people to be actively engaged in local politics. There are so many barriers, such as being a carer or able to take the hit on their career progression from a career break to offer yourself up for public service.
I understand that the ratio of elected people to constuents in the UK is one of worst in Europe.
Much thought needs to given to representation and local democracy, as well as the need for a fair voting system. What we have is not sustainable and self selects a narrow range of politicians.
Thanks
And much to agree with
It doesn’t matter how much of a good idea it is, how easy it would be to implement or even how necessary it is because if it threatens the revolving doors of Tory Right and Tory Light each having a turn in charge then I can never see it happening.
I’ll try again. Third time lucky perhaps? My computer keeps dumping my erudite(?) and considered responses. It brings me back to the earlier question of whether we would wish to be diagnosed by an autistic machine rather than a human GP. There is no doubt whatsoever in my mind that computers are inherently autistic. And autism has serious downsides as well as some benefits. Is that contentious? I think not.
PR.
“…in England apparently people do have difficulty with understanding [PR]……”
Yes they do. At a very late stage in the 2011 PR referendum debate the Tories ran a high profile, prime-time TV commercial suggesting, as if it were fact, that in a three horse race under PR the two leading horses (Tory and Labour) would lose to a third placed (Lib Dem) horse.
I knew people at the time who were persuaded of this.
If we had had an advertising standards authority worthy of the name the Tory party would have been rendered effectively bankrupt. As it was there were no repercussions whatsoever.
Except Brexit……..