The consequence of FPTP
I have trouble understanding why electoral reform should be such a thorny issue for the Labour Party. As, supposedly, a progressive egalitarian party, surely its members must realise that changes to the current system are the only way forward. The Labour Party is meant to challenge unfairness across society: what better place to start than in removing First Past the Post from the political spectrum. In the jubilations of our having won a general election, have we forgotten that for eighteen years we were denied governance or influence principally due to the exigencies of the electoral system? FPTP allowed landslide majorities for Thatcher in 79, 83 and 87 with nearly 60% of the country voting against her! Why? Because FPTP ensures that some peoples votes are worth vastly more than others: a voter in a safe seat has as much as fifty times less influence on choosing a government (or even their local MP) than does someone in a marginal: this is equality? The sickening hypocrisy over electoral reform within the Labour Party is very worrying: whilst FPTP kept us out of power in the 80s, we were generally in favour of it. Now it benefits us (after all, only 43% of the country voted Labour in 97), we've suddenly gone off the idea of changing anything. Just because we were drubbed at the Euro-Elections (I must admit that closed lists are a disgusting form of PR, as were the selection processes which went with it, as Labour Party members in Leeds will know) and prevented from gaining a majority in Wales, we've decided that PR isn't representative of the people really, for how could people possible vote against Tsar Blair? The problem here was not the system, it was the campaign and the issues. Labour needs to put itself across as unashamedly pro-European if it is to regain any respect in this field, but that's another issue... Incidentally, had FPTP been used for the Euro-Elections, Labour would have fared even worse. If Labour is governing 'for the people and with the people', then it must be prepared to let them have a say. If we are an egalitarian party, we must ensure that all votes count equally and to do away with the scandal of the millions of wasted votes cast at each election. That Labour would suffer under PR is not a valid argument: we would simply have to adjust to the changed conditions. Above all, our manifesto pledge must be held to - this is not just a subject for strange Liberal Democrats in hypothetical anoraks, this is a matter for everyone who wants to see Britain become a more responsible and real democracy.
Jo Kibble 19-01-00
Originally published on-line in the Beyond Millbank e-zine.