Are the Times keeping track of events?

By Jessica Asato / @jessica_asato

The Times claimed in an editorial today that Labour leader Ed Miliband has offered ‘lacklustre’ leadership of the Yes campaign. Ignoring the fact for the moment that the Yes campaign isn’t led by any politicians, you have to wonder whether they have been keeping track of the events in the past few weeks – or if perhaps their own opposition to reform is already starting to cloud their perception of reality.

On Monday, Ed was in Methodist Central Hall speaking alongside Vince Cable and Eddie Izzard in support of the AV referendum. There was no “distancing equivocation” as the Times suggests. Instead Miliband committed himself, not for the first time, to supporting voting reform as part of a wider process of changing our democratic system.

Perhaps they did not have time to watch the news. But there have been several other opportunities to catch Ed in action for AV. Here he is launching the Labour Yes campaign and a couple of weeks later here he is sharing a platform with Charles Kennedy and others. He’s written for the Independent and The Guardian.

Given that the Labour Party is split on the issue, it is hard to see what else Ed could have done except for march into Yes HQ and ask to take over as campaign director. The Times says that his support for AV is “opportunistic”, but as he himself has written, “the easy and politically expedient route would be to find an excuse to abandon my support”. When asked during the leadership election whether he would support a Yes vote he stated: “I’m in favour of the AV voting system for the House of Commons and will campaign in favour of AV in the referendum”. He’s not erred from that position since.

If anything, Ed’s support for AV shows the strength of his leadership in the face of opposition within his own party. Given the huge and understandable hatred of the Lib Dems, Ed could have found a convenient route out of the AV referendum. There were all manner of hooks he could have used – the constituency reductions forced into the same Bill, the fact that the referendum is being held on the same day as elections, or the fact that in opposition Labour is reviewing its policy positions. But he didn’t and that tells us he genuinely believes in this reform.

The Times, along with the rest of the right wing press know that a yes vote would harm their ability to influence the ever-decreasing group of marginal voters, now calculated to represent 1.6% of the electorate according to the ippr. These voters, numbering only 460,000, who were assiduously courted by New Labour are the key to government and editors are not unaware of this. They tend to be small ‘c’ Conservative, are suspicious of tax, think immigration is too high, the criminal justice system too lenient, and don’t care for Europe.

AV doesn’t represent a revolution – there will still be safe seats – but it would increase the number of marginals so that more voters would have an influence on the outcome of elections. Perhaps that is the real reason for The Times’ attack on Ed Miliband; as part of the political establishment they wouldn’t like to see their world view challenged by an electoral shake-up. Ed seeks to bring about precisely this – a new kind of politics – and that is why I, and many others in the Labour Party are working for a Yes vote on May 5th and support Ed in his brave stand for a better system.

Jessica Asato is Director of the Labour Yes campaign for the AV referendum