Vote Labour, Vote Yes

By Jessica Asato

In her piece “Vote Labour, Vote No” Joan Ryan argues – apparently without irony – that the case against AV is a matter of principle. This after the No campaign has spent months trotting outspurious invented figures about the cost of electronic voting machines that don’t exist. After claiming that AV would endanger the lives of servicemen and premature babies, by somehow taking money away that would otherwise go to save them. This conversion to making an argument on the principles at stake is belated to say the least.

Yet even when it comes to the political principles involved, Ryan’s case is built on claims that are simply untrue. Here are just some of the arguments that don’t stack up:

“Keeping our ‘one person, one vote’ system rather than giving supporters of the most unpopular parties extra votes”

The highly-respected Political Studies Association found that “AV would uphold the principle of ‘one person, one vote’. Every voter would still be treated equally; each vote would count only once in deciding who is elected in each constituency”.

No-one has more than one vote under AV – preferences only transfer in the event that a candidate has been eliminated before their votes can be counted.

“It would cost the Labour party seats in most elections”

Electoral modelling suggests that under AV Labour would have had increased majorities in 1997, 2001 and 2005, and – contrary to Ryan’s claims – would have denied John Major a majority in 1992, according to modelling by Democratic Audit. In 2010 Labour would have both lost and gained seats under AV, so while Joan is right to say Labour would have lost seats, she fails to admit we would have gained seats too.

“AV would have hurt Labour in the Thatcher elections and in close elections like 1992 and 2010”.

Not only might Britain have been saved from the disastrous Tory years from 1992-97 under AV, but if the 2010 election had been conducted under AV, David Cameron might never have set foot in Downing Street. The British Election Survey modelling of the 2010 results under AV concluded that the outcome “would have radically changed the arithmetic of post-election coalition building” with the possibility that Labour could have built a working coalition with the Lib Dems. Imagine if Clegg had been forced to stick to his original promises because Labour was the majority party. The dismantling of the NHS and the horrific cuts we see across the country could have been avoided.

“Clegg would get to play ‘kingmaker’ over and over again”.

This scenario assumes that AV would lead to more coalitions than FPTP – but there is no basis in fact for such a claim. Australia, which uses AV, has seen fewer hung parliaments since 1945 than we have had in Britain over the same period. When a party has a clear mandate for change, as New Labour did in 1997, AV produces large majority governments. Ryan ignores of course the fact that the current coalition has been formed under FPTP – a situation which is likely to continue as the IPPR found in its report earlier this year. At least AV gives people the option of showing their preference for a coalition partner, something that is impossible to do under FPTP.

“The other big winners from a Yes vote will be parties like the BNP and National Front”.

This is the most pernicious and blatantly false claim made in the article. Nick Griffin and the BNP are campaigning for a “No” vote, since as their Deputy Chairman Simon Darby put it “we are never going to get our feet under the table under the AV system”. AV would avoid the situation where, as has happened under FPTP at local council level, BNP candidates have been elected with less than 30% of the vote because the mainstream majority has been split. IPPR research has found that BNP second preferences would have not been decisive in the 2010 election.

AV means every MP will need broad support from across their constituency, having to aim for at least 50% of the vote – this makes sure the voice of the majority is heard.

“Clegg’s credibility depends on a Yes vote”

Nick Clegg’s credibility is already shot to pieces, and he will be weakened by the devastating loss of hundreds of council seats on Thursday 5th. Pressure will continue to mount on Clegg irrespective of the referendum outcome.

However, a No vote would be greeted as an enormous boost for David Cameron, who will be saved from the wrath of his backbenchers who realise that AV would allow the progressive majority to unite against Conservative interests. This is why AV has been described as a “dagger at the heart of the Conservative Party” and why David Davis called it an “anti-Tory system”.

“Had the last general election been held under AV, 20 current Labour MPs would not be in the House of Commons.”

Not only might we have avoided having David Cameron in Downing Street leading a Tory-dominated coalition if the last election was held under AV, but according to research, all the following constituencies who currently have Tory MPs would be represented by Labour MPs instead:
Aberconwy
Cardiff North
Brentford and Isleworth
Broxtowe
Hendon
Hove
Lancaster and Fleetwood
Sherwood
Stockton South
Warrington South

Labour has nothing to fear from a system which means MPs have to reach out to win the support of more of their constituents, allows voters to vote for the party they support most without having to think tactically, and that means more marginal seats.

So many of the No campaigns’ arguments are either untrue (money, coalitions, BNP) or only partly true. There could have been a principled debate in this referendum, but when one side of the campaign starts from the basis that it’s better to fight in the gutter, it’s hard to cut through with the principled arguments that exist in favour of AV. This small shift in our voting system won’t make the roof fall in. It will mean that MPs, and hence governments, have the majority support of the public.

Some MPs who don’t gain 50% of the vote will have to reach out to more voters for their support.The number of marginal seats will increase slightly meaning that more voters will get to determine the outcome of elections. And for the first time in many places across the country, voters will be able to vote for Labour without worrying that they will let the Tories in. There’s a better and different way of doing politics. AV is a first step that could help us get there.

Jessica Asato is the Director of the Labour Yes campaign