The future of electoral reform in the UK

[admin]

The future of electoral reform in the UK

Read the full story

[glambert]

Very important that we remember that such a low turnout does not represent the views of the entire nation. In Bury we managed to persuade non-voters to vote for us - something other parties admit they either failed to do or didn't bother trying to do.

If we persuade the non-voting people to vote in favour of electoral reform so that they can make their voice heard, we will soon be using a method of PR.

This referendum returned a resounding NO to a method that nobody really wanted and I'm still baffled as to why it was presented as the preferred alternative to the electorate.

We want PR and we aren't alone in this. We need to unite together with other parties that support PR on this issue only and we need to continue the fight for it before we lose out completely for another generation.

We have waited nearly 30 years since John Cleese campaigned with the SDP-Lib Dem Alliance to implement PR, let's not wait another 30 years!

[borgs8472]

I hope the failure of the yes to AV PPUK will lead to policies being decided by more expert groups, and fewer full member votes.

The pro AV camp were criticised, rightly in my opinion for being made up an odd group of disparate fringe parties + the lib dems and some of the major parties, this unfortunately includes PPUK.

Whilst attaching our flag to the yes to AV group was valuable political experience for those involved on the ground, I'm concerned we jumped on the wrong bandwagon, which highlights how we must stick to areas we have mature knowledge on and established views or discussion.

[Gavman]

I hope the failure of the yes to AV PPUK will lead to policies being decided by more expert groups, and fewer full member votes.

The pro AV camp were criticised, rightly in my opinion for being made up an odd group of disparate fringe parties + the lib dems and some of the major parties, this unfortunately includes PPUK.

Whilst attaching our flag to the yes to AV group was valuable political experience for those involved on the ground, I'm concerned we jumped on the wrong bandwagon, which highlights how we must stick to areas we have mature knowledge on and established views or discussion.

I half agree and half disagree with you here Borgs. At the end of the day, our members voted for the Party to support Yes to AV and as such it is quite simple, the party was right to campaign for 'yes to AV' however I agree with you that perhaps we got carried away and jumped on the bandwagon without thinking things through.

[M2Ys4U]

I don't think things are that simple. The Yes campaign was badly run as a whole tbh, and most people recognise that as such. We could have been better utilised but my impression is that Yes thought we - and some other smaller parties - were a liability instead of harnessing out support.

At the end of the day, though, it was clear out membership supported a Yes vote, and there was only really one big yes campaign group - what else where we to do?

I fully support us putting issues like these - where there is a cause that is related to our core policies (electoral reform) but not specifically mentioned in them (AV) - to a membership vote. The mandate is with the membership, not the NEC.

[borgs8472]

I'm not suggesting the mandate be with the NEC, I say 'expert groups'.

[lhsi]

Would the 'expert groups' enforce their decisions on every member, or just put forward a recommendation? In this case, for example, if the expert group decided we should follow 'no to AV', but the members wanted to support 'yes to AV', what would the decision be? (I would say in the case of a disagreement that neither should be supported instead of choosing one, but that would be harder to do in something directly related to a core policy. Is electoral reform a core policy?).

I think it was a good thing that the party was involved in some campaigning for this, if anything just for more experience and insights into running/being part of the campaign.

[plooterman]

I'm still baffled as to why it was presented as the preferred alternative to the electorate.

Because it would fail - the Lib Dems were stitched up

[cabalamat]

I hope the failure of the yes to AV PPUK will lead to policies being decided by more expert groups, and fewer full member votes.

I disagree. I'm in favour of internal party democracy.

[korvalis]

I hope the failure of the yes to AV PPUK will lead to policies being decided by more expert groups, and fewer full member votes.

That's probably the best way of disenfranchising the membership, if the majority of members views are being ignored in the favour of those of the select few, they will get up and leave.

I'm all for 'expert groups' providing detailed information / sources (on both sides of an argument) for the membership to vote on.