Referendums are a very un-British device.
Referendums are a very un-British device. They are, as Clement Attlee said, ‘alien to all our traditions’ of parliamentary democracy. Yet in 12 weeks’ time, we are to have the second nationwide plebiscite in our history. Unlike the 1975 vote on whether Britain should stay in the European Economic Community, this one will not exercise the nation. This year’s referendum will be on the alternative vote, a subject that only excites politics lecturers. But the AV vote could have just as profound an effect on our politics as the EEC referendum.
If the people chose alternative voting, Britain will be heading for an era of lowest-common-denominator politics. Parties will shy away from bold leaders who divide opinion. Instead, the electoral imperative will be to find leaders who alienate as few voters as possible. Butskellism — not Thatcherism — will be the order of the day.
Since 1950, the House of Commons has been elected by the first past the post system. We all know the drill. In every constituency, the candidate who polls the most votes wins. This has shaped the contours of our politics. MPs who are either loved or hated can, and do, win.
Under the alternative vote, the electorate is invited to rank candidates in order of preference. These votes are then tallied up. If no candidate has an absolute majority, the bottom candidate is eliminated and their votes redistributed. This process continues until someone has more than 50 per cent of the total.
By its very nature, this system rewards candidates who have broad but shallow appeal. Politicians who take firm stands on controversial issues will fare badly because people tend to rank them either first or last.
It is hard to predict what will happen in the referendum on 5 May because ‘the alternative vote’ is little understood.
Comments
Join the debate for just £1 a month
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for £3.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just £1 a monthAlready a subscriber? Log in