I can only assume John Reid feels really, really strongly about AV to risk the inevitable opprobrium from some quarters for sharing a platform with David Cameron.
In common with a lot of people, I cannot claim to feel that much fire in my belly either way, but I have to say the nature of the No campaign is leading me towards a Yes vote.
It says something for how personality driven our politics has become that so much of the coverage has focused on the implications for Cameron, fighting for a No vote, and for Nick Clegg, who is campaigning for Yes.
Of the three main party leaders, Ed Miliband strikes me as the only one who has actually made arguments that speak to the issue. Cameron has ventilated a milder version of the crazy scare stories peddled by the No campaign, whilst Clegg sees it as a lifeline to what remains of his credibility.
It would not be unhelpful to Labour for Clegg to lose on this, but Ed has decided the issue is more important than the narrow political interest, and is to be commended for so doing.
Compare and contrast the role of The Sun newspaper in Scotland, backing the SNP in the upcoming elections, because Cameron would rather have Alex Salmond as first minister, rather than Labour leader Iain Gray.
As I said when I blogged on this a while back, as the signs of support for the SNP were all around, the paper nationally is passionately pro Union. But that principle wears quickly thin.
I remain unconvinced their backing will help the SNP that much. I should also tell John Reid that I spoke last night to two people who said they had switched from No and Don’t know to Yes on AV on the back of his event with DC. I acknowledge that both are Rangers fans. Democracy works in odd ways.
29 Comments
Leave a reply
My Latest Book
But What Can I Do?
Why politics has gone so wrong, and how you can help fix it
by
Alastair Campbell
"Your country needs you. Your world needs you. Your time is now."
Our politics is a mess. We have leaders who can't or shouldn't be allowed to lead. We endure governments that lie, and seek to undermine our democratic values. And we are confronted with policies that serve the interests of the privileged few. It's no surprise that so many of us feel frustrated, let down and drawn to ask, 'But what can I do?' That question is the inspiration behind this book. It's a question regularly posed to Alastair Campbell, not least in reaction to The Rest is Politics, the chart-topping podcast he presents with former Tory Cabinet minister Rory Stewart. His answer, typically, is forthright and impassioned. We cannot afford to stand on the sidelines. If we think things need to change, then we need to change them, and that means getting involved. But What Can I Do? provides each of us with the motivation and the tools to make a difference. Opening with an acute analysis of our polarised world and the populists and extremists who have shaped it, it goes on to show how we help transform it. It explains how we can develop our skills of advocacy and persuasion. It draws on Alastair’s long experience, as well as on role models and lessons from history, to offer practical tips on starting and leading a campaign. It offers advice on developing confidence and coping with criticism and setbacks. And it sets out the practical steps by which we can become political players ourselves. Part call to arms, part practical handbook, But What Can I Do? will prove required reading for anyone who wants to help change things for the better.
“..implications for Cameron, fighting for a No vote, and for Nick Clegg, who is campaigning for No.”
Don’t know if that’s an intentional error.
True though.
Both campaigns have been truly awful
I think you’re spot on with this blog, Alastair. I’m actually in favour of AV, but like you won’t lose too much sleep if it goes the other way. You’re so right that it is personal, and right to applaud Ed Miliband’s principled stance. I’m kind of sorry to say it, but I think the fact that Clegg is supporting the YES vote is probably enough to persuade a huge number of voters to go for NO. It shouldn’t be that way – but it is. Only good thing to come out of that will be that Clegg no longer has any excuse for staying in the Tory camp and hopefully will be forced out of the party.
Cameron and Reid just looked…odd. A bit like when Mike Huckabee rolled out the support of Chuck Norris during the US primaries.
I doubt either conference made that much difference overall. Miliband rather curdled the cross-part unity on show with his dig at Nick Clegg. And as for Vince Cable stating that under FPTP Ann Widdicombe would have won Strictly Come Dancing… Seriously, what the f*@k what was he going on about the mad old fool!
Personally I don’t like AV. I like the winner to be the winner. To have somebody win a seat who may be nobodies first choice will create more problems than it solves. And who wants to win off the back of a load of second or third preferences anyways. They’ll be ripped to shreds from the minute they take to the podium for their acceptance speech.
Nope. I want Neil Armstrong speaking for me, not Buzz Aldrin.
I would vote for PR but so would many others which, I guess is why the referendum is instead on AV. It is a symbol of DC’s power in the coalition and of how he says one thing but does another. I could not bear either Cameron or Clegg to win, but as both can’t lose I will vote yes hoping to send a message to Cameron and more importantly to undermine his position.
From my distant viewpoint (Japan), Ed Miliband seems to be a thoughtful and principled leader of the opposition. I’m not sure that this will get him to number !0, though.
Agreed. Negative campaigning should be outlawed. It says nothing about the merits of one system to tarnish the other.
Ach, so what if he did. Hope the YES will pull through though.
We will have to remember Reid here as some Galloway character, feeding to the hysterical masses of life. That is all have to say on Reid, the drama political queen!
Usual biased drivel, but no, Reid hasn’t shifted votes to the Yes campaign. AV is such a poor alternative that it will nver be accepted. The electorate should of been offered a proper choice which included full PR.
How dispiriting that people would make up their minds on the referendum based on their footballing loyalties.
I guess in the old days you’d just have done this as briefing in the shadows – at least you’re coming out these days. lol
I enjoy what you write, Alastair, but let’s be honest, you’re just trotting out the party line there by saying Ed Miliband is the only one making the real arguments. The fact is that Ed Miliband could simply sit on the fence on this issue, or flip a coin, or even not bother turning up to vote and he’s still escape all media scrutiny. When Miliband makes it *ehem* “VERY clear that this is NOT a referendum on Clegg” he knows very well that it is. He’s getting a total pass on the issue because of it.
I believe the Alternative vote is indeed a “miserable little compromise” but I have to say that the best argument I’ve heard from the yes campaign is that it makes politicians look for points of common agreement rather than constantly touting the negatives and the differences. I want to say it was Chris Huhne who came up with that one? I could be wrong. Either way, while it’s a solid argument, It’s not compelling enough to change the status quo. Nevertheless I will continue to enjoy the unfolding dogfight between the Liberals and Tories!
In fairness I think some LibDems are making the real arguments as well as Ed Miliband, but Team Cameron is just trying to stifle any real arguments. I doubt if David Cameron ever had a ‘gut feeling’ in his life, but a lot of his supporters have little else, especially the Sun and Daily Mail readership. I’ll be voting AV in May but I’m resigned to a victory for FPTP, another feather in Cameron’s cap and another blow to the LibDems. I think Nick Clegg’s resigned to it too, though he’ll never admit it in public. He’s just sold his four-bedroomed house in a posh area of Sheffield and is moving into a rented, two-bedroomed flat in Stannington, which is not at all posh. He’s getting ready for off – though of course as an opportunist, lying politician he claims to be downsizing to set an example to other expense-grabbing MPs.
It’s just over a hundred years since Robert Tressell died, author of that excellent novel of working class life, ‘The Ragged-Trousered Philanthropists’. The grinding level of poverty described in that Edwardian novel has mostly gone in the UK – though poverty, as always, is relative – but Tressell was mostly concerned about the attitudes of the people suffering from poverty, particularly how they philanthropically keep their exploiters in luxury while they go without, and how they give short shrift to thinking people – the dreaded socialists – who criticise and try to change the system which is creating the poverty.
Those attitudes persist and it is at the ‘gut feelings’ of people with those attitudes that Team Cameron is cynically aiming. They’ll give him his victory, either by voting for the status quo or not voting at all. And then Team Cameron will happily proceed to screw them for all they’re worth. Cameron may even go for an early General Election before that silly five-year, fixed-term parliament system comes onto steam.
Goodness me. You think that only ‘Ed’ has actually made arguments that speak to the issue. Well well well.
Come on Ali – give Cameron a bloody nose by encouraging a yes vote. It’ll be the West Lothian question…in Spades, if it happens!
Anybody heard of the expression “Thieves falling out”?
I suppose I shouldn’t still be amazed by your amazingly biased reporting on things but i am disappointed. According to you, Milliband is the only politician to have made arguments on the issue whilst, of course, Cameron is completely scaremongering and Clegg doesn’t count.
In point of fact all three have made their own reasoned arguments for their positions and all credit to John Reid for putting aside party politics and personal distaste to make a point he sincerely believes in.
As for your absurd slur that The Sun is backing SNP to support Cameron – beyond parody!
This commentary does you absolutely no credit and undermines what little credibility you have left.
I think AV is a fairer system. The ‘first past’ brings about a lot of wastage of votes. It can bring about a less popular in government (this has happened – see 1951 and 1974). With AV that could happen also, but the chances are very slim. Why should that be in the country that boasts of having introduced the modern concept of parliamentary democracy in the world? Either Britain practices democracy or it does not. Also, why has Britain imposed proportional representation in most (if not all) of its former colonies prior to independence? Because the powers that be in Westminster have always known that that is fairer and the real test of democracy in a free election, but these same politicians can’t stomach having that electoral system in their own backyard because that would upset their status quo (and possible hold on power). This is a very shortsighted view of things and I congratulate Ed Milliband for rising above that narrow sentiment despite the obvious advantages of seeing Nick Clegg humiliated and the Social Democrats in disarray if they lose the referendum by a wide margin of votes (as seems to be the case) .
In point of fact, Chris, Cameron’s ‘gut feeling’ about AV can hardly be categorised as ‘reasoned argument’, not even by you. In point of fact it is a means of stopping ‘reasoned argument’ by appealing to vague ‘gut feelings’. In point of fact people have ‘gut feelings’ about all sorts of things – capital punishment, immigration, mental illness, unemployment, female and gay clergy, etc. In point of fact ‘gut feeling’ is not something that should be appealed to by responsible, mature politicians.
Ah, I was wondering when Mr Campbell’s loyal defender would turn up. If you actually read my comment you would realise I didn’t claim Cameron had a gut feeling. This comment was about Campbell, not Cameron.
If you read a few past posts you might notice that I have disagreed with Mr Campbell on some points. One was the high-speed rail link across Buckinghamshire. I quote from your post:
‘In point of fact all three have made their own reasoned arguments for their positions’.
I think ‘all three’ includes Mr Cameron, who has recently talked about his ‘gut feeling’ in relation to AV and FPTP.
Dave, have a look at the Times leader today (oh I know, it doesn’t count because it’s a Murdoch rag) If you haven’t got a quid let me know and I’ll tell you what it says.
Thanks for the offer of the quid Chris – I’ll take you up on it sometime. I have access to the ‘Times’ most days and usually enjoy the ‘Letters’ page most. It’s the only daily newspaper I do read. Perhaps perversely I prefer it to the ‘Independent’ and the ‘Guardian’. I can’t stomach Daniel Finkelstein and Matthew Paris, but I did like the article on Eurozone debt as a percentage of GDP which was published in the ‘Times’ on Monday 15th November 2010. It showed that the UK figure, 76.6%, was close to that of Germany on 75.3% and not as bad as France (84.1%), not to mention the Irish Republic (93.6%), Portugal (83.1%), Belgium (100%), Italy (118.3%) and Greece (130.2%). And the Tory-led coalition keeps telling us that the UK is worse off than any other European country. Do look up this article. The ‘Times’ is certainly part of Murdoch’s News International but I wouldn’t call it a ‘rag’. I’ve seen the ‘Times’ leader today, but thanks for drawing my attention to it.
SG says: “no, Reid hasn’t shifted votes to the Yes campaign.” That’s remarkable awareness by you. Can I have the secret of how you know the views of the entire electorate and can make sweeping statements like that? Awesome.
Agreed but I think in very different ways. Yes campaign inept. Why did they spend so much time trying to nail donors to No, and why have they been so leaden-footed in responding to No scare stories? But No campaign truly shocking, most dishonest political campaign in my lifetime in UK (I’m in 50s). Lie after lie after lie – eg voting machines, AV helps BNP, Australian use of AV. And treating voters like idiots – AV complicated!
I was also undecided but decided I would definitely vote YES after John Reid’s performance and also after reading the leaflet that came through our door from the No campaign which I thought was scandalous and vicious. As Ed Milliband said this vote is more than just about personalities.
So who in your opinion would suffer most if they lost, Cameron or clegg, and why doesn’t Ed Milliband attack them more on this to open a division that is already present, is this because he would rather not push to hard and potentially force a spilt and the possibility of another election and is waiting for them to deal with the financial circumstances, if so it is a huge disappointment for labour supporters who see a potentially weak coalition who are acting far to aggressively with the deficit and undoing much of the good work that labour achieved, for example reading this week ref waiting at their longest an years, a sign of things to come with Cameron “the nhs is safe in my hands” umm I don’t think so
With so many Australians in the UK (and those new devices we have available these days known as the ‘telephone’ and the ‘internet’), it seems strange to me that in all the media analysis, debate and hyperbolic discussions about AV in recent months nobody has thought to ask a panel of ordinary Australians if AV works for them and how they feel about it.
Forget the major political parties (whose opinion is inevitably caught up in the point-scoring and personalities of the domestic political situation). I’d rather hear what the bartenders of Earl’s Court think than get bold predictions from Brits who, by definition, have no experience with the system.
As an aside, I saw some MP on TV yesterday claiming that “most Australians are against it”. That’s patently untrue, and AV (or ‘preferential voting’ as they call it) is not regarded as a dangerous or radical proposal to them at all.
A bit late I know but could someone tell me whether AV will benefit Labour in terms of winning more seats and gaining a majority. As a Labour supporter I’ve been thinking about it and I’m not too sure.
On the one hand Labour benefit enormously from FPTP; it’s clear from the 2005 election where we won only 35.2% of the popular vote, yet established a 66 seat majority. Even in 2010, we managed to get 258 seats with just 29% popular support.
But then again would Labour gains more seats from AV? Britain leans to the left and there is a large anti Tory movement here. Most Lib Dem and Green Supporters would put Labour as their second choice ahead of the Tories, who’d probably be in last place (or penultimate if the BNP are standing) . So that suggests that Labour would benefit in tighter constituencies where Lib Dem support may gain them the seat.
My natural instincts are against AV, as I believe in strong governments to get things done and AV is a step towards PR which I strongly oppose, but if AV would benefit the Labour party I’ll be willing to vote for it. Someone at party HQ needs to do a report asap.