Cameron tries to rubbish PR - how many false arguments can you spot?

The most powerful tool in our democracy is not the ballot box or the soap box. It's the packing box in the removal van in Downing Street. That's when you know your vote has led directly to the ousting of one government for another.

This is the great strength of the electoral system we have now: it's called first past the post and it means you can kick 'em out if you want to. That's why we need a general ­election as soon as possible.

This is real accountability, real ­democracy, real people power. So it is incredible that at a time when our entire political system is suffering a crisis of trust — when what we need more than anything is a radical redistribution of power from political elites to the man and woman on the street — members of the Cabinet are proposing to get rid of this system for one that is less accountable, less democratic and less open.

Proportional representation may sound like a fair and effective system but it's anything but. Let me explain. First it removes the link between one MP and one constituency. PR comes in many forms but more often than not you find yourself voting for a party rather than just one person.

Under our current ­system, when you put your pencil to the ballot paper you're putting your cross against someone's name — one person to represent your interests, to go to if you have a problem: one person whom you feel a direct link to. A move to faceless politics would sever this local link and damage voter engagement.

This Thursday in the European ­elections you won't be voting for an individual but for a political party in a massive sprawling regional constituency. PR has destroyed the link between voters and their MEP. The only people who have gained from this are the political parties who call the shots on drawing up the party lists.

The second problem with PR is that it gives smaller parties an unfair and disproportionate boost. This may sound good but what you'll find is that more often than not, PR turns politics into a beauty contest between various fringe parties — either peddling niche ­concerns or ugly extremist views.

This Thursday Britain votes in the European elections. If just eight per cent of the electorate votes for the BNP then as a result of the PR system that Labour forced on us, that party is guaranteed a seat in the European Parliament. Imagine the same thing happening in national government. Not only would the BNP get in — they would also wield influence out of all proportion to their numbers, for the simple fact that in coalition governments, it's the smaller parties that are the power brokers.

That feeds in to the third weakness of PR — so much of the evidence from abroad shows that it leads to weak, unstable governments. Between 1947 and 1993 Italy's parliament was voted in through a system of proportional representation. During that time the average government lasted just nine months. Why? Because when you force together a number of different parties, each with different outlooks, philosophies, priorities, you're bound to get indecision and division over decisive action and unity.

At a time when we're facing the greatest economic crisis in living memory, it's not in-fighting or compromise we need — it's clear leadership.
The fourth major problem with PR is that the coalition governments it ­inevitably creates inevitably descend into backroom deals that betray the will of the people. Instead of voters ­choosing their government on the basis of the manifestos put before them in an election, party managers put together a government that suits them after rounds of horse-trading and bargaining for power.

via thisislondon.co.uk

Posted via web from sunwalking's posterous