LD questions over Government's Strategy For Elections
In the last week before the UK parliamentary recess, the Government published its Strategy for Elections, its plan to protect our democracy. Liberal Democrat MPs questioned the lack of ambition and lamented a wasted opportunity for truly fair elections.
For instance, Tom Gordon, LD MP for Harrogate and Knaresborough, asked the minister to explain why there should be a difference between electing a mayor and electing an MP:
Could the Minister explain why there is a difference between Westminster elections and combined mayoral elections? We know that the majority of the British public want to see the scrapping of first past the post, and we know [...] that the majority of Members in this place want to see the scrapping of first past the post [...] So why is there a difference between the different types of elections?
Tom Gordon, LD MP
Rushanara Ali, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, responded that the government believed that the supplementary voting system is "more appropriate for selecting single-person executives." At LDER, we believe that the most appropriate voting system is the fairest voting system and it is disappointing that the government is unable to recognise this.
Sarah Olney, MP for Richmond Park, questioned the lack of ambition in the measures:
I am concerned that the strategy shows nowhere near the kind of ambition that we need to fix a system of elections that has left large swathes of the public feeling like their vote simply does not count. [Last] year’s general election turned out the most disproportionate result in history, with nearly 60% of people who voted not represented in Parliament by the candidate they voted for. Will [the government] finally scrap first past the post and introduce fair votes via proportional representation?
Sarah Olney, LD MP
The government's response was blunt and inflexible: "The Government have no plans to change the electoral system for UK parliamentary and local elections."
While we welcome many of the government's measures, including plans to stop the corrosive effects of illegal and non-transparent money in our political system, their plan fails to address the obvious and most important issue: fair elections require fair votes.