PR is not the solution

This morning's Times has an article by Alan Johnson on the need for Proportional Representation. Some are seeing this as an attempt by Johnson to line himself up for the leadership after the wipeout on 4th June, which it possibly is. As fascinating as that prospect is, the PR question is bigger in the long term.

The argument for 'fair votes' is a rallying cry for every small party in politics, and it's quite obvious why. The smaller parties would get a greater number of seats in parliament, for instance the Lib Dems would be looking at something like an extra 50 seats, parties like the Green Party and UKIP would probably get representation in parliament for the first time (I'm going to ignore Bob Spink - as most of us should). But this would also let the BNP get some MPs, not a prospect we should be welcoming!

There is an even bigger reason why the Lib Dems yearn for PR, which is why they make it a condition for an electoral pact, and that it because it would make them the permanent power brokers in this land. The Earl of Warwick in the Wars of the Roses was the most powerful of the political class in the 15th century, commanding a large army. Whomever he supported would be made King, hence it switched from King Henry VI to Edward IV, to Henry VI and finally back to Edward IV. The Lib Dems want that power now.

If you look at all the general elections of recent times, if elected by purely proportional means, no party would have formed a majority as no party would have over 50% of the votes. This would have meant that the Lib Dems would have been in Government for all that time, switching at their whim whichever larger party would be in Government. Probably, for most of the time, the Lib Dems would follow the prevailing wind and do what the people wanted, but there again maybe not. What if Nick Clegg had a close personal friendship with Gordon Brown, maybe he would not be able to breakaway from the coalition and we would be stuck with him for years.

It is such a scenario which means that I support First Past The Post (FPTP). Take those general election results again, I think that we got the decided verdict of the electorate in each case. In 1997, the Labour party thoroughly deserved their landslide, in a PR world they would have had to form a coalition! It would have been perverse.

Another reason against PR, is that the manifestos put forward at election time mean nothing once the the PR-based election bargaining starts when parties try to form coalitions. Policies are thrown out, watered down and neutered. Not what the public wanted at all. If there was real principle at all, they would form their pact first, thrash out a manifesto and put that to the public - and that could work in a FPTP world.

Of course, pure PR is not being considered by Alan Johnson, other forms such as the Single Transferable Vote and Alternative vote plus would maybe increase the number of possible majority Governments, but in many cases we won't. Although we're living with a ditherer now, we would have permanent dithering built into the electoral system.

Finally, now is not the time. Some people say it's the perfect time, but making major decisions on our democracy on the back of a crisis is wrong. We need time to consider, rushed legislation like the dangerous dogs act leads to bad legislation. And this Government has come up with some of worst legislation (not in intent, but unexpected consequences) of all time. So let's save this debate for a quieter time.

Squiffy.