Home » Posts tagged 'progress'
Tag Archives: progress
Survey Results: If the Liberal Democrats want AV, they should ditch Nick Clegg?
23 people completed my AV survey last night in the space of two hours. Only people intending to vote Labour were invited to complete this short survey online. I offered this survey, as I have not made up my mind about AV. All respondents to the survey were given an explanation of what the AV system is. The United Kingdom Alternative Vote referendum is a planned UK referendum on whether to adopt the Alternative Vote (AV) electoral system for electing Members of Parliament (MPs) to the House of Commons. The referendum is planned to take place on 5 May 2011, having been agreed as part of the Coalition, and put before parliament in July 2010 as part of the Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill.
The history behind this, for Labour, is that we have historically been in favour of AV, so any U-turn on this may be in danger of being interpreted as political opportunism. It was an election manifesto commitment of Labour in 2010, and Gordon Brown was in support of AV. Nick Clegg is obviously behind electoral reform in some form, but is famous for being an advocate of PR. At the time of writing, the Labour think-tanks, the Fabian Society, Compass and Progress support AV. They are supported by the Electoral Reform Group.
I have witnessed on Twitter approximately an equal number of people in favour of AV as those who are opposed. Complementary to this, there was an even split in my poll results; 52% before completing the survey said that they would say ‘YES to AV’, and this proportion remained unchanged at the end of the poll. Interestingly, a huge proportion (72%) said that they would not be influenced by any campaigning. However, 65% said that they felt that the AV referendum was not a top political priority given recent political events, albeit the survey did not state any provide any details of these events. 74% felt that any official party line by Labour would not influence the voting choice for the respondent. 52% would not be worried if AV encouraged a coalition-style of government, and indeed the vast majority (72%) believed that Britain should have a coalition-style of government. However, a very high proportion (82%) felt that ‘coalitions break promises’, but worrying over half of respondents would consider voting ‘NO to AV’ if Nick Clegg remained Leader of the Liberal Democrats.
67% of voters felt that AV did not penalize extremist parties, and about half of the sample agreed that it eliminated the need for tactical voting (52%). The voters did agree with two major reasons usually given for voting ‘YES to AV’ including ‘the Alternative Vote is a fairer and more democratic way of electing our parliament’ (62%), and ‘it retains the same constituencies, meaning no need to redraw boundaries, and no overt erosion of the constituency-MP link’ (71%), and, more importantly, they felt that these factors matter.
The outcome of this very small study amongst Labour voters is that they don’t feel that there should be an official party line on this, and that they wouldn’t be influenced by any campaigning in any case. There was about a 50/50 split in those in favour of AV, and people did agree with the traditional reasons given for voting ‘YES to AV’. Intriguingly, this small sample suggests the Labour HQ should allow a free vote amongst the MPs. This would make sense for three reasons: if the country votes NO and the Labour Party vote YES, it could look as if Labour is ‘out-of-touch’, Labour HQ should be seen to trust its MPs, and, perhaps most relevantly, this vote is not supposed to be a ‘political issue’. Interestingly Labour voters would be more inclined to vote ‘NO to AV’ if Nick Clegg remained as leader. This suggests perhaps that if the LDs want AV the should ditch Nick Clegg. How ironic would that be…
Shibley Rahman on Ed Miliband's Labour
Ed Miliband’s Labour has to move beyond New Labour and commit to changes in policy and organisation as profound as those introduced by Tony Blair in 1994.
I would like to see 50p tax rate remain for those earning more than £150,000 – I would like to see it permanent, especially in this age of austerity, as a way of creating greater equality in Britain. When I met Ed Miliband for the first time in his primary school at Haverstock Hill, I had a photograph taken with him. During this smile, I said to him, “Did you know that in Tony Blair’s “The Journey”, the words inequality and poverty don’t appear once in the index?” He continued smiling, in a way that reminded me of my first ever supervisor at Cambridge, Prof Simon Baron-Cohen, and grinned, “No, really!” Labour has to be much stronger on issues of inequality and poverty, to regain the moral ground. It needs to win the hearts of England, let alone Middle England, and the legacy of an increasing inequality gap in Britain is one which I am deeply ashamed of as a English Labour member. The people who are described as the ‘wealth creators’ are also the people making money out of speculating on money inter alia, creating nothing of any artistic or scientific merit for this country, and to a large extent created the mess that the poor are now paying for. This is truly obscene. Actually, it was at this point I decided that I would vote for Ed Miliband as leader of my Party.
A policy review will be conducted including commissioned work by independent thinktanks and studies by each shadow cabinet member on the issues in their field. Ed Miliband is starting with new policies, but the same values. This is brilliant news – as it to some extent obviates the inefficient and ineffective policy formation groups of the antiquated Labour machinery. As a member of the Fabian Society, Progress and Compass, I warmly embrace this challenge, as we build our new policies addressing people’s aspirations, but recognizing that their expectations and hopes are threatened by insecurities. These insecurities are across a diverse areas of society issues, including housing, immigration, of course, the public services, the bedrock of Britain, what makes Britain special, and the heart of Britain’s infrastructure.
The changes proposed by Ed Miliband will indeed be substantial as the world itself has changed massively, and Labour did not change massively. I believe strongly it needs to have a clear idea as to whether it agrees with the commodification and marketisation of British life at all. David Cameron despite enormous backing patently did not win the last general election because he didn’t undertake the profound change he needed. What he has performed is a hatchet salvage operation, which does nothing to paper over the cracks surrounding Europe, for one. I am not even convinced that New Labour was in the right place at the right time even then, apart from being an antedote to Margaret Thatcher. Labour has indeed embarked on an intellectual and practical journey, but every long journey has to start with its smallest initial steps.
Ed Miliband furthermore says he does not want union levy payers disenfranchised from the Labour party elections, but is happy to look at how the relationship could be reformed. He once said publicly in a meeting which I attended that he didn’t want the Union to be seen as Labour’s evil uncle that we needed to lock in the attack whenever visited. The reasoning for this is clear – you don’t have to be a member of Labour to be a member of a Union, Labour was born out of the Unions and we have a proud history together, and the Unions represent the part of the business and industry that is interested in ethical action, not necessarily shareholder profit at all costs.
I will be supporting him all the way. Ed Miliband is full of surprises, and there’s a remarkable combination of focus and unpredictability in him I very much respect.
Dr Shibley Rahman Queen’s Scholar BA MA MB BChir MRCP(UK) PhD FRSA LLB(Hons)
A view point from Timothee Defaramond as to why David Miliband should be leader
Many thanks to Timothee Defamond for the account below of why voters should strongly consider putting David Miliband down as their no.1 choice for the Labour leadership.
There is one thing that David Miliband doesn’t seem to get nearly enough credit for – his radicalism. And yet it is this very radicalism that makes him the right person to take Labour forward, not only to the next election, but beyond that too. David is the candidate with the vision and ideas that can make Labour once again a party sure of purpose and clear about its priorities, a candidate that can give serious meaning to the left in Britain, and go beyond opposing the coalition’s unfair cuts.
One of the cornerstones of the Labour movement is the idea of equality. But what does equality mean for our society today, and why do we seek to achieve it? In many of these speeches David has tackled this head on. At the heart of our belief in equality is that idea that we should all have the ability to lead a life that we can authentically call our own. To achieve this individuals need power – and empowering individuals and communities is what should be at the core of our commitment to reducing inequalities. Furthermore, it means allowing individuals control over the public services they receive. That is the opposite of the top-down Labour state some party members have come to fear. Finally, we need to remember that we all have a stake in the success of the lives of each other, and that we’ll get the best results through cooperation rather than competition. David’s ideas are incredibly powerful, and putting them at the heart of policy making will make Labour the party that wins the next election.
David is also radical in his approach to the party. He promises to transform it to build “a movement not a machine”. For too long we have ignored the grassroots of the party and as a result lost touch with the very people we are representing. David promises to buck this trend by putting the leader of Labour’s councillors in the shadow cabinet. Furthermore, through the Movement for Change, David wants to allow Labour to be more involved in communities through community organising. Over 700 community organisers have already been trained as part of the Movement for Change, and their successes already show that the Labour movement can be effective even when the party is out of power.
All five candidates in this election are strong, and all will have a bearing on the future of the party. A Yougov poll this week showed David as the public’s favourite choice by far to replace David Cameron. Whatever happens to the coalition, we must be ready to persuade the country it is in their interests to vote Labour, and only one candidate can achieve this: David Miliband.
