The Alternative Vote Christopher Hollis Mexico: 1962 Antonio et rniendariz
Aldermaston 'Liberal Christian'
Polymorphs for Passengers Sir Harry Legge-Bourke, MP
Trading with the Enemy Constantine Fitz Gibbon Window Boxes Ray Ellis Profits in the New Capitalism B. C. Clauson Martians Bearing Bursaries Tyrrell Burgess Last of the Viceroys Philip Mason
THE ALTERNATIVE VOTE
sane person would make any confident Prophecy about a general election eighteen months or two years ahead. The unforeseeable is only too likely to break in to upset all calculations. Yet two prophecies are abroad in the air today and both of them are plausible enough. The one is that, with the Liberals polling perhaps not quite as well as they are doing today but a great deal better than they have ever done since the war and taking two votes ,fl'om the Conservatives for every one that they take !rom the Socialists, the Socialists are likely to get In with a minority of votes but a majority of seats. The other is that the election will be fought on the Common Market. Even if the Government and the present House of Commons should have taken a decision before then, we clearly can have no effective membership of the Common Market if the electorate should see fit to repudiate it. Whatever little local difficulties' may bulk large in voters' minds. the Common Market will in fact be incom- parably the most important issue of the moment. It is reasonable to deduce from Mr. Macmillan's Stockton and American speeches that be is now confident that he will get terms which he can recom- mend as acceptable. The signs are that the Socialists Will decide that the guarantees for the Common- wealth and for agriculture are insufficient, and the election will be fought out on the issue whether on balance we do right to accept the bargain or not. Individual dissidents—a Sir Derek Walker-Smith on the one side or a Mr. Roy Jenkins on the other —will be somewhat embarrassed to know how to fit themselves into such a pattern. But such problems will be personal problems. That, in all probability, iS the way that the pattern will be. I myself, I will confess, happen to be a strong supporter of the Common Market, but I am not here concerned to argue the merits. I am concerned with facts. All the polls seem to show that a major- itY of the electors, rightly or wrongly, favour the Common Market. Yet the likelihood is that, owing to our curious electoral system, the majority of Pro-Common Market candidates will be defeated. ,"11; whatever secondary differences there may be Detvveen them about how negotiations should have been managed, the basic fact is that both the Con- servatives and the Liberals are for the Common Market, and it is almost a mathematical proposition that, if, out of three parties, two have the same Policy, the third with the differing policy wins the majority of the seats.
No one can seriously pretend that our electoral
system is either democratic or equitable. Obviously e,I ere are and always have been, very many of the , lectors who dislike both the main parties, but we Sp an electoral system which is effectively designed 4° as to prevent such electors from ever getting
any representation. Critics of the system denounce this as an evil purpose of the party machines. Its supporters say that the two-party system is a good system and ensures stability of government. We need not at the moment decide which in general is right. The point to make is that, whereas up till now the present electoral system has greatly benefited the Conservatives, it is very doubtful whether it will benefit them in the future. It is likely enough to put into power against the will of the people a Socialist Government who will prevent our entry into the Common Market.
Is there any way in which that can be avoided?
A pact between the Liberals and the Conserva- tives in which the party managers agreed to allow one another's candidates free runs in selected con- stituencies is clearly out of the question. What- ever else the polls may show, they always show that there is no party which commands the support of a clear majority of the electorate. We may therefore deduce that, if a full system of propor- tional representation were introduced, we should get a House of Commons in which no party had a majority, but, whether desirable or not, there is no possibility of the introduction of such a system be- fore the general election. But the alternative vote is a much simpler matter. A Bill for it could be introduced without any redrawing of the constitu- encies. The outcome of an election fought on such a system no one can certainly know, but we can at any rate say what is likely. There are likely to be a number of constituencies in which the Socialist is comfortably ahead of the Liberal and the Con- servative but polls substantially less than the Liberal and the Conservative combined. If which-• ever is the less popular of these two is eliminated, it is reasonable to suppose that a fair majority of Liberal votes would be transferred to the Con- servative and a substantial majority of Conserva- tive votes would be transferred to the Liberal and that in some cases the Socialist candi- date would be defeated. It is likely that, if the country was pro-Common Market under such a system, a pro-Common Market Parliament would be returned, or, if in spite of the electoral reform the Socialists still won, it would at any rate prove that in repudiating the Common Market they spoke for the majority of the electorate, which would be a great deal less unsatisfactory than a repudiation after a victory won by a mere psephologtcal accident.
Previous page
