One year on: re-arranging the deckchairs

To mark the first anniversary of the Government's The Governance of Britain green paper on 3 July 2007, The Ministry of Justice published another document, Governance of Britain - one year on, on 3 July 2008. Perhaps unsurprisingly, there was no great fanfare or flourish to accompany the publication. After all, in the absence of any progress on that most important and urgent of all constitutional reforms, electoral reform, the Government has little to shout about. Let's hope that the Government's slightly shamefaced attitude to its publication is a sign that it is beginning to recognize that constitutional reform without electoral reform is just another rearrangement of the deckchairs on The Titanic and that more radical action is needed to save the ship

STV Action commented yesterday:

• "What is the Government doing about [the way the legislature is elected and the Government chosen]? Nothing!"
• What is the point of giving more power to a parliament that is not truly representative of, or accountable to, the nation?"

STV Action also reminds its readers that the Government had claimed in January that it welcomed contributions to the electoral reform debate and accuses it of failing to encourage debate.

Please visit http://www.stvaction.org.uk/?q=node/275 for more details.

The Electoral Reform Society commented yesterday:

• "The British public have had to make do with evasion, subterfuge and back pedalling."
• "Weekend voting is merely a diversion. It’s not when you vote, but how you vote, and just what sort of government that it produces."
• "One year on: We are still waiting for substance."

Please visit http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/news.php?ex=0&nid=158 for more details.

80 years on: still not many women in parliament
2 July 2008 was the 80th anniversary of votes for women on the same basis as men, but they are still only a small proportion of MPs. However, the lack of women in Parliament is not a disease in itself, but merely a symptom that we have an unrepresentative voting system. Quotas and all-women short lists would hide the symptom but not cure the disease; it might even make it worse by covering up the problem.

One problem now is that most constituencies cannot elect a woman even of they would like to; either all the candidates are men or the only candidates with a realistic chance of winning (rarely more than two and most often only one) are men. All-women short lists with the present voting system would simply mean some constituencies would still be able to elect only men while others could elect only women. Although this would increase the number of women MPs, it would do nothing to increase voter choice or ensure voters could elect the candidates they wanted.

In practice, it is unlikely that many voters want to elect a man for being a man or a woman for being a woman; they just want good constituency MPs of their own political views. STV is the best way to achieve this, it would also encourage parties to nominate more women and members of other under-represented groups and it would enable voters to elect them if they wished.