Brits: is there a serious chance Labour will pull a Francois Mitterand?

[Linus Van Pelt]

i.e. bring in a proportional voting system to stop a Tory majority. Normally this would have struck me as totally wild, but a couple of Labour ministers seem to have flirted with the idea, and a general mania for reform seems to be sweeping the country after the expenses fiasco. But it's hard to get a sense over here of how serious this is, so any input would be appreciated. If this actually happened, things would be interesting indeed.

[Verily]

It only works if they make the assumption that Lib Dem voters would prefer Labour to the Tories, while recent polling has suggested otherwise, that Lib Dems (narrowly, but consistently) favor the Conservatives over Labour. Which would basically guarantee that Labour does poorly in an STV system, although maybe not as badly as they might be walloped in FPTP. Certainly the Lib Dems would not prop up Labour if Labour fell into second place, either; think of Scotland 2007.

(MMP is not even being considered by anyone.)

[Silent Hunter]

Unlikely. Labour would do even worse under any form of PR.

[afleitch]

No. There is no time to push through any voting system before their term is up. If they tried, it would probably be seen for what it is; a desperate attempt to stop a slaughter and would probably worsen their position.

Labour are finished for at least 10 years. When the Tories were kicked out in '97 it was clear they would be out for at the very lest two terms (it has been three so far). Likewise in Scotland it is probably a certainty that the SNP will increase their representation and lock Labour out in 2011 for another 4 years. They also look set to loose their last 4 county councils in the local elections as well as a few hundred councillors.

Who will be left to lead Labour depends on who has a seat left, so the PR idea may be quietly ditched.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I suppose there's a small chance of a referendum on electoral reform on the same day as the next General Election, but that's not the same thing at all.

[Democratic Hawk]

Labour had its opportunity for sweeping constitutional reform including the electoral system - and they blew it . It could have all been accomplished in the 1997-2001 Parliament but no, they pissed around so much to the point the North East had its referendum on regional government against the backdrop of an unpopular foreign war (2004). Result: it went down in flames!

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Don't entirely disagree, but that isn't entirely fair. There was sweeping (and grossly overdue) constitutional reform in the 1997 Parliament, just not enough and not enough for England outside London. But politics is like that.

[afleitch]

Don't entirely disagree, but that isn't entirely fair. There was sweeping (and grossly overdue) constitutional reform in the 1997 Parliament, just not enough and not enough for England outside London. But politics is like that.

Constiutional reform has been broad...but perhaps not deep. The problem with politicians generating this is that they often create something that suits them. Scotland got an arrangement that was 20+ years in the making and influenced by the 1989 convention. Labour could have overplayed their hand here but they were bound, in spirit at least, to the convention blueprint published in 1995.

Now of course devolution seems to have tamed the SNP marginally (or rather government has tamed the SNP) while Labour is split between 'Westminster Labour' many of whom favour rescinding some devolved power and 'Holyrood Labour' who favour an extension of power (though tellingly less of an extension than the Tories now propose) This split within Scottish Labour is wideing and dangerous for the party, though I expect a few ousted MP's may make a dash for Holyrood in 2011

However there is no set course for the movement towards full fiscal autonomy and there probably won't be until after the next GE. An incoming Tory government, wishing to lance the 'English taxpayers pay for everything blah blah' ho-ha may push for it and the SNP up will certainly 'take' it given that.

I agree that England has been poorly catered to. If we federalised Britain, England is perhaps to diverse or simply too 'big' to be given a sole parliament (though there is no real objection to it not having one from my perspective) Catering to regional identity is a difficult road and could lead to artificial creations.

I feel further away from Westminster with each passing year. Okay so I work for Scottish Government! Even if I didn't, Scottish politics still has more of a 'pull' outside election time.

[Hash]

I thought this involved Labour having an illegitimate child and hiding it...

Or hiding a cancer, but that...

[big bad fab]

I thought this involved Labour having an illegitimate child and hiding it...

Or hiding a cancer, but that...

And let some counsellors kill themselves...
which would have been far closer to Labour practices (I mean, kill themselves politically speaking) !

[Antonio the Sixth]

i.e. bring in a proportional voting system to stop a Tory majority. Normally this would have struck me as totally wild, but a couple of Labour ministers seem to have flirted with the idea, and a general mania for reform seems to be sweeping the country after the expenses fiasco. But it's hard to get a sense over here of how serious this is, so any input would be appreciated. If this actually happened, things would be interesting indeed.

I am a strong supporter of Proportional Representation. No care of the purpose, it would be a good thing.