The AV referendum bill should stand alone – not shoehorned in with boundary changes

RT @leftfootfwd The AV referendum bill should stand alone – not shoehorned in with boundary changes http://bit.ly/bieAXu

Hear, bloody hear! RT @leftfootfwd: The AV referendum bill should stand alone – not shoehorned in with boundary changes http://bit.ly/bieAXu

RT @leftfootfwd: The AV referendum bill should stand alone – not shoehorned in with boundary changes http://bit.ly/bieAXu

Absolutely. RT @leftfootfwd: The AV referendum bill should stand alone – not shoehorned in with boundary changes http://bit.ly/bieAXu

Very fair- I agree RT @leftfootfwd: The AV referendum bill should stand alone – not shoehorned in with boundary changes http://bit.ly/bieAXu

RT @theday2day: Hear Hear! RT @leftfootfwd: The AV referendum bill should stand alone – not shoehorned in with boundary changes http://bit.ly/bieAXu

RT @leftfootfwd: The AV referendum bill should stand alone – not shoehorned in with boundary changes http://bit.ly/bieAXu

From @leftfootfwd: The AV referendum bill should stand alone – not shoehorned in with boundary changes http://bit.ly/bieAXu

RT @leftfootfwd: The AV referendum bill should stand alone – not shoehorned in with boundary changes http://bit.ly/bieAXu

Opinion: The AV bill should be split from boundary changes, its unnecessary and divisive to combine http://bit.ly/bieAXu #takeitback

RT @leftfootfwd: The AV referendum bill should stand alone – not shoehorned in with boundary changes http://bit.ly/bieAXu

RT @leftfootfwd: The AV referendum bill should stand alone – not shoehorned in with boundary changes http://bit.ly/bieAXu

RT @takeback2010: Opinion: The AV bill should be split from boundary changes, its unnecessary and divisive to combine http://bit.ly/bieAXu #takeitback

Important piece from Andy May of @TakeBack2010 on why boundary changes should be separate from the AV Bill http://bit.ly/bieAXu

RT @wdjstraw: Important piece from Andy May of @TakeBack2010 on why boundary changes should be separate from the AV Bill http://bit.ly/bieAXu

I’m sorry but this is just fantasy.

If the Bill gets split the Tories won’t support the AV referendum. That’s 47% of MPs voting against, with the very odd exception.

There’s also a significant minority of Labour MPs who are against changing from FPTP. While they shouldn’t rebel given their manifesto commitment, if they think it can be defeated that may tempt many of them to vote against.

A standalone AV referendum bill is highly risky.

Split the bill now! RT @leftfootfwd: AV referendum bill should not be shoehorned in with boundary changes http://bit.ly/bieAXu

RT @leftfootfwd: The AV referendum bill should stand alone – not shoehorned in with boundary changes http://bit.ly/bieAXu

RT @jruddy99: Split the bill now! RT @leftfootfwd: AV referendum bill should not be shoehorned in with boundary changes http://bit.ly/bieAXu

RT @wdjstraw: Important piece from Andy May of @TakeBack2010 on why boundary changes should be separate from AV Bill http://bit.ly/bieAXu

RT @wdjstraw: Important piece from Andy May of @TakeBack2010 on why boundary changes should be separate from AV Bill http://bit.ly/bieAXu

RT @wdjstraw: Important piece from Andy May of @TakeBack2010 on why boundary changes should be separate from the AV Bill http://bit.ly/bieAXu

RT @wdjstraw: Important piece from Andy May of @TakeBack2010 on why boundary changes should be separate from the AV Bill http://bit.ly/bieAXu

.@TakeBack2010 see the need for AV to be separate from gerrymandering. Are you listening @Nick_Clegg? http://bit.ly/bieAXu #condem

RT @leftfootfwd: The AV referendum bill should stand alone – not shoehorned in with boundary changes http://bit.ly/bieAXu

@Duncan Scott
Just because the bill gets split doesn’t mean it’s a free vote. The Tories would still be whipped to vote for it, as it is part of the coalition agreement. So you’ve got all Lib Dems, most Labour and the majority of the Tories who aren’t rebelling.

RT @takeback2010: Opinion: The AV bill should be split from boundary changes, its unnecessary and divisive to combine http://bit.ly/bieAXu #takeitback

Duncan,

I take your comment to mean that the politics of the coalition is the only justification for putting the two separate proposals together. What LD strategists didn’t consider is that the Bill may fall if the two are put together as Tory rebels join Labour MPs in the Noe lobby.

The Coalition Agreement says:

“We will whip both Parliamentary parties in both Houses to support a simple majority referendum on the Alternative Vote, without prejudice to the positions parties will take during such a referendum.”

Last time I looked, the Tories didn’t have a majority so Labour and Lib Dem voting Aye plus the whipped frontbenchers (even assuming every backbench Tory rebels) would be enough.

The question is whether or not Clegg really wants this bill to pass.

Will

RT @takeback2010: Opinion: The AV bill should be split from boundary changes, its unnecessary and divisive to combine http://bit.ly/bieAXu #takeitback

@Duncan Scott

By bundling AV with gerrymandering the LibDems are abandoning any pretence of actually wanting a fairer voting system. If they have any principles they’d split the bill but going on the last three months that won’t happen.

This is a test of LibDem influence if they have any they should be able to split the bill.

If it were the case that the Conservative party as a whole wouldn’t vote for this most vital piece of legislation for their Lib Dem coalition partners and risk bringing down the coalition I would agree with you Duncan. However I don’t believe this is the case.
Given that the Lib Dems would likely vote on the coalition line for a separate bill including the boundary review I can’t see the reasoning for the Tory leadership to vote against AV if the bill was split.
If Tory backbenchers and a few Labour dinosaurs do want to vote against the people there should still be the numbers to pass it. And if they do vote against it their true colours will be revealed. The ‘No campaign’ will be exposed as a bunch of people who are opposed to not only a fairer voting system but don’t even want to allow a public vote to happen. They will be exposed as the self interested political elites we already know they are and this can only benefit the longer term ‘Yes’ campaign.
I don’t think it would jeopardise the passage of the bill and I think it makes sense to act now to ensure the bill passes with smooth passage and consent rather than having an unnecessary party political argument over the wholly separate issue of boundary changes.

RT @wdjstraw: Important piece from Andy May of @TakeBack2010 on why boundary changes should be separate from the AV Bill http://bit.ly/bieAXu

http://www.leftfootforward.org/2010/08/the-av-referendum-bill-should-stand-alone-not-shoehorned-in-with-boundary-changes/

RT @leftfootfwd: The AV referendum bill should stand alone – not shoehorned in with boundary changes http://bit.ly/bieAXu

funny, on the one hand the article declares the issue of elecotral reform to important to mess about with and then on the other passes the blaime for the labour party trying to block it. people own their own actions. labour leadership, this as you say is too important to mess about with so when push comes to shove support the people no matter what and support the bill instead of making up feable excuses (equal size constituencies are not exactly gerrymandering proposals) to use the populations chance of elecotral reform to political point score. anyone would think that after your 13 years in power when you could have adopted av, and then your noises that you will used some crap excuse to block it the first chance you get,you are as corrupt as the tories. stick to your manifesto – back the peoples campaign for fair votes. people will respect your maturity and progressiveness if you do.

funny, on the one hand the article declares the issue of elecotral reform to important to mess about with and then on the other passes the blaime for the labour party trying to block it. people own their own actions. labour leadership, this as you say is too important to mess about with so when push comes to shove support the people no matter what and support the bill instead of making up feable excuses (equal size constituencies are not exactly gerrymandering proposals) to use the populations chance of elecotral reform to political point score.this is obviously what you are doing (un-ess you secretly don’t what av of course) and people are not stupid enough to fall for it. anyone would think that after your 13 years in power when you could have adopted av, and then your noises that you will used some crap excuse to block it the first chance you get,you are as corrupt as the tories. stick to your manifesto – back the peoples campaign for fair votes. people will respect your maturity and progressiveness if you do.

i think if it was a bill on just av it would probably get passed without problem but this isnt its a bill that is part av and part boundry changes, why should labour help pass a bill that is not part of the manifesto it doesnt say anything in the labour manifesto about support for boundry changes this is the issue and they are right to object to it. the boundry changes are more favourable to the tories which is why they are trying to introduce them in this way. i think nick clegg should stand up for his values and say the bill needs to be split to allow a fair vote on just the av change. the other thing i would say is as it is ok for the coalition to deviate from their election manifesto as they have seen all the facts why is it unacceptable for the labour party to have reservations on av as it is more likely to bring a result of more hung parliaments which given the condem alliance as a result of the last election doesnt really favour labour as the lib dems have proved to be more right wing then thought so making hung parliament and coalitions less likely with labour.

Andy May – The Tories will vote for this to support the Lib Dem’s and once it’s passed voters in Tory marginals will put the Lib Dem’s as second preference and the same in Lib Dem marginals.

The Labour Party should fear AV, especially with the electoral timing being fixed at 2015 and I think that Cameron wants to change the Conservative Party to grab disillusioned Blair supporters next time round.

After Gordon Brown’s push for AV in the last Parliament it will make Labour look really bad if they come up with some excuse for not supporting this bill…

RT @leftfootfwd: The AV referendum bill should stand alone – not shoehorned in with boundary changes http://bit.ly/bieAXu

RT @leftfootfwd: The AV referendum bill should stand alone – not shoehorned in with boundary changes http://bit.ly/bieAXu

RT @leftfootfwd: The AV referendum bill should stand alone – not shoehorned in with boundary changes http://bit.ly/bieAXu

Anon E Mouse – I don’t suppose you have any statistical evidence to back that up? I would think the Lib Dem second preferences would split in favour of Labour, particularly as the cuts will inevitably become more unpopular as time goes on.

But which party marginally benefits or loses from AV in the short term is a moot point. This progressive reform shouldn’t be seen solely as a self interested calculation, its a matter of righting a massive injustice. Many Labour supporters will vote for a Yes and hold true to the legacy of the Chartists and Suffragettes in ensuring that political representation as fair and equitable as possible.

RT @leftfootfwd: The AV referendum bill should stand alone – not shoehorned in with boundary changes http://bit.ly/bieAXu

Andy May – No I think I’m alone in that theory but here’s what I think.

Cameron is in danger in the Conservative Party. Money poured into the coffers – because of his bad behaviour and ineptness Brown was rightly unpopular – if ever a Conservative landslide was in the offing it should have been then. (I am not alone in that view)

That’s fine in a party as weak as Labour has been since Blair’s departure -they lack the killer instinct and didn’t rid themselves of Brown. But the Conservative Party have form where deposing leaders are concerned and Cameron was in trouble.

If Brown had any pride he would have resigned May 7 (as numerous Labour MP’s said he should) and Cameron would have been in a very bad place. Once again Brown’s needs were put before the party.

And Cameron was given time to act – confusion reigned and in rides Nick Clegg. He has a total dislike of Brown and having done so badly in the election himself realises he can actually hold power with the coalition.

Clegg’s always been a Tory and is less tribal than your average Lib Dem so they get on well.

If Clegg dumps the coalition I think Cameron is in trouble with the Conservatives, so in my opinion an AV vote in an election could be rigged against Labour. I think that’s why Cameron has an excuse for no Inheritance Tax, fox hunting or other Tory faves. It also lets him deal with his backbenchers. (If I was him I’d review the funding to political parties to stop the unions funding Labour and destroy them)

Cameron wants AV I believe. Lib Dem supporters shouldn’t vote for Labour’s love of big government and control freakery and given a period in government they may do better at the next election, hopefully under the AV system.

I do hope Labour supporters ignore the wishes of the elites in the party and vote for AV regardless – your last sentence is spot on…

Anon E Mouse

I love a good conspiracy theory too.

Re Brown and when he should resign – I think you’ll find that there was a small matter of a constitutional duty to stay – and he has recently been slated for resigning too early (before the coalition had completed their deal). Seems he would be damned whatever he did.

Re Clegg dumping the coalition – like you said he’s a Tory – so I would suggest, if anything it’s more likely that the LibDems dump him first. That would set the cat amongst the pigeons.

Re trade union funding – I don’t really see why you think it’s wrong that thousands of individuals who have joined a trade union and have agreed on the levy from their subscriptions to be given to an affiliated political party. Some unions (PCS for example) choose not to affiliate. Why is is wrong for a few pounds from thousands of people to be given to a political party, but not for massive donations from one person for example Andrew Cook circa 750k to the Conservative party? And why would you want to “destroy” a political party which was voted for by more than 8.5 million people only in May?

Andy May: I would think the Lib Dem second preferences would split in favour of Labour

Recent polling suggests otherwise, though part of that may be because more Labour-leaning Lib Dems are now polling as Labour than Conservative-leaning Lib Dems are polling as Conservative. There’s not a lot of usable second preference polling out there at the moment, but I’ve done a few calculations based on what there is and in two out of three the Conservatives benefit more than Labour from AV: use the polling quick links on my Alternative Vote swingometer for the full details.

RT @takeback2010: Opinion: The AV bill should be split from boundary changes, its unnecessary and divisive to combine http://bit.ly/bieAXu #takeitback

The majority of Lib Dems where I am will tick labour second followed by the monster raving loony party. I say this because local demographics will play a huge part. If we manage to force the MPs into giving us electoral reform no-one really knows what will happen – which is brilliant because it means everyone knows that the current system is so biased it is unfair.

RT @takeback2010: Opinion: The AV bill should be split from boundary changes, its unnecessary and divisive to combine http://bit.ly/bieAXu #takeitback

RT @takeback2010: Opinion: The AV bill should be split from boundary changes, its unnecessary and divisive to combine http://bit.ly/bieAXu #takeitback

RT @takeback2010: Opinion: The AV bill should be split from boundary changes, its unnecessary and divisive to combine http://bit.ly/bieAXu #takeitback

RT @takeback2010: Opinion: The AV bill should be split from boundary changes, its unnecessary and divisive to combine http://bit.ly/bieAXu #takeitback

RT @takeback2010: Opinion: The AV bill should be split from boundary changes, its unnecessary and divisive to combine http://bit.ly/bieAXu #takeitback

RT @takeback2010: Opinion: The AV bill should be split from boundary changes, its unnecessary and divisive to combine http://bit.ly/bieAXu #takeitback

RT @takeback2010: Opinion: The AV bill should be split from boundary changes, its unnecessary and divisive to combine http://bit.ly/bieAXu #takeitback

RT @takeback2010: Opinion: The AV bill should be split from boundary changes, its unnecessary and divisive to combine http://bit.ly/bieAXu #takeitback

RT @leftfootfwd: The AV referendum bill should stand alone – not shoehorned in with boundary changes http://bit.ly/bieAXu

RT @takeback2010: Opinion: The AV bill should be split from boundary changes, its unnecessary and divisive to combine http://bit.ly/bieAXu #takeitback

Excellent piece by Andy May on @leftfootfwd http://tinyurl.com/3x7meuu

RT @takeback2010: Opinion: The AV bill should be split from boundary changes, its unnecessary and divisive to combine http://bit.ly/bieAXu #takeitback

Caroline – I’m an ex-Labour voter – I want a strong opposition, I’m just saying that if I was Cameron that’s what I’d do.

Brown clung desperately onto power and it just looked bad – the “Squatter in Downing Street” will be remembered for ever. David Blunkett, John Reid and several other prominent Labour figures called for him to do it but he wouldn’t. This guff about hanging on for a coalition was an excuse… what did he care – he was finished? Cameron was given breathing space and now look where we are. The Tories should have been running a minority government.

Regarding resigning he should never have been in that position – I voted for “Full Third Term” Blair – but as soon as it became clear how useless he was he should have gone or called an election (which ironically he may have won) – his book called “Courage” is a joke. Resigning too soon? I don’t think so.

I agree with you on the Lib Dem’s dumping Clegg – he doesn’t see the danger he’s in – unlike Labour but like the Tories, the Lib Dem’s can be vicious towards bad leaders.

Finally on the trade unions, as an ex T&GW (Bill Morris era) member I just think that the union funds shouldn’t be funding political parties whilst individual people can’t donate at will.

My partner is a member of Unison and I’ll post some info when she backs back from a holiday next week to back up my point…

[...] remains determined not to back down, the second way forward is the one which Left Foot Forward has proposed – split the Bill. Section 1, which makes provisions for the referendum, could still receive Royal [...]