Wednesday 9 May 2007

Trust the people

Some things are too important to be left to politicians; for example, their own pay and allowances, length of office, whether the Freedom of Information Act should apply to them and, above all, the method by which they are elected. On all these subjects, politicians have a conflict between their personal interests and the public interest.

The New America Foundation asked Californian voters last year whose recommendation on changing the voting system they would prefer. An overwhelming 70 per cent would trust a panel of average citizens more than they would trust politicians and only 10 per cent would prefer politicians' views. When the choice was between independent experts and average citizens, average citizens still won, by 48 to 34 per cent.

British Columbia (Canada) has already tried the process. The Provincial Parliament established a Citizen's Assembly of 161 members to review the voting system. One man and one woman were selected randomly (like a jury) to represent each of the 79 voting districts, two more were selected from the aboriginal community and a Chairman was appointed. They met over most of 2004, took evidence, consulted experts and then decided by 146 - 7 to recommend the Single Transferable Vote (STV) system, which was later supported by 58 per cent of voters in a referendum. STV offers proportionality both for parties and other groupings; it also gives voters a wide and genuine choice of candidates that avoids split voting.

In the UK, the newly elected Labour Government appointed the Jenkins Commission in 1997 to review the voting system for electing MPs, but ignored its recommendation of 1998. Now the Government is carrying out its own "desk" review, but we can safely assume it will recommend no change although, perhaps, with a vague commitment to review the system again one day. It's time the UK Government trusted the people and appointed a citizen's jury now to review the system.

Labels:

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home