Ed Miliband's putter.

There should be someone near to Ed Miliband advising him not to support a 'Yes' vote in the forthcoming referendum on changing the electoral system. Miliband reminds me a little of the French golfer Jean Van de Velde in the 1999 British Open held at St Andrews. De Velde needed only a 6 on the final hole (2 shots over the par of the hole) to win the great tournament; his shots went everywhere including into the stream, from where, with shoes removed, he tried to play out. In the end he took 7 and lost the Open. Had de Velde taken his putter and gently tapped the ball towards the hole he would have won.

Ed Miliband should play the political putter. By aligning himself with the 'Yes' vote he is destined to be on the losing side and damaging his credibility. Miliband's claims that somehow the Alternative Vote will revitalise British politics is difficult to fathom; I have written about AV elsewhere in the blog, but essentially it can mean the person who comes second or even third in an election actually winning. It does nothing about creating a more proportional system. It also puts Ed Miliband on the same platform as Nick Clegg. There is so little that Ed Miliband can gain by supporting the change that is seems a reckless decision on the part of the Labour leader.

To mix sporting methaphors, Ed Miliband is backing the wrong horse.

10 reasons to vote No to AV.

Later this year we are to be offered a referendum on replacing the First Past The Post (FPTP) electoral system with that of the Alternative Vote (AV)  for Westminster elections. Here are 10 good reasons to vote NO:

• AV will not substantially change the outcome from the present FPTP, so why bother?
• It might allow the candidate who came second (or even third) to win
• It would not be more proportional than the present system (not that I want proportional representation anyway).
• It runs counter to our political traditions; reformers may mock this but FPTP is generally accepted by the people. At least there is no popular movement for electoral reform other than among the chattering classes.
• It would spoil election night; many of us love that!
• It would unduly benefit the centre party as being the 'lesser of two evils'.
• It might curb radical political ideas that from time to time have invigorated our nation as each party becomes afraid of alienating the middle ground.
• FPTP recognises the social diversity of the nation; we tend to get the MPs we want; contrary to popular belief the vast majority of constituents are very happy with their MP, even if they did not vote for him or her.
• AV would do nothing to give a voice to minorities or smaller parties.
• The added mystery and complexity of the count would remove politics from the people; low turnout is has nothing to do with FPTP.

I am sure there are other good reasons for voting No in the referendum, but let this be my contribution for now.