Alan Johnson's referendum on AV+

[caramel_betty]

As a known, self-confessed Liberal Democrat, it should come as little surprise that I'm in favour of proportional representation. However, I'm not in favour of just any form of proportional representation, and therefore I'm slightly sceptical of Alan Johnson's referendum

Comments

[caramel_betty]

Well, I'm sure that Johnson has - despite his protestations - raised the point now with some political motive. Maybe he wants to lay himself out as the Labour leader in waiting, maybe he sees this as a potential way of trying to (slowly, baby steps) move the press on from ever more detail on expenses, maybe he's using this to try to destabilize Gordon and steal a march on him, maybe he sees this as a way of trying to "steal" Lib Dem votes. (I know a small number of people, for example, who vote Lib Dem basically because they want PR at Westminster, and balls to the rest of it.)

However, I don't think that we can assume that Alan Johnson has just plucked Proportional Representation out of his hat as a topic to do this with. He is a long-standing supporter of PR at Westminster, though when the Jenkins report came out, he wasn't really known as someone to shout about it, nor in the Cabinet. (He was new to Westminster in 1997.)

Examples:

A week ago: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/alan-johnson-you-ask-the-questions-1686893.html (18 May 2009) I believe that we need to overhaul the political system and that we should complete unfinished business by discussing again the Jenkins review and consulting the British people on proportional representation, which gives greater power to the electorate.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/alan-johnson-you-ask-the-questions-425084.html (Monday, 20 November 2006) Are you in favour of proportional representation? ... Yes, but I recognise that many in my party aren't. Turnout at elections is falling, making it vital that we do more to engage people in politics and debate. Voting reform is one way of doing that but I don't think it's the only way and any reforms must be agreed by the party and then the people in a referendum.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2005/aug/13/politics.economicpolicy (Saturday 13 August 2005) Despite his avowed reluctance to swap the front rank of the union movement for the backbenches of the palace of Westminster, Johnson had his agenda. "A lot of it was kind of techie constitutional stuff, I have always believed that we could have a much more vibrant and much more inclusive democracy. I have been a supporter of proportional representation for 30 years. It was an anorak issue, now I'm at the kagoule stage. "The Labour party of Keir Hardie was about devolution for Scotland, proportional representation and reform of the House of Lords. I was very much focused on those issues."

So it's:

a) not a flash in the pan thing that he's just cooked up for his own political benefit
b) not new that he was calling for it, even in recent history, it's just the papers didn't care last week.

And personally, I don't mind Alan Johnson being a terrible old Blairite. (He's certainly a Blairite, anyway.) In as much as Blair-ism is a vaguely cogent philosophy mixed with slightly cycnical political pragmatism - even if I disagree with much of it - I have few problems with someone senior being in a position to espouse it, rally people to its ideas, and act on it. That's what politics should be about. It should be a battle of ideas and philosophies, of different priorities, of different worldviews.