Thanks. So it is a diluted form of PR to be voted on eight years from now -- maybe. (If Blair is established enough by then he may renege. If the Tories throw him out in the meantime (eight years is a hell of a long time in politics), no referendum.) Aditya Chakrabortty wrote: > > Gar, the article below from the Guardian should provide an answer. > > But note the end-papargraph, which I took from another Guardian report. It > is more than likely that Britain will wait 8 yrs before having a referendum > on PR. As you probably already know we will be using PR in elections for > European and regional parliaments. > > Best wishes, > > Aditya > > Jenkins PR plan redraws > political map > > By Michael White, Political Editor > Friday October 30, 1998 > > Tony Blair's Cabinet yesterday buried > its > differences over Lord Jenkins's > blueprint > for electoral reform and appealed > instead > for a serious - and protracted - > public > debate over the most radical shake-up > of > Westminster's voting system for more > than > a century. > > The proposals would empower ordinary > voters, not the politicians, Lord > Jenkins > insisted. The reform would "give > voters > more choice, be more democratic in > the > constituencies and lead to a fairer > result > nationally," he declared. The package > would take up to eight years to > implement. > > Paddy Ashdown led the pro-reform > forces > in enthusiastically welcoming the > report's > elaborate compromise - known as 'AV > Top-Up' - as William Hague denounced > it > as "a complicated and confused" > irrelevance. The Cabinet's low-key > response was designed to keep the > peace in > Labour's divided ranks. > > It will also keep Mr Blair's > referendum > options open, possibly until after > the next > election. Though Labour has > introduced > different forms of proportional > representation (PR) for > Euro-elections and > devolution, Mr Blair has previously > declared himself "unpersuaded" by the > reformers' case for changing the way > MPs > are elected to the Commons. > > Yesterday he "warmly welcomed" the > report, but was non-committal as to > whether he will eventually campaign > in its > favour, despite the likely opposition > of > many, if not most, cabinet > colleagues. They > have all promised not to become > 'standard-bearers' for either camp. > > "We've got to manage this process and > manage it well," Mr Blair told the > Cabinet > during a 20-minute discussion of the > report, described as 'more positive' > than > expected. That may be mood music, but > Mr > Blair does not wish to jeopardise a > valued > political alliance with Paddy > Ashdown, > aides stressed. > > The Liberal Democrat leader was > equally > sensitive to the prime minister's > tactical > dilemmas. "The commitment to a > referendum is there. We expect it to > be > honoured. But it was never our > intention, > absolutely to close an option. That > is not > practical politics," Mr Ashdown said. > That > effectively means he would prefer a > referendum delayed to one lost. So > would > Mr Blair. > > Lord Jenkins's proposals would see 80 > to > 85 per cent of MPs still directly > elected on > a constituency basis, albeit with > voters > ranking candidates in order of > preference to > ensure that each elected MP enjoys > more > than 50 per cent local support. > > But the most significant change to > Britain's > ancient voting habits lies in the > 'Top-Up' > element. Between 100 and 120 MPs > would > be picked from 80 local lists, > allocated to > ensure that each party's total number > of > MPs more accurately reflect the total > votes > cast. > > If the Jenkins system had been in > place in > May 1997 Labour's huge Commons > majority of 179 would have been cut > to 77 > and the number of Labour MPs cut from > 419 to 368 - as they are all too > aware. The > Tories would have gained three seats, > making 168, while Liberal Democrat > ranks > would have swelled from 46 to 89. > > MPs will debate the report next > Thursday. > > In personally drafting the 90-page > report > the 77-year-old former Labour > chancellor > turned breakaway SDP leader was > making > what amounted to his final bid to > 'break the > mould' of British politics by > empowering > the moderate centre and curbing > landslide > swings to left or right. Lord > Jenkins, whose > hybrid solution has been crafted to > assuage > traditionalist fears about weak > government > and MPs' weakened constituency ties, > insisted his recipe would "mostly > deliver > majority governments" - though > possibly > not in 1992 when the Tories scraped > home, > or 1974 and 1964 when Labour did the > same. > > After the Cabinet discussed the > report, Mr > Blair issued a blandly balanced st > atement: 'I > welcome it warmly. The report makes a > well-argued and powerful case for the > system it recommends. It's very much > a > modification of the existing > Westminster > system rather than any full-blown PR > system as practised in other > countries.' > The Jenkins' Commission does not > suggest > a date for the referendum, but makes > clear > the proposed new voting system could > not > be introduced until the election > after next. > > -----Original Message----- > Sent: Monday, November 02, 1998 10:21 PM > To: Pen-l > Subject: [PEN-L:816] Query: Blair and proportional rep. > > Jim Heartfield or other Brits on this list: > > I remember one progressive promise Blair made -- that he would hold > some sort of referendum on Proprortional Rep. in the UK. (A few weeks > after I heard he was considering making the referendum on instant > run-off instead -- a much less progressive alternative, but still one > which gives minor parties a fighting chance.) Since then I've heard > nothing about it. As a group of Clinton clones, has New Labor trashed > this particular promise, or is the referendum still scheduled for an > actual date and time? If it is really going to happen, which version > will be voted on? > -- > Gar W. Lipow > 815 Dundee RD NW > Olympia, WA 98502 > http://www.freetrain.org/ -- Gar W. Lipow 815 Dundee RD NW Olympia, WA 98502 http://www.freetrain.org/
