EU Referendum voter eligibility seems like a colonial hangover

Britain's Conservative Government is set to introduce their bill on delivering a referendum on Britain remaining a member of the European Union.  Legislation will be introduced via the EU Referendum Bill to cover voting eligibility.

The voting eligibility is set to allow citizens of the Irish Republic (also a fellow EU country) and the Commonwealth who are aged 18 years or over the right to vote.  However, the eligibility is set to refuse voting rights to citizens from other EU countries who are resident in the UK, with a certain exception I will come to in a moment.

The absurd consequences of this proposal allow voting rights to not only citizens of the Republic of Ireland, but also to two other EU Member States (Malta and Cyprus) as members of the Commonwealth.   This seems like a bit of a colonial hangover to me.

I want to be very clear that I don't want to see every EU citizen who is resident in the UK, the right to vote in this referendum.  As a pro-European, I recognise that a close referendum result in favour of staying in which is swung by all the citizens of EU Member States who are resident in Britain, would not decisively settle the issue in the way I wish to see Britain decide.

All I am calling for is common sense and fairness.  If I ever decided to move to Australia, I would personally not expect the right to gain any voting rights until I have either obtained Australian citizenship, or been a resident for a certain number of years.  I don't personally think in the 21st Century that I should be able to obtain those rights from day one, just because the UK and Australia are both members of the Commonwealth!

I say that some EU citizens who have been resident and worked in this country for many years, have made a contribution to Britain that deserves just a little more respect.  How can it be fair, for example, that an EU citizen who has lived in the UK for over twenty years, not to be given the same voting rights as another EU citizen who has lived here for a year, just because the person here for two decades came here from Rome, whilst the more recent arrival came here from Dundalk?



 

Not talking Electoral Reform (on this occasion). Well, almost...

I have said a lot over recent months on my feelings towards Britain's current electoral system.  In this particular post, I will not even give this outdated monstrosity the pleasure of referring to it by it's name.  I will though take the opportunity of expressing myself.  It is time for me to explain that my political views go way beyond pro-PR or as the cynics may call pro-Coalition.

Here is a flavour of my views on some of the issues facing ordinary Brits, and also on the odd issue many Brits may not give a **** on.

Britain and the EU

Well, I have actually talked a bit on this in recent months as well.  Therefore, it is probably worth trying to aim to wrap this up in a sentence.  I want the UK to remain in the EU, after a referendum to hopefully resolve the issue for at least another 40 years.

Immigration

Very much linked in with the EU, I do accept.  On the whole, immigration benefits the UK economy and the continued functioning of the NHS.  Plus, we have Brits living in other parts of the EU as well.  I do accept though that some of the people living in towns along the south coast of England in some cases will have a different perspective.  In a democracy those voices must also be heard.

NHS

I can only really go on my own experiences.  I have had a need within the past couple of years to attend my local hospital on a certain matter.  I spent a Monday evening in hospital for about 4 hours.  I will say that I got very good care, and my expectations were managed very well indeed, considering I did not expect to be going into work the next day. 

I will though add that I do not have any reason to doubt stories I hear of Nurses struggling to take breaks for instance.  Pressures on our NHS are a worry of course.

The only scenario at present in which I would challenge the principle of free health care is for those who put pressure on our NHS through drunken behaviour.

Economy

We can talk all day and all night about the rights and wrongs of Tory and Labour administrations alike.  Ultimately, I have no problem with top earners paying a competitive rate of income tax, such as 40% or lower.  It is not just the question of our relationship with Europe which will determine how successful UK plc will be in attracting inward investment.

However, I cannot agree with such a policy at times of austerity.  I disagreed with the policy of the Con-Dem Coalition to reduce the top rate from 50% to 45%.  Whilst reversing this policy will probably not raise all that much money, it goes against what Prime Minister Dave (Cameron) once referred to as everyone being in it together. 

Fracking and English devolution

Fracking may well bring new wealth and employment opportunities to these shores.  On balance, I am minded to support it more than oppose it.  Although I do believe there are environmental arguments that have substance as well.

To balance the economic benefits against the environmental concerns, it would be better to have regulation set by Regional Assemblies.  Prime Minister Dave and Chancellor Gideon (Osbourne) are too far detached to balance the conflicting economic benefits and environmental threats.  At least one American State and a Spanish Region have both exercised powers to ban fracking in recent years.

I am also a believer in English devolution as a means to rebalance the United Kingdom, against a backdrop of National Parliaments in other parts of the UK.  Devolution would be a positive change to a Westminster system that is far too detached for too many Brits.

Whilst I would prefer Regional Assemblies to an English Parliament, an English Parliament would probably be better than the status quo.  Sticking to the status quo or having English laws which can only be decided by English MPS, would ultimately lead to the break up of the Union.  Why would a Country within the UK continue to send MPs to a Parliament in which they effectively become second class MPs?

British Overseas Territories and the Falklands/Malvinas dispute

On the whole, I do take the line that if some of these countries want to have a modern relationship with the UK, then we cannot force independence upon them.  That said, many of the British Overseas Territories are tax havens.  I don't see how that benefits us, and tax havens hardly create the impression of paying a fair share of tax.  Furthermore, if these territories are insisting on dependence towards the UK on matters like Foreign Affairs and Defence, then there must be something we can do about it.

I have previously written extensively regards my views on how a solution can be found in the long running dispute between the UK and Argentina over the Falklands/Las Malvinas.  On that note, I will not go into too much detail here on my view on how a long term solution can be found. 

What I will say is that the Falklands/Malvinas is the World's second most sparsely populated territory, if you don't include all the remote uninhabited islands on earth.  Plus, the UK does not currently have the same level of international support it once had on this issue.  That is why there is room to accommodate Argentina's geographical claims and the Falkland Islanders' right to self-determination. 

With Argentina set to elect a new President in the autumn, there will need to be a different approach to the Falklanders from that of current Argentine President, Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner.  Otherwise any road towards compromise will be later rather than sooner.

Canadian General Election 2015

Due to colonial links, the Canadians also use the same electoral system as us Brits.  Well, hopefully when they go to the polls in the autumn, they will get the Hung Parliament we so nearly got.  That will go a long way to undermine the monstrosity of a voting system our two countries share!

Whether you agree with some of what I have said above, none of the above, or all of the above, electing our representatives ultimately underpins every issue.  That is why British Electoral Reform is for the moment at least, more important to me than all of the above.


 

Why First Past The Post is bad for most UK voters!

An online petition has been set up by Owen Winter, a 17 year old student to bring an electoral reform debate to the House of Commons.  When I heard about this petition, I had no hesitation in signing myself.  I have generally always been uneasy with First Past The Post.  Although I will admit that until recent years, the issue of Electoral Reform has not been right at the top of my political concerns.

Having already signed the petition, I later saw a video on Youtube of 17 year old Owen Winter talking about the unfairness of Britain's First Past The Post electoral system.  I found it to be very inspiring.  I am now going to talk through a few scenarios on why FPTP is bad for Britain.


"I live in the safe Labour seat of Liverpool Riverside and vote Labour."

The plus is that you will get the party you vote for representing you at Westminster.  But the 29,835 people who voted for Louise Ellman to be re-elected, are only voting for one member of parliament.  And that is not the only downside.  The election for this seat is a one horse race, and even if there was ever a Tory government that wins a general election by a landslide, Liverpool Riverside would still probably be Labour anyway.

There are too many seats that are either safe Labour and safe Conservative.  I feel it is time to make the case to Labour and Conservative voters in safe seats that they are effectively taking part in a one horse race for one seat.  Whilst many staunch Tories and Labourites may like the idea of an electoral system that is more likely to deliver a single party government, they really need to reflect on the reality that if they are in a safe seat, the current system does not make them powerful voters!

"I live in the marginal constituency of Wirral West and vote Liberal Democrat."

This seat was won narrowly by Labour at the expense of Conservative government minister Esther McVey in this year's election.  But if you wished to vote Liberal Democrat or any party other than Labour and the Conservatives, then you have to accept your vote will be wasted.  Some people in seats like Wirral West will inevitably vote for one of the two big parties, to try and keep the other big party out, even though the vote they have cast does not reflect their true opinion.

This seat is of course not too far geographically from Liverpool.  So why should the Labour voters in this seat be more powerful than the Labour voters in Liverpool Riverside and other safe Labour seats in Liverpool?

"I live in Camborne and Redruth, but am unsure on how I am going to vote."

The good news is your vote should count here, in a seat that has been held in recent times by three different parties.  This seat was billed in the 2015 general election as a four way marginal between the Conservatives, Liberal Democrats, Labour, and the UK Independence Party (UKIP).  Although the Conservative George Eustace increased his majority of just 66 votes in 2010 to a majority of over 7000 in 2015, his share of the vote in this seat was just a little over 40%.  This is now a familiar pattern across the country where many MPs are getting elected on less than 50% of the popular vote.


And there now follows a couple of quotes from prominent politicians, which I feel undermine First Past The Post.

"Here's a thought: on 7th May you could go to bed with Nigel Farage, and wake up with Ed Miliband.  I don't know about you but not one bit of that works for me."

Of course those are the words of David Cameron at the 2014 Conservative Party Conference.  In a bid to appeal to former Tory voters who had moved over to Nigel Farage's UKIP, Cameron gives a reason to not vote for someone else as opposed to why voters should vote for him.  The recent election also saw senior Labour politicians give a similar message to Scottish voters on how voting for the Scottish Nationalist Party will let a Tory government in by the back door.  All very negative really!

"Even if we selected a raving alcoholic sex paedophile we wouldn't lose Grimsby."

Prior to retiring as MP for Great Grimsby after serving the North Lincolnshire constituency for 38 years, it is believed Austin Mitchell made these comments in an interview with a Sunday newspaper.  Although Mitchell later claimed the remark (if he had made it) was a joke, Grimsby has been continuously returning Labour MPs since 1945.


Britain did indeed have an electoral reform referendum in 2011, as part of the coalition agreement between the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats.  Whilst the electorate did vote to stick with the status quo, we have now had another general election under the same existing system which is exposing more problems.  

In the scenarios above, one group of people I did not mention are the voters in safe seats who prefer to vote against the party who always wins.  These people have very little voice and are being failed in a big way.  In fact of the 31 Million people who voted in General Election 2015, 19 Million voted for losing candidates.

I have made noises previously suggesting that electoral reform was not likely in the foreseeable future.  To my pleasant surprise, I may have underestimated a growing feeling of voters across the political spectrum.  If change can be achieved sooner rather than later, then it will in part be a major achievement for Owen Winter.

Dear Helen Jones MP,

Let me introduce myself.  My name is Andy, and I currently live in the boundaries of the Warrington South parliamentary constituency.  However, prior to boundary changes which took effect at the 2010 general election, I was resident in your Warrington North constituency.

I am writing to discuss a particular concern I have about politics in Britain today.  I am approaching you because I understand it is possible that future boundary changes may mean I once again could become a Warrington North constituent.  Even if this does not happen, I believe there are some people in your constituency who will share my views which I am about to outline.

Before I discuss the political concerns I have, I would like to take the opportunity to say that I have no issue with you personally.  During the 18 years in which I have lived in Warrington, I can't say I can recall anyone ever saying a bad word about you as one of the town's local MPs.

Since my eligibility to vote, I have consistently voted at all types of election.  I can recall just one council election in which I forgot to vote in, and which I am not proud of.  My politics are on the centre, and I have at various stages voted for all mainstream parties.

I did in the fact vote Labour in the recent general election, in the south constituency.  In one sense, this election has been one in which I have gained a feeling of being a valued member of the electorate.  It has been very flattering to get the attention in which I got from all the Labour Party activists who were knocking on my door.  This is what goes on in marginal constituencies.  Of course, I know I will not get that attention if I get moved back into the safe seat that is Warrington North.

In four visits I had from Labour activists since January, I made the point right at the outset that I am strongly opposed to the First Past The Post voting system.  On two of the visits, the activist agreed with me!

How can it be right that Labour voters in Warrington South can be more powerful than Labour voters in Warrington North?  On a similar note, how can it be right for Conservative voters in the Warrington South constituency to be more powerful than those who vote Conservative in Gideon's Tatton?

It is my understanding that you were amongst the Labour MPs who supported the campaign to retain the First Past The Post system in 2011.  This does concern me.  The recent general election has demonstrated the disadvantages of FPTP in a way not seen before. 

I recognise that FPTP may well survive for the next election in 5 years time.  As stated, I also recognise that I could be voting in your safe seat.  If both of these things do happen, I will be seeking a firm commitment from Labour to deliver on electoral reform.

In the event of Labour showing no intention of delivering on electoral reform, I may well be ruling out voting for Labour.  NOW I REALISE THAT WILL MEAN A WASTED VOTE IN WARRINGTON NORTH!

I am though optimistic that these words will not be wasted in the wider debate on electoral reform that I believe now lies ahead in the years to come.

Yours Sincerely

Andy J Watson

 

UKIP hard done by!

I believe the UK's national interest would be best served by remaining in the EU, following any referendum.  Life outside the EU would not be economic suicide, as demonstrated by the UK's current status as Germany's biggest trading partner.  Also, a vote to leave the EU would not change the fact that Europe as a whole would remain as Britain's most important external relationship.

I have always been pro-European on balance since developing my views as a student in my late teens.  It has always been the position of influence, for Britain to vote in the European Union institutions on matters linked to the Single European Market, which has been a decisive factor.  In other words, I consider it to be too much of a disadvantage to be in the Single Market as Norway or Switzerland are, but unable to vote on the rules.

So there we have it: I certainly did not vote for UKIP in this week's general election.  But as a democrat above all else, I do respect that other people may have a different viewpoint to mine on the European issue.  As far as the 2015 election and UKIP goes, winning a solitary seat on nearly 13% of the national vote is a disgrace.  I fully agree with the sentiments of outgoing leader Nigel Farage that the First Past The Post electoral system is bankrupt.

Previous arguments to change the British electoral system have often been made by the Liberal Democrats, who ironically on a very bad election for them this time around, managed to hold onto eight seats on just 7.9% of the vote.  JUST MAYBE, UKIP HAVE INJECTED FRESH LIFE INTO THE CAMPAIGN FOR A FAIRER VOTING SYSTEM.