Labour political dominance over Wales has largely been maintained by the First Past the Post electoral system. As a result of the 2005 General Election, Labour won 72.5% of Wales’ Parliamentary seats based on just 42.7% of the vote.
Now that the figures are in for the 2007 National Assembly elections (and I’m bored out of my head) I have taken the liberty of analysing the Assembly voting system to see how far it goes to secure fair votes.
The vast majority of seats for the Assembly continue to be elected via First Past the Post, based on Wales’ 40 Parliamentary constituencies. The results are as follows
Party
Votes (to the nearest thousand)
% of Vote
Seats
% of vote required per seat
No of votes required per seat
Con
219,000
22.4
7
3.2
31,285
Plaid
219,000
22.4
8
2.8
27,375
Lib
144,000
14.8
3
4.9
48,000
Lab
315,000
32.2
24
1.3
13,125
The figures are quite clear, Labour do particularly well out of the First Past the Post System. They only need 13,125 votes per seat as compared to the massive 48,000 votes needed by the Libs. Plaid and the Tories have to gain twice as many votes as Labour per constituency seat.
Matters are somewhat addressed by the use of a regional top up system (d’Hondt). The following table provides an analysis based on combining both constituency and regional ballots.
Party
Votes (to the nearest thousand)
% of Votes
Seats
% of vote required per seat
No ov votes required per seat
Con
428,000
21.9
12
1.8
35,700
Plaid
424,000
21.7
15
1.4
28,300
Lib
259,000
13.3
6
2.21
43,200
Lab
604,000
30.9
26
1.2
23,200
Yet again we see how even with an element of PR introduced the result continues to be skewed substantially in Labour’s favour.
Before anyone accuses me of being a hypocrite I do acknowledge that Plaid did well out of the system this time. But we still have to get over 5,000 more votes per seat when compared to Labour. The poor Lib Dems have to get 20,000 extra votes per seat!
If we had a totally proportional system, Labour would be reduced to 19. Plaid and the Tories would be on 13 and the Libs on 8. UKIP, the BNP, Independents and the Greens would all probably get at least one seat.
Labour hegemony over life in Wales has always been supported by an unfair voting system that gives them a disproportionate political representation. This political clout has been used by Labour to dominate every aspect of Welsh life, as careerists pay homage in the name of their own personal progress. A one party state has been built around a voting system that does not reflect the political wishes of the people of Wales. In anyone’s book this isn’t a healthy democracy, and partly explains why our country has stagnated over the years.
In the unlikely event of electoral reform at Westminster level, I hope that whatever agreement is reached in order to form the next Government of Wales, contains provision for fair votes for local government and any election to a proper Welsh Parliament. The current d’Hondt system is only a step in the right direction.
Undoubtedly Labour hacks will point to the current instability in Wales as why PR is an idealistic pipe dream. I used to agree but have now changed my mind. I’m also quite easy minded about coalitions. Furthermore, it is precisely because of the likely result of the election many of us were exacerbated by Labour’s sectarian and tribalist strategy.
Surely it’s a sign of strength in our democracy that our political leaders following an election have to sit down and work a way forward based on the common good.
Showing posts with label Conservatives. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Conservatives. Show all posts
Monday, May 14, 2007
Monday, January 22, 2007
The Duplicity of the Cameron Project
David Cameron to be fair to him as employed the obvious political strategy to counter act New Labour since becoming leader of the Tories. Much of New Labour’s success has had far more to do with the idiocy of the manner in which the Conservatives have responded to New Labour’s existence rather than anything constructive New Labour has achieved.
By moving Labour to a centre right position – traditional Tory ground – the Tories did the fatal error of moving the party further to the right to create some clear blue water. Under Hague, IDS and Howard, Tory strategists played into the hands of New Labour by fighting on issues that were only relevant to the far right - ie their membership.
Cameron has turned things around by appearing to move the Tories back into the centre right position – creating a Tory/New Labour bottle neck meaning that ultimately after 10 years of New Labour middle England might well just vote for the Tories at the next General Election for change more than any clear divergence.
The problem Cameron has is that messaging is one thing, policy is another. There is no coherence currently. Whilst he passionately talks up the NHS the only detailed policy to come out of the Tories so far is to cut public expenditure by £20bn.
The new cuddly Tories Cameron is trying to push is further undermined by an extremely right wing article he gave to the Telegraph last week. In a statement which has gained very little coverage, Cameron said that he would restore the UK opt out of the EU social chapter. Nick Cohen of the Observer in his excellent article yesterday points out that the Cameron approach is not to secure legal rights for workers but hope employers do the right thing. As we have one of the most liberal labour laws in the world already – the prospect of even greater de-regulation, for the most vulnerable in particular, is quite frankly frightening.
The phrase ‘a wolf in sheep’s clothing comes to mind.’
By moving Labour to a centre right position – traditional Tory ground – the Tories did the fatal error of moving the party further to the right to create some clear blue water. Under Hague, IDS and Howard, Tory strategists played into the hands of New Labour by fighting on issues that were only relevant to the far right - ie their membership.
Cameron has turned things around by appearing to move the Tories back into the centre right position – creating a Tory/New Labour bottle neck meaning that ultimately after 10 years of New Labour middle England might well just vote for the Tories at the next General Election for change more than any clear divergence.
The problem Cameron has is that messaging is one thing, policy is another. There is no coherence currently. Whilst he passionately talks up the NHS the only detailed policy to come out of the Tories so far is to cut public expenditure by £20bn.
The new cuddly Tories Cameron is trying to push is further undermined by an extremely right wing article he gave to the Telegraph last week. In a statement which has gained very little coverage, Cameron said that he would restore the UK opt out of the EU social chapter. Nick Cohen of the Observer in his excellent article yesterday points out that the Cameron approach is not to secure legal rights for workers but hope employers do the right thing. As we have one of the most liberal labour laws in the world already – the prospect of even greater de-regulation, for the most vulnerable in particular, is quite frankly frightening.
The phrase ‘a wolf in sheep’s clothing comes to mind.’
The question is where do the Tories in Wales stand on this?
Wednesday, January 17, 2007
What Planet are the Tories Living on?
Tory Welsh Leader Cheryl Gillan is quoted as saying as the Independence issue reaches a frenzy, “We disagree with Plaid Cymru whose policies will take Wales down the road to economic ruin….”
I know Cheryl represents a constituency outside Wales, but has anybody told her Wales is the poorest part of the UK with a lower GVA than any of the other nations and regions. GVA in the European Objective 1/Convergance Funding areas is only 65% of the UK average. In hard figures this means that in most of Wales GVA per head is £11,126 whilst the UK average £17,677. Most worryingly, the trend is of a worsening situation.
To put things in context two hours down the road in London GVA is at 140% compared to the UK average – clearly portraying the wealth inequities caused by the prioritisation of the service sector of the South East of England by the London parties, and their clear failure to compose let alone implement a regional economic policy.
Put together with the worst health levels in the UK; the worst standard of housing; and poor transport links - the case for Welsh independence is compelling. The union as it stands is fast moving Wales down the road of economic and social ruin.
To coin a phrase from New Labour ‘things can only get better…’!
I know Cheryl represents a constituency outside Wales, but has anybody told her Wales is the poorest part of the UK with a lower GVA than any of the other nations and regions. GVA in the European Objective 1/Convergance Funding areas is only 65% of the UK average. In hard figures this means that in most of Wales GVA per head is £11,126 whilst the UK average £17,677. Most worryingly, the trend is of a worsening situation.
To put things in context two hours down the road in London GVA is at 140% compared to the UK average – clearly portraying the wealth inequities caused by the prioritisation of the service sector of the South East of England by the London parties, and their clear failure to compose let alone implement a regional economic policy.
Put together with the worst health levels in the UK; the worst standard of housing; and poor transport links - the case for Welsh independence is compelling. The union as it stands is fast moving Wales down the road of economic and social ruin.
To coin a phrase from New Labour ‘things can only get better…’!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
