Press Story

It argues that if the referendum only offers a straight choice between the current First Past the Post (FPTP) system and the system known as Alternative Vote (AV) this will not give the electorate the chance to opt for fair proportional voting.

The report argues that the Additional Member system (AMS) is the best option for voting for the Westminster parliament because it combines a treasured part of the current system - the constituency link - with genuine proportionality. AMS is currently not being discussed as part of the debate over electoral reform, even though it is used successfully for elections to the Scottish Parliament, the Welsh Assembly and the London Assembly.

The co-director of ippr, Lisa Harker said:

"The outcome of this election shows that the current voting system is past its sell-by-date. First past the Post is unfair and distorts the electoral outcome - and this time it didn't even deliver its proudest boast: a clear majority for one party. We warmly welcome the decision of the new coalition government to hold a referendum on electoral reform, but if the people are only offered the chance to reject one unfair system and replace it with another it will be tragic missed opportunity. There needs to be an open debate on all the options and the public needs to be offered a real choice over how they vote in future."

The report author, Dr Phil McCarvill, a Visiting Research Fellow at ippr said:

"In our view what the UK needs is a fair electoral system which can deliver a proportional outcome, while preserving the constituency link. The best system for that is the Additional Member system, which is already used successfully in elections in Scotland, Wales and London. It is well suited to the UK context and would offer a way round the fixed positions of the parties."

In the paper, ippr sets out a number of criteria which it believes a new electoral system must satisfy:

o Maintain the principle of the constituency link thus preserving one of the key features of UK parliamentary democracy.
o Establish a clearer relationship between the number of votes cast for a particular party and the number of seats it holds.
o Avoid replicating or reinforcing the distortions of the current system or simply favouring the largest parties
o Ensure that all votes have a value and that the real electoral battle is not confined to a small number of marginal constituencies.
o Have a system sufficiently sophisticated to provide for stable government but also offering the opportunity for periodic power shifts to reflect the changing national mood

The debate about electoral reform to date has been too narrow, with a focus on just three alternative systems - Alternative Vote (AV), Alternative Vote Plus (AV+) and Single Transferable Vote (STV). These appear to have come to fore simply because they are the favoured options of elements among the main political parties. However, none of the three satisfies ippr's criteria and all contain significant flaws.

o AV lacks a proportional element
o AV+ will not deliver results which are sufficiently proportional
o STV would require a shift toward unacceptable super constituencies.

As such, it is ippr's view that none of these represents a viable and workable electoral system for the UK.

But there is an alternative the Additional Member System (AMS), the preferred choice of Lord Alexander of Weedon, the sole dissenting voice on the Jenkins Commission, which was charged by the first Blair government with proposing ideas for electoral reform in 1998. Subsequent election results and relevant analysis tend to vindicate Lord Alexander's position.

AMS involves using FPTP for the election of constituency based MPs with a top-up for the remaining seats. The case for AMS is a strong one:

o It maintains the constituency link
o Academic projections suggest that AMS delivers proportional election results, which avoid the distortions of other alternative systems
o It has been used successfully in Scotland and Wales
o It has a record of delivering stable government in countries such as Germany and New Zealand; academic projections
o It can easily be adapted to fit the UK context

ippr believes that AMS could deliver a more effective and proportional electoral system which would:

o Ensure a degree of continuity
o Be more responsive to the voting intentions of the electorate
o Enable the electoral system to reflect regional and national voting patterns

AMS would also help to change the culture of UK politics for the better by:

o Bringing renewed legitimacy to parliament
o Consolidating a new more consensual and cooperative way of doing politics
o Ending undue external influence in constituency politics
o Changing the culture of the British political media
o Helping to keep the UK together

Notes to editors:

The report: Devising an Electoral System for the 21st Century: The case for AMS is published today and is available as a PDF at www.ippr.org.uk/publicationsandreports/publication.asp?id=750

Contact

Tim Finch, Director of Communications - 020 7470 6106 / 07595 920 899 / t.finch@ippr.org