The Joys of Living in a Safe Seat, or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love ‘Democracy’

As those of you reading this blog may have picked up (I know you’re out there), I’m a Wigan-born lad, living in the Makerfield constituency to be precise. Makerfield and Wigan at large are industrial areas, or at least they used to be before the pits closed. As a result, they are about as staunch Labour as as you can find in this country. I don’t think I can overstate this. To give you some idea about how safe a seat Makerfield is, we have returned a Labour MP for the past 100 years. A century of Labour rule. Let that sink in for a minute. We’ve been electing a Labour MP back when the word ‘Labour’ actually meant something!

Now, I realise people might not be interested in the details of my specific constituency. That’s fair enough. But the example of Makerfield has wide-reaching implications with the run up to the General Election. Makerfield is certainly not the only constituency to be classified as a safe seat - there are many others like it up and down the country. The obvious problem with this, of course, is how a democracy be said to exist in these areas. When somewhere can return an MP of the same party for the past 100 years, to me that says that there is something fundamentally wrong with the electoral system in this country.

In name, at least, we have a democracy in the safe-seats; we are free to vote for any party on the list at the polling station, though it’s highly unlikely your choice will get elected if it’s not the incumbent party. But here lies another problem; is there even a guarantee of choice on the ballot paper? Here are the people standing in Makerfield:

Itrat Ali (Conservative)
Yvonne Fovargue (Labour)
Dave Crowther (Lib Dem)
Ken Heslam(BNP)

...Is this some kind of joke? What kind of choice is this? Here we have the 3 wings of the ‘Fuck The Proles’ party in all their resplendent glory, as well as the joke candidate from the ‘Fuck the Foreign Proles’ party. This isn’t choice, it’s the illusion of choice, and its a poor one at that. Although nominations for candidates conclude on April 20th, (should there be a new nominee worthy of support I’ll update this post), even if a credible alternative was put forward we come back to the problem of the Labour stranglehold on the constituency. Once again, I can guarantee that Makerfield is not unique for its lack of options in this election, hailed by some of those detached from reality as ‘the most exciting in a generation.’

So what can be done by those unfortunate enough to live in safe seats? The long term goal would be to support widespread political reform, with the institution of some kind of PR system. Obviously, we can’t simply wait for that to happen, there is a sense of immediacy with the election right around the corner. People may still want to vote but have no credible alternative to support. If you are in that position, I would suggest spoiling the ballot, perhaps by writing ‘none of the above’on the ballot paper. Spoiled ballots still get counted when the results come, and that’s the best bet if you’re in an ultra-safe seat. Of course, you could always give this fella some support:

House of Lords to be Abolished?

Saw this in The Times today:

'PLANS to abolish the House of Lords and replace it with a wholly elected, 300-seat second chamber are set to be unveiled by the government before the general election.

Jack Straw, the justice secretary, is ready to unveil a draft bill on Lords reform in the next few weeks, a move designed to put the Tories on the back foot during the election campaign.

Although the plan is unlikely to become law before parliament is dissolved, Labour strategists hope it will open up a dividing line with the Conservatives, who will be reluctant to back any Labour reforms'

This is announced in the same week where the interminable expenses wrangling has reared its head in the Lords; the familiar tactic of citing parliamentary privilege to escape prosecution has come into play once again by the accused.

Of course, moves towards making the ludicrous and anachronistic entity that is the House of Lords more democratic should be welcomed, though this is presuming these measures will be followed through. In the run up to an election, all kinds of things are promised by the 3 major parties in order to both gain support and keep their opponents on the back foot. With many commentators predicting a hung parliament, it is unlikely that, should Labour get elected, they will not have a strong enough majority to pass this. When the Lib Dems are playing down talks of coalition, it remains to be seen what legs this piece of legislation has.

It's funny what comes back into fashion. In the early 1980s, abolishment of the House of Lords was one of the Labour Party's key manifesto pledges, and yet I do not see New Labour now being derided as 'far-left lunatics,' (although some of the sketchier blogs floating around will contend this) or this draft being termed 'the longest suicide note in history.' Perhaps the Labour Party is not as threatening to capital as once it was...

More to the point, the timing of this proposal is bizarre; why now? We have endured the worst economic crisis since the 1920s, unemployment is at 7%, and those in work have either had to take pay freezes or cuts. Furthermore, in order to cut the deficit, 'savage' cuts have been proposed in the public sector by all 3 parties at some stage in the election trail (though they have now since played down the gravity of the cuts). Employment, housing and welfare are of far more pressing concern than legislative reform at present: surely that should take precedent?

The proposals outline;

'The government’s reform blueprint would have all members directly elected, ending the tradition of party patronage. A proportional representation system would be used to select members, with voting taking place at the same time as general elections.

One-third of the new chamber would be elected on each occasion, with members serving three terms — 15 years — in a system similar to the one used to select members of the United States Senate. '

Hmm. Maybe it's just me being a bit of a stick in the mud, but it seems there's been a lot of
American import into the British political sphere lately. What with this televised, presidential-style debate with the 3 party leaders in the run up to the election, and now this reform based on the US legislature, it's worrying we seem to have run out of original ideas in UK politics.