An end to open primaries?
When that the United States, the most powerful democracy in the world, prefers the First-Past-the-Post system of elections, John Humphrys pointed out that the US political system has primary elections too.
This, Humphrys argued, gives people more choice since supporters of the main parties get to choose the party's candidates.
Ah, Mr Cameron replied, but we are starting to get primary elections in Britain.
Yes and no, prime minister. The Labour and Liberal Democrat parties show few signs of holding primary elections to pick their candidates.
The Conservatives held 20 or so so-called primaries before the last election, whereby members of the public could turn up to a meeting and help pick the Tories local candidate.
I attended one of the first such events, in Battersea, and voted, and also filmed the evening for Newsnight. And in two or three seats, such as Totnes and Gosport, the Conservatives even conducted a postal ballot of local voters to choose their candidates.
But now the process has slowed down. A pledge in the May coalition agreement for the state to fund 200 primaries in safe seats, for all parties, was quietly dropped last autumn on cost grounds.
And when the Totnes MP Sarah Wollaston rebelled against the government's NHS reorganisation, Mr Cameron himself was so annoyed that he was heard to remark that it was the last time his party would conduct an open primary.
I'm Michael Crick, and I'm Newsnight's political editor. My guiding rule is that in any story there's usually something the politicians would prefer the world not to know. My job is to find that out. Follow me on
Comment number 1.
At 3rd May 2011, Bass_God wrote:Another example of democracy coming second to party management, I fear. The politburos at the top of each party trust their memberships not a jot and the electorate even less.
Profoundly depressing.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 1)
Comment number 2.
At 3rd May 2011, JunkkMale wrote:Speaking of arguing from Mr. Humphrys, anything else of note take place in that lovely blinkered world within the bubble?
It's just that I am a bit unsure about all this AV lark, so like to rely on the calm, impartial questioning of protagonists, pro or con, to arrive at a view.
For instance, one argument I have heard is that it is going to prove complex to understand.
And in challenging that I rather might expect the 91Èȱ¬'s finest to not only not get on blustering tribal high horses to push their pet agendas, but certainly don't expect them to prove the point quite so eloquently, albeit in such foot-shooting style.
Good job one doesn't have to pay... oh.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 2)
Comment number 3.
At 3rd May 2011, Bass_God wrote:#2
I'm afraid those days are long gone. Politician/media relations are almost entirely based upon finger-jabbing from the interviewer and non-answering from the interviewee.
Bring back Richard Dimbleby!
Complain about this comment (Comment number 3)
Comment number 4.
At 3rd May 2011, barriesingleton wrote:A VOTING REFORM THAT WOULD HAVE COST NOTHING
I have raised, before, the matter of an ABSTENTION choice on the voting paper. My MP (typically) told me to spoil my paper, and Westminster doesn't like the idea because it is PROOF OF TURNING OUT coupled with a tacit VOTE OF NO CONFIDENCE in governance generally. It stops Westminster braying about 'apathetic masses'. Even if no one ever used it (or understood it) nothing negative can accrue.
ZERO COST - IT CAN ONLY HARM THE WESTMINSTER CITADEL - RULED OUT.
This is the Westminster Ethos: self serving, self perpetuating, well defended AGAINST US! But it relies for strength on the iniquitous party system, so
SPOILPARTYGAMES
Complain about this comment (Comment number 4)
Comment number 5.
At 3rd May 2011, sionnyn wrote:Shouldn't we be given a referendum on whether or not we want to see primaries as well, if Cameron is using them to justify FPTP ?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 5)
Comment number 6.
At 3rd May 2011, barriesingleton wrote:JUSTIFIER CAMERON (#5)
We are going to need a lot of referenda on that basis. Cameron may yet out-Blair Tony, when it comes to justifications, and all done without a dossier or a Campbell.
WE GOT OURSELVES ANOTHER ONE.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 6)
Comment number 7.
At 4th May 2011, stevie wrote:bring back Geoffrey Searl and the radio Doctor....Dr Hill..
Complain about this comment (Comment number 7)
Comment number 8.
At 4th May 2011, barriesingleton wrote:I'M WORRIED ABOUT JIM (#7)
Dr Dale was better stevie.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 8)
Comment number 9.
At 10th May 2011, cntv wrote:Mr Cameron loves 'first past the post' - even though his own election as Prime Minister and his component of the LibDemCon coalition government was not.
He will be pleased to hear, though, that the BOGUS AV v FPTP REFERENDUM is now 'first past the post' in the world of bogus referendums:
The Electoral Commission have a lot of explaining to do, Mr Crick:
If only you'd do the asking.
Why not...
Complain about this comment (Comment number 9)