Letter: Blair and Lib Dems

Philip Goldenberg
Thursday 01 January 1998 20:02 EST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Sir: "What reasons," asks Donald MacIntyre, "would now justify the [Liberal Democrats'] stubborn refusal of [cabinet] office?" ("Why Blair will soon invite Ashdown into the Cabinet", 30 December). Let me give two.

First, the history of coalition governments under a first-past-the-post (FPTP) electoral system shows that, at the subsequent election, the perceived electoral choice is for the government (vote for the larger party) or against it (vote for the opposition). The smaller coalition partner suffers heavily from a loss of its distinct identity. So a coalition could only be based, so far as the Liberal Democrats are concerned, on a cast-iron commitment to a reformed electoral system being in place before the next general election.

Second, Mr MacIntyre answers his own question with his next words: "Blair is now impatient to gather together the collective anti-Tory forces while he is ahead". The worst way forward for British politics would be the combination of a single party containing "all the sensible people" on the one hand and the continuation of a FPTP electoral system on the other as, by definition, sooner or later some non-sensible party would win.

The better way is to embrace the pluralism inherent in a reformed electoral system, and recognise that there is at present, within British politics, a spectrum of five parties (six in Scotland and Wales), with the Conservatives fundamentally split between the English Nationalists on the one hand and a Christian Democrat-type strand on the other, and the Labour Party divided between "New Labour" and the "Tyrannosaurus Tendency". "Gathering together the anti-Tory forces" under a FPTP electoral system is precisely the opposite of that pluralism.

PHILIP GOLDENBERG

Woking, Surrey

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in