By Babak Moussavi

All votes are equal, but some are more equal than others

“It is a truth universally acknowledged that it takes fewer votes to elect a Labour than a Conservative government.” Sarah Wollaston, Conservative MP for Totnes, makes this “truth” sound like an immutable law of British politics. One does not need to be a psephologist to find this a little simplistic. The real truth that we can infer from the statement is that that she assumes there are only two parties that have a right to govern in this country, and that the rest can be safely ignored.

Yet, it seems absurd to blatantly ignore these ‘other’ parties, when the focus of Dr Wollaston’s article on Monday proceeded to directly target one of them. Indeed, Dr Wollaston condemns the third largest party, and her party’s coalition partner, the Liberal Democrats, for their apparent “betrayal” in anticipating their vote against the cherished Tory policy of boundary reform. If we assume she isn’t just being partisan (an improbable assumption), then she has evidently missed a few key points about electoral reform.

Read More

By Babak Moussavi

If Mitt the Twit wins, where else is there to hide?

Just as they would for a World Cup final, or an Olympic 100m race, millions of people will be glued to their television screens (and probably Twitter feeds) on Tuesday evening (or, more likely, Wednesday morning) to watch the sprint finish of a much more important event. The US Presidential elections are finally happening. If Mitt the Twit wins, the world loses.

At first sight, it seems reasonable that the election is close. American politics is heavily polarised, with only two (plausible) party options at each elections. Barack Obama promised much in 2008, and was inevitably constrained by the political system. Many on the left, such as Paul Krugman, argue that he could and should have been much bolder in his initiatives, with particular regard to the stimulus package that staved off depression, and the health care reforms that were modelled on proposals offered by Republicans (albeit of a different era). Many on the right, meanwhile, set out to stop Obama on Day One, believing him to be an illegitimate imposter, hell-bent on destroying America. They are naturally disappointed that he managed to get anything done at all.

Read More

By Babak Moussavi

What would Mill say?

The Liberal Democrats have now governed with their Conservative coalition partners for over two years. The jury is still out though on whether they have made much of an impact on government policy, or whether they have been naïve dupes who were fooled into locking themselves into a suicidal embrace with the tougher, more ruthless Tories. Most political observers have a strong opinion either way. It is certainly an important question for the Lib Dems, who understandably insist that they have played a role in shaping policy. But if they can’t convincingly show their achievements by the time of the next election, they will be massacred.

On the face of it, it seems a little silly to suggest they have had no impact. The last budget has widely been derided as a catastrophe, but the Lib Dem policy of raising the lowest tax band was progressive and successful, and the reputation of George Osborne appears to have taken the blow. Chris Huhne and now Ed Davey have been standing up for environmental policies, irritating the Chancellor in the process. Vince Cable, the Business Secretary, ensured the most controversial aspects of the Beecroft Report would not see the light of day (yet). On political reform, the boundary reform proposals that would have benefited the Conservatives are expected to be shelved, although the flagship Lib Dem constitutional policies have also failed to materialise.

Read More