The report by the Jenkins Commission on reform of the electoral system in Britain is probably as ambitious as could be expected, given the political forces at work. Its flaws - and there are a number - have their genesis in the terms of reference given to the Commission. It was asked to recommend a system that would generate broad proportionality, stable government, an extension of voter choice and the retention of the link between MPs and geographical constituencies. These tasks, the report noted dryly, were "not entirely compatible." In spite of that, the recommendations that have emerged would make the composition of the House of Commons more representative of the popular will, while reducing geographical divisions based on party strength. Discrimination against women and ethnic groups would also tend to diminish. And surely that would be no bad thing in a properly functioning democracy?
Elements of the British establishment do not see things in that light. Sweeping majorities - gained with as little as 40 per cent of the popular vote - and safe seats, have an obvious appeal for Conservative and Labour MPs. Both parties benefited significantly from this unrepresentative, first-past-the-post voting system in the past. Proportional representation systems in Europe were derided as dangerous and enfeebling. And the unrepresentative nature of British elections was ignored in the interests of the two big parties and of "strong government". Third ranking parties suffered. The extent of that discrimination was evident in the 1997 general election when the Liberal Democrats secured seven per cent of seats in the House of Commons with 17 per cent of the vote.
Pressure from the Liberal Democrats, through a pre-election alliance with the British Labour Party, was responsible for the establishment of the Jenkins Commission. The report proposes that 80-85 per cent of seats in the House of Commons be filled by PR in single-seat constituencies, with the remainder being filled on a "top-up" basis in proportion to votes cast for the parties. This system could have given the Liberal Democrats an extra 43 seats last time out, depending on the number of "top up" seats available and the cut-off point at which small parties would be granted representation. Those two issues will be decided by the British Parliament but, on the basis of current thinking, the bar for entry to the House of Commons is likely to be set very high.
The British Prime Minister, Mr Blair, adopted a positive tone when he described the report as "a well argued and powerful case for the system it recommends". And, ignoring critics within his own party, he linked it to the government's constitutional reform programme, involving devolved administrations in Scotland and Wales. In those circumstances, it was only to be expected that the leader of the Conservative Party, Mr William Hague, should seek to make common cause with Labour dissidents and British business leaders in blocking voting reform. The proposed electoral system may not be introduced until the election after next. But the first hurdle will involve a referendum on the issue during the lifetime of this government.