§ 11. Mr. John Bercow (Buckingham)What plans he has to implement the recommendations of the independent commission on the voting system. [64355]
§ The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. Jack Straw)We made it clear in our manifesto that implementation of the recommendations of the independent commission on the voting system would require the endorsement of those recommendations by the people of this country in a referendum, and that remains the position.
§ Mr. BercowI thank the Home Secretary for that reply. Why should we give up the British electoral system, which is the most widely used in the world—it is used in 62 countries and by 49 per cent. of the world's electors—in favour of the dog's breakfast served up by the noble Lord Jenkins, which has never been tried anywhere in the world? Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that when, as long ago as 1974, the then Labour Cabinet rejected Lord Jenkins's first paper recommending electoral reform, it demonstrated a wisdom that he would be well advised to follow 25 years later?
§ Mr. StrawSome people take the hon. Gentleman's view; others take a different one. There is one thing of which I am clear: any change to the electoral system should have the full support of the British population in a referendum. It is of course a matter for the British people whether they wish to stick with the current system.
§ Mrs. Gwyneth Dunwoody (Crewe and Nantwich)Before my right hon. Friend allows his colleagues to blunder into the incompetent system suggested by Lord Jenkins, who proved conclusively that he could not even run a political party, will he show sufficient confidence in the British electorate's ability to study carefully the selection procedures for and elections to the Welsh Assembly and the Scottish Parliament and, only after those arrangements have had sufficient time to run, put to the British people the suggestion that even this Government can occasionally make mistakes?
§ Mr. StrawI entirely subscribe to my hon. Friend's final proposition—as was said to Jack Lemmon in the last line of "Some Like it Hot", "Nobody's perfect." That certainly includes the present Home Secretary. There is a case for seeing how the new systems of proportional representation for elections to the Welsh Assembly, the Scottish Parliament, the Northern Ireland Assembly and, indeed, the European Parliament, fall into place before proceeding with the referendum. We shall take those findings into account.
§ Mr. Richard Allan (Sheffield, Hallam)Will the Home Secretary confirm that his view of electoral systems could be described as horses for courses, as he has said previously? Will he confirm, to echo the debate on the euro, that, while the Conservatives say that they want no change and my party is committed to change, the Government's position is to consider the national interest in deciding whether to change? Will he therefore also 560 confirm that it remains his Government's opinion that it is in the national interest that a referendum of the British people should decide the matter?
§ Mr. StrawI am grateful to the hon. Gentleman. It goes without saying that we speak and decide things only in the national interest. We have always been committed to a referendum. Which recommendations Ministers and Members of Parliament make to the electorate remain to be seen. Let us be absolutely clear: the decision on future voting systems for Westminster is not in the hands or the pockets of any Minister or Member of Parliament. It is for the British people to decide. I am quite sure that, when it comes to it, there will be a vigorous and open debate on the issue.
§ Mr. Peter L. Pike (Burnley)Will my right hon. Friend confirm that the Jenkins proposals would allot a disproportionate share of the say to minority parties and that that is not an acceptable way forward? Is not it a fact that, if we accept the Jenkins fudge, between 15 and 20 per cent. the incumbents of parliamentary seats would not be directly elected?
§ Mr. StrawIt is patent that that could be a consequence. During the debate on the Jenkins report, I pointed out some of the questions that still remain about its recommendations. The Jenkins commission felt that the current system produced a lack of proportionality. If one examines its subsequent proposals, however, one might consider that the fact that the Conservative party's position—this is not a partisan point—will remain the same suggests that the committee's recommendations are not robust on proportionality, if on anything else.
§ Sir Norman Fowler (Sutton Coldfield)Contrary to what the hon. Member for Sheffield, Hallam (Mr. Allan) has said, does the Home Secretary remember that, when he was in opposition, he wrote an article for The Times, in which he said:
Proportional representation is not a matter of morality but crude party advantage—which is why the Liberals only adopted the idea in 1922, when their decline really began"?Before congratulating the Home Secretary on those words, may I check that he stands by them?
§ Mr. StrawOf course I remember the article. It is one of a series that I used to write for The Times, and which I much enjoyed writing. It might be to the advantage of the House if I were to publish my extensive collected works on first past the post. I believe that the position that I have taken on the subject is no secret.