Debating the Alternative Vote (AV)

In recent weeks I've become a little embroiled in the Alternative Vote debate on Twitter.

The debate there is very limited, not because of the 140 character limit, but because most of the vocal protagonists (particularly on the #yes2av side) just throw blandishments like "fairer", "better" and "reform" around as if vocabulary was a fair substitute for debate.

And so I was easily tempted to go to a real debate on the topic organised by the UCLU Debating Society.

I had been to a few events at UCL before, mostly in connection with SSEES, but this was my first time in the magnificent Wilkins Gustave Tuck Lecture Theatre.

Getting there was something of an achievement in itself as UCL is as well signposted as most hospitals and there were obstacles like a keep fit class along the way.

Arriving early meant a good choice of seats (on the end of a row about a third of the way up) and also time for a little wine kindly provided by the society.

This was billed as a public event but, apart from the speakers, I'm pretty sure that I was the only non-student there. It was a little weird so it's lucky that I don't get fazed by things like that.

The speakers for the motion, This House Would vote YES to AV, were Jonathan Bartley and Murad Qureshi AM (2nd and 1st right) who were opposed by Dr. Robert McIlveen and Stephen Parkinson (3rd and 4th right).

This was a formal debate, rather than a discussion and normal debating rules regarding length of speeches, interruptions and rights or reply.

The disappointment was immediate with Jonathan Bartley's opening remarks repeating the familiar vague claims and also the misleading claim of needing a majority of votes to win.

Robert McIlveen responded well by pointing out that AV will make no difference at all in the 1/3rd of seats that are already held with over 50% of the vote going to one party.

He also pointed out that a more complicated voting system will work against the less intelligent to which Murad Qureshi later responded by saying that it was OK for these people to vote with a single X. An appalling attitude.

The AV leads to PR claim was also demolished to complete a very convincing speech by Robert McIlveen.

Sound-bite of the evening went to the Nos with "AV moves us from wasted votes to wasted elections" as coalitions will means, as we have seen with the current administration, the policies we voted for being discarded by politicians in favour of agreements made behind closed doors.

The debate livened up a little when the audience were allowed there say. Unfortunately most of these were written beforehand and so were unrelated to what had gone before. For example, one speaker argued that AV would lead to PR when this had already been dismissed.

The two best speakers were both for abstaining on the vote. One pointed out that the debate was not being taken seriously by the government as they had put the referendum on the same date as other elections that the political parties would give priority to. Another said, quite rightly, that nobody had explained why AV changes anything.

The lowest point of the evening came in Jonathan Bartley's closing remarks when he mentioned his disabled son meeting David Cameron for no apparent reason.

The evening recovered a little after that when I joined some of the student in the nearby The Bar @ TCR for some closing drinks.

If this is a sign of the standard of debate that we can expect over the next three months then politics is going to be the loser, whatever the result of the referendum.

New Parties in the New Europe

"Live Fast, Die Young: The Short and Curious Life Cycle of New Parties in the New Europe" was the title of a talk that incited me to SSEES on a Thursday evening.

SSEES, that's the UCL's School of Slavonic and East European Studies if you want it in full, runs a number of interesting lectures relating to Central Europe but I get to fewer than I would like as they normally start at the student-friendly 5pm when I'm still chained to my desk. I could make this one as it started at the more worker-friendly time of 6pm.

For reasons that were never made clear, we actually met in a cramped lecture room in the building next door to SSEES which was bit of a challenge to squeeze in to and also deprived us of the promised wine and nibbles. Luckily the talk was diverting enough to overcome those difficulties.

The speaker was Professor Kevin Deegan-Krause from Wayne State University, USA who betrayed his nationality through his accent and his constant referral to the countries under discussion as being in Eastern Europe when it was made very clear to me when working there that they are in Central Europe. The name of the time-zone they are in is a clue here.

Professor Deegan-Krause took us through a model that he and colleagues have been working on that attempts to explain how political parties grow and die in the New Europe where each election see the emergence of new parties and the gradual decline of old ones.

The talk explored some of the types of parties that emerge, e.g. those that focus on fighting corruption or those that are built around a charismatic leader.

It then explained some of ways that these parties decline. For example, parties fighting corruption when elected can be tainted with the same corrupt tag that the electorate applies to all politicians and the party become part of the problem rather than the solution and so it withers and dies.

Elements of the birth/death model were interesting and illuminating but I found the model itself unconvincing and quite possibly unnecessary.

I asked a simple question at the end, and that was "so what?" and Professor Deegan-Krause was kind enough to say that that was something that they wanted to look at in further research, e.g. the correlation between party volatility and outcome metrics like voter participation or economic growth.

I'll be interested to see how that turns out.

PM of Slovakia, Robert Fico, speaks to BACEE

When the British Association for Central and Eastern Europe (BACEE) was wound up in 2008 it was agreed that the name would live on through a series of high-profile lectures organized with UCL's School of Slavonic and Eastern European Studies (SSEES).

The event took some time to arrange but in November 2009 the first BACEE/SSEES talk was given by the Prime Minister of Slovakia, Robert Fico and I took the morning off work to attend.

The original impressions were not encouraging through my western eyes as Robert Fico looks like you would expect a former Easter European Communist (or a Bond villain) to look with his square features, drab suit and bland tie.

But appearances can often be deceptive and in the case they most definitely were as he delivered a very engaging and informative talk that looked back on the successes and failures of the twenty years since the Velvet Revolution.

He claimed democracy and human rights as successes but admitted that the economy and standards of living had not done as well. For example, the average wage in the last year of Communism (1989) was not reached again until 2007.

The root cause for the problems currently faced by Slovakia (and, presumably, similar countries) is that when the Communists were overthrown the only people in a position to take over where those who already had wealth and power. This clique then disposed of state assets to themselves.

The talk covered a wide range of subjects which were presented in a refreshing open and frank way; no sign here of the empty media-trained spin that we are force-fed in the UK.

Fico was equally honest and forthright in dealing with audience questions at the end, two of which resonated with the current situation in the UK; funding and standards in university education and integration of minorities. He made the good point that minorities should learn Slovak (in addition to their own language) not to become Slovaks but in order to work better with the Slovak authorities and political systems in the cause of their community.

Overall Fico impressed me immensely and I felt that he gave a very honest account of the situation in Slovakia today.

It is still a great shame (and a mistake by this government) that BACEE no longer exists as an organisation but it is good that their reputation helped to secure such a prestigious lecture. I expect I'll be taking holiday to catch the next one too.

Dobre rano, Slovensko!

A showing of the documentary Dobre rano, Slovensko! (Good Morning Slovakia!) was the second BCSA event of the week, this time organised in conjunction with the UCL School of Slavonic and Eastern European Studies.

The film was introduced by its producer, Fedor Gal, who played a part in Slovakia's emergence from behind the Iron Curtain in the Winter of 89/90.

Sadly I do not know yet exactly what his role was as technical difficulties meant that we had to watch the film in Slovak, which it may surprise you to learn, is not one of the one languages that I speak.

Luckily the Q&A session was translated so I was able to follow that part easily enough.

I had to leave the drinks reception afterwards fairly early but was there long enough to speak to a few new Czechs/Slovaks who I hope to see at other BCSA events and also to get an offer from Fedor Gal to send me the English version of the film, which I am looking forward too.

Almost all of the retrospectives on 1989 in the UK have focused on Germany and so it was good not just to hear fromCzechoslovakia but actually from the Slovak part.

The last ever BACEE meeting

On Tuesday evening I attended an Extraordinary General Meeting of the British Association for Central and Eastern Europe (BACEE) which was called to agree the closure of the company following the withdrawal of grants by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. Friends in high-places have failed to reverse the decision, as have debates in parliament and articles in the national press, so now it is over.

If there are any glimmers of hope they come from the agreement with UCL School of Slavonic and East European Studies (SSEES) to hold an annual lecture under the BACEE banner and to maintain the BACEE archive so that researchers have access to it.

And any quick review of the news in Europe (e.g. Russia threatening to point missiles at Poland, Czech Republic and Ukraine) shows that there is the need for somebody to do the work that BACEE did so well.