Apparently today is the day the electoral reform society have their picnic. However instead of sandwiches there will be debate, and the proverbial bees set to ruin the party is the subject of Alternative Vote.

It's important to realise that this subject is getting more important by the day. In two years time we could be sitting under a Conservative government, and worse still it could be one with a huge majority. Now the Tories have never advocated electoral reform, and Labour in 1997 showed that huge majorities in parliament mean a complete lack of initiative to change the system that got them such power. Every day counts, if it isn't already too late, because the next two years could be the last chance we have to change our electoral system to something fairer for another decade or more.

Labour are in a position where they would be crazy to not try at least something to change the way we vote for our MPs, they're heading for a huge defeat, yet that defeat will be based on the same sort of numbers Labour achieved in 1997, i.e. winning seats without the majority vote. Proportional Representation may not save them to keep them in power, even with a coalition, but it could go a long way to stopping the Tories having a huge majority of power in the House of Commons.

But as James of Queqeuam Blog says, the way to get Labour to do this has to be by pushing for positive solutions that are known to have worked in the country. The idea that AV can be touted as the compromise is a ridiculous notion that essentially accepts defeat for the electoral reform movement. A system that simply encourages people to vote between two candidates is not a proportionate and fair system. Look at the London Mayor elections, people soon realised that if they didn't put either Labour or Conservatives in their second preference then their vote wouldn't count.

I hope to hear that the meeting has ended with a resounding agreement in carrying on pushing for a Single Transferable Vote based system that works in an equitable and fair manner, and to not water the debate down with talk of compromise.