Decision time

Voting commences tomorrow in the Great British General Election. If you think voting is a waste of time, I recommend the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (AKA North Korea) as a place of residence for it is a democracy where you don’t need to vote – ever.
These TV debates have ‘energised’ the election it is claimed; rather it has saved the campaign from being as gruelling and turgid as a World Championship Snooker Final between Neil Robertson and Graeme Dott. It was during the first of the debates, that people found that the Liberal Democrats actually exist. Having voted for them in 2001 and 2005, I felt a little vindicated that a large swathe realised that the Lib Dems were not part of the loony fringe but a respectable party which is regularly cheated of its rightful share of parliamentary seats compared with the percentage of people who mark their cross for it.
‘I agree with Nick’ became a catchphrase, as the polls rocketed for the ‘third party’ to something like 33%. It was conveniently overlooked that another, more odious ‘Nick’ who has been in Nick, garnered 20% of voting interests after a bad-tempered Question Time appearance, whose cause was vastly helped by all the other guests ganging up on him – understandable, but unfortunately playing into his hands. No-one was printing T-shirts claiming ‘I agree with Nick’ then (thankfully). And I’m not referring to Nick Robinson here!
When Jimmy Carter was challenged in his presidency from within his own party by Edward Kennedy, he played it smart. He knew Kennedy’s support was wide but not deep and he won the areas he needed to see of his rival. Didn’t help when Ronald Reagan turfed him out of the White House by a landslide though. The worry is the Lib Dem support is similarly wide but not deep enough to win a number of constituencies to match the turnout. Most of the support is amongst the young who don’t have an impressive record when it comes to tootling down to their local polling station.
I’ve voted for the Lib Dems, not out of tribal reasons - for given their fissiparous past, they are the least of the big three capable of drawing on that characteristic – but because I’ve agreed with their policies. They’ve opposed the Iraq war from the outset and they continue to oppose Trident nuclear defence (when we have a far cheaper option that Germany, Italy and Spain subscribe to – it’s called the American nuclear umbrella). Just as importantly as what they are against is what they are for – voting reform. Not the Johnny-come latelies of the Labour Party, this has been a long-cherished goal. The Guardian, piqued that Labour chose not to indulge in regicide and kept Gordon Brown against their strong lobbying, have swung their support behind the Lib Dems – unprecedented for the house paper of the Labour movement – and it because of the Lib Dems commitment to proportionality, so that votes matter when cast, rather than an MP winning 34% (or even less) of all the votes in their area. It is still scandalous that in 1983 Labour won 27% of the popular vote and finished with 32% of the seats in parliament and the Liberal/SDP Alliance won 25% and got only 2% of the MPs. Such a system as first-past-the post (as it is commonly referred to) is inherently unfair – maybe suitable for less mature democracies but a festering sore on the Mother of Parliaments. I am dearly hoping for a hung parliament come Friday morning.