Mehdi Hasan

Mehdi Hasan’s polemical take on politics, economics and foreign affairs

Dear Chancellor, your pants are on fire

Isn't it time for George Osborne to apologise for his mendacity during the AV campaign?

By Mehdi Hasan Published 02 July 2011 12:34

There were two depressing aspects to the electoral reform referendum in May. First, of course, there was the result: it was a crushing defeat for the Yes2AV campaign and all of us who support progressive, pluralist politics. Second, there was the US-style negative campaigning and gutter politics engaged in by the No to AV campaign and its parliamentary and media outriders. The No campaign was built on fear, hysteria and lies -- and it worked. The British public rejected a system that would have put more power in the hands of voters and reduced, in a stroke, the number of "safe seats" across the UK.

And here's the thing: the lies were brazen. The former home secretary and high-profile No to AV supporter David Blunkett admitted, on the eve of the vote, that anti-AV claims were "made up". No to AV, for example, pulled the figure "£250m" out of thin air and then argued that this would be the cost of introducing AV in the UK. One anti-AV poster -- proudly conceived by the Staggers guest blogger Dan Hodges -- claimed that the adoption of AV would automatically reduce the number of cardiac facilities available to premature babies. It was nasty stuff.

But to witness the Chancellor of the Exchequer, one of the most senior politicians in the land, getting down and dirty in the gutter on behalf of the anti-AV campaign was deeply disturbing. On 12 April, the Daily Mail reported Osborne as saying:

What really stinks is . . . one of the ways the Yes campaign is funded. The Electoral Reform Society, which is actually running some of the referendum ballots, and is being paid to do that by the taxpayer, stands to benefit if AV comes in . . . that organisation, the Electoral Reform Society -- part of it is a company [Electoral Reform Services Ltd] that makes money -- is funding the Yes campaign.

That stinks, frankly, and is exactly the sort of dodgy, behind-the-scenes shenanigans that people don't like about politics. The No campaign has asked for it to be investigated by the Electoral Commission and certainly I think there are some very, very serious questions that have to be answered.

But, on Wednesday, the Guardian's Roy Greenslade noted on his media blog that the Press Complaints Commission's latest list of resolved complaints includes two items on how Electoral Reform Services (ERSL) had complained about articles in both the Daily Mail and the Sun -- both of which carried the Chancellor's claims -- that they said contained inaccuracies. The Mail and the Sun, "to resolve the matter", agreed to publish a letter from the organisation in print and online (at the foot of the original articles).

The ERS letter pointed out:

Mr Osborne was wrong: the introduction of AV would not have required any additional voting machines and even if it had, ERSL would have gained no financial benefit because it doesn't manufacture or supply such machines.

Our services to local authorities are limited to the printing and mailing of ballot material and the provision of software for the management of electoral registers.

The Mail and the Sun have been forced to correct their misleading reports. The question is: isn't it time Mr Osborne is asked to apologise for or, at least, clarify his own dishonest claims?

Special Offer: Get 12 issues of New Statesman magazine for just £12

Tags: AV referendum AV David Blunkett George Osborne media

More from Mehdi Hasan

17 comments

Mon, 2011-07-04 12:10 — georgep

Surely readers of the Sun and Mail wouldn't need persuading from Osborne to vote no.

Sat, 2011-07-02 13:02 — Ricardo1

The lie that annoyed me the most was them saying AV wasn't a "One person one vote" system.

1P1V is such an important principle in democracy that without it you wouldn't have democracy at all.

Which begs the question, does David Cameron think Australia is an undemocratic country for electing its MPs with AV? Or America? who's constitution allows AV to be used if desired (as it is to elect some mayors)

Sat, 2011-07-02 13:16 — Dave C (not verified)

You can only say it worked though. If the downside of an allegation is an apology three months later when it's irrelevant to the outcome, then politicians will be tempted.

It reminds me of the Channel 4 Dispatches 'exposé' of Ken Livingstone just before the last mayoral elections. By the time its allegations were investigated and found to be largely groundless, that election was long over.

I look forward to Channel 4 Dispatches doing an investigation of Boris Johnson, but I don't suppose it'll ever happen.

Fri, 2011-12-09 19:39 — LindbergMarley

Cameron and Co also said words to the effect that we could either have the Alternative Vote or incubators for children but can't have both. What a load of right wing, spoilt little bastard, clap trap!! http://www.personalinjurylaws.net/

Sat, 2011-07-02 16:13 — frances smith (not verified)

allow me to assist here in the correct line on this issue.

"yes, the lies told by george osborne were terrible and he should apologise immediately.

however no one takes any notice of anything he says, so it wouldn't have made much different.

however, the main reason for the defeat of av is that people recognised it was too significant a change, and most people would prefer a meaningful change to pr."

there thats better.

Sat, 2011-07-02 17:38 — matthew fox (not verified)

It will be a cold day in hell, before Osborne starts apologising.

This highly paid public servant was too busy watching Roger Federer to actually perform his role of Chancellor.

Friday's report that growth in UK manufacturing had slowed for the 4th consecutive month, undermining the statement of " The March of the Makers "

The new narrative of the Right, is that we are entering a
" Soft Patch "

Sat, 2011-07-02 17:54 — Andrew Byrne (not verified)

The one thing that really annoyed about this AV referendum was when David Cameron said that those who supported PR should not support the Yes campaign because "AV is not Proportional." That had to be the most cynical statement I've heard from him, given that he and his party are the main reason such a choice was never on the ballot.
In effect, he was saying: "We've given you this floored system to reject so that we can say that out disproportionate system is the best available," though the fact that it also gives him 47% representation for 36% of the vote factors into it I'm sure.

Sat, 2011-07-02 18:08 — capt-price (not verified)

BTW is it just me or has Cameron piled on the pounds recently? His face looks more flushed and slapable than usual?

Sat, 2011-07-02 21:15 — Freeman2

'... a crushing defeat for the Yes2AV campaign and all of us who support progressive, pluralist politics.'

The two are not necessarily synonymous, as you'd know from the number of genuine PR supporters who opposed AV.

Sat, 2011-07-02 21:31 — Peter H (not verified)

"Our services to local authorities are limited to the printing and mailing of ballot material and the provision of software for the management of electoral registers."

No counting machines wouldn't have been required if AV came in, but the final paragraph of the ERS letter rings a little hollow.

To quote an announcement to the LSE last year: "London Elects has announced today it has awarded an electronic counting contract to IntElect, a joint venture between DRS Data Services Limited (the subsidiary trading company of DRS Data & Research Services plc) and Electoral Reform Services Limited.

The contract is initially to supply electronic counting to the 2012 Mayor and London Assembly Elections. The contract will include an option to extend the term of the service through to the GLA elections in 2016. The combined cost of the e-counting service for both the 2012 and 2016 elections, and including a London site for testing, training and demonstrations in 2012, is approximately £6.8m, whereas the manual counting of votes in one GLA election alone would cost in the region (at 2012 prices) of £3.6m and, it is estimated would take approximately 4 days to complete.

Both companies have a track record of success in electronic counting and, together, they form the UK’s largest supplier of data capture solutions and election administration services. DRS have provided similar services for GLA elections in 2000 and 2004, and ERS have undertaken postal voting administration and electronic counting for a number of local authorities. "

http://www.drs.co.uk/stock/2010/09/10/2012%20Mayor%20and%20London%20Asse...

Sun, 2011-07-03 08:58 — Luddite (not verified)

You lost, whats the point in whinging about it. The yes campaign was dull uninspiring and never got off the ground.

Tue, 2011-07-05 18:36 — English Electric (not verified)

...what Billy said.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4hpfqFt-0Q&feature=related

Sun, 2011-07-03 10:33 — Acamar (not verified)

I would never believe a word from Osborne. And for me the lies about cost were irrelevant. But I still felt the AV proposal was a bad change to our system (bad as it already is). Nobody could predict the effects it would have.

Sun, 2011-07-03 23:46 — Billy (not verified)

Osborne is an animal-like kaffir, a cattle with no intelligence, what did you expect Mehdi.

Sat, 2011-07-09 00:48 — Jon (not verified)

I honestly think what you call mendacity, Osborne thinks is the cost of winning. I think he's probably proud in exact proportion to the degree you (and perhaps I) think he ought to feel shame. Please no-one think him less than the extremely intelligent man he clearly is.

Sat, 2011-07-09 00:51 — Jon (not verified)

Furthermore - what is explicitly a lie in Osborne's AV statements, is implicitly so where it comes to his and his party's pronouncements about Labour economic mismanagement - not just if you think about regulatory policy towards the banks, or the budgets unopposed year after year, but when you look at the substance of statements such as the UK being bankrupt a la Greece, or that we haven't got any money left, so vital parts of the state must be removed, whether or not it causes economic contraction. The world service? I can't think of a better advert for the UK and would-be visitors. Yet the grant is 98% withdrawn.