Matthew Flinders: Political class must prove to public that voting matters

The 2013 British Social Attitudes Survey reveals that only a small majority of the public now turns out to vote, and fewer than ever before identify with a political party.

The UK is by no means unique in terms of the relationship between the governors and the governed and even a quick glance at the titles of recent books on this topic – Why We Hate Politics, Democracy in Crisis, The Life and Death of Democracy. The
list is almost endless and reflects the fact that “disaffected democrats” appear to exist in every part of the world. But what is to be done?

There are, as Bernard Crick emphasised in his classic In Defence of Politics (1962), no simple answers to complex questions and, in many ways, the political process and the capacity of politicians is defined by this simple fact.

And yet in the intervening half-century since Crick’s classic book was published, public attitudes to political institutions, political processes and politicians have become increasingly negative.

Today three-quarters of the public feel the political system is not working for them, younger people are less likely to identify with a political party, less likely to believe it a civic duty to vote and are less likely to have engaged in any conventional political activities.

Recent research suggests that only 12 per cent of those aged between 18 and 25 years report that they will definitely vote in 2015. The other 88 per cent appear unsure whether it is worth voting at all.

In this context, Russell Brand’s argument appears slightly more sophisticated than some of his critics might have appreciated.

The comedian’s position was that it was rational for people not to turn out and express their democratic right when there was, in fact, no real choice between the main parties.

To do otherwise was simply to participate in a sham that actually gnawed away at the health of democratic politics. The problem, however, with this argument is that it polarises the debate around a set of rather crude and simplistic options – “Vote!” versus “Don’t Vote”, the “engaged” versus “the disengaged”, “politicians” versus “comedians” – okay, so I made the last bit up but you know what I mean.

My point is therefore whether the arguments about voting, turnout and elections risk unnecessarily closing-down options when we should, in fact, be reinvigorating the options we have while looking to create
new forms of political engagement.

In terms of voting, surely the real question is how to make voting matter? For some people this might involve the introduction of compulsory voting or reform of the electoral system and these ideas merit consideration (although in Australia, where voting is compulsory, levels of public trust in politics make the UK look positively healthy) but a simpler and more effective reform might include the addition of a “none of the above” option on all ballot papers.

In this way, citizens could make a formal and recognised contribution to the electoral results without having to demonstrate their frustration through spoiling their ballot paper or simply not bothering to vote. The danger is that at the moment the “none of the above” option might actually win quite a few elections!

A more radical option involves the introduction of time limits for MPs. Let us say – for the sake of argument – a maximum of two or three terms (i.e. 10 or 15 years) after which the individual would have to leave Parliament and serve the same period “in the real world” before being eligible to stand for re-election.

The simple fact is that the vast majority of the public do not “hate” politics (or politicians) and it is closer to the truth to suggest that they no longer understand how politics works or what politicians actually do. Why does everything seem to take so long and never be quite right? Why does there tend to be such a gap between what is promised and then delivered in office?

The crux of the issue therefore
lies not so much with voting but with bridge-building and promoting the public understanding of politics (and therefore the political understanding of the public).

• Matthew Flinders is director of the Sir Bernard Crick Centre for the Public Understanding of Politics at the University of Sheffield. The Speaker of the House of Lords will speak tonight at 6pm at St George’s Lecture Theatre, Mappin Street, Sheffield. Entry is free.