Precisely a year since the general election that brought in the coalition government, Britain will go to the polls this Thursday over an issue that has divided the governing parties like no other.

Along side local council elections, a referendum will take place on whether to replace the country's traditional first past the post system of voting with Alternative Vote.

Under that system candidates are ranked in order of preference, and would need an absolute majority rather than a relative majority to get elected. It is a system used in a handful of countries, including Australia, Fiji and Papua New Guinea.

While the past year hasn't been an easy ride for the coalition government “whether it's been on reform of the National Health Service, increasing the tuition fees paid by university students, or changes to the immigration system” the campaigns for and against the new electoral system is where side-swipes have given way to open warfare.

The “No” campaign has been accused of using tactics like that of Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels, by none-other than the Liberal Democrat Energy Minister, Mr Chris Huhne, who has also accused the opposing campaign of repeatedly using “untruths” and “falsehoods”.

With the Prime Minister, Mr David Cameron, fronting much of the “No” campaign, it's hardly a sign of coalition partners at peace.

Mr Cameron has attempted to distance himself as much as possible from the “No” campaign, which in one campaign theme had suggested that soldiers' lives would be endangered by the change, to little avail. The fact that the “No” campaign is being bankrolled almost entirely by some of the Conservative Party's biggest donors has little to dispel this picture.

Opponents of Alternative Vote argue the current system is simple, fair and decisive, and gives members of the public the power they need to kick governments out. The new system by contrast, they argue would lead to unstable coalition governments.

The “Yes” campaign argues this is precisely the reason a change is needed and that an Alternative Vote system would lead to less complacency among the biggest parties.

“The system would essentially have the Liberal Democrats as the king maker,” says Mr Simon Hix, Professor of European politics at the London School of Economics.

Prof Hix believes the implications of the referendum could extend far further into the relationship between the coalition partners. If the campaign goes against them, the Liberal Democrats could destabilise an important but little known part of the Conservative's recent policy agenda, a plan to redraw constituency boundaries, which must still return to the House of Commons.

It could also influence how rigorously the Liberal Democrats pursue their pledge to get an elected House of Lords. A “no” vote could prompt the Conservatives to hand them that concession, as a consolation prize, argues Prof Hix.

Either way, the stakes are big, but for the moment it seems likely that the supporters of the status quo are likely to get their way. Current polls suggest a clear lead for the “No” campaign of between 10 and 15 per cent over the “Yes” group.

Related Topics
comment COMMENT NOW