John Richardson, the Ugley Vicar, asks Is there a Christian view on Alternative Voting?, and is “surprised at the overall silence on this whole topic.” This is in the context of the referendum on the Alternative Vote which will be held here in the UK on 5th May.

Personally I am a convinced supporter of a YES! vote in the AV referendum. My only concern is that this is a somewhat half-hearted measure, less satisfactory than a full system of proportional representation. On the other hand, more proportional systems have other disadvantages, for example by breaking the links between MPs and constituencies. So I judge the AV proposal to be a good compromise which should be acceptable to almost all.

Of course I understand why some MPs are strongly opposed to the change: it means that all of them will have to work hard at every general election, as there will no longer be any safe seats. From my perspective that is also one of the best arguments in favour of change. For more arguments from the official campaign, click the YES! image.

I should disclose that I am still a member of the Liberal Democrat party, which has long favoured electoral reform and strongly favours a YES! vote in the referendum – although I am currently rather disillusioned with Nick Clegg’s leadership especially on the student fees issue.

But this is all from a secular viewpoint. Is there any distinctively Christian approach to this issue? The problem is that democracy is not really a Christian institution, although it has become a presupposed good at least among more liberal Christians. So how can there be a Christian view on exactly what kind of democracy is best? I can’t presume to give a definitive answer, but I can suggest a direction from which this can be approached, in the following principle which the apostle Paul outlined to the Corinthians and the Philippians:

I appeal to you, brothers and sisters, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another in what you say and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly united in mind and thought.

1 Corinthians 1:10 (NIV 2011)

Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit. Rather, in humility value others above yourselves, ⁴ not looking to your own interests but each of you to the interests of the others.

Philippians 2:3-4 (NIV 2011)

Now I accept that these appeals by Paul are primarily about relationships within the church, not in the political sphere. But surely they show God’s ideal for how all relationships should be conducted. So they can also be applied to relationships outside the church, including in the political arena – although as Christians we should not try to enforce them in a legalistic way on outsiders.

The principle Paul put forward can be summarised as that groups should seek consensus rather than divide along party lines, and should avoid pushing through decisions which might be against the interests of others, even if those others are a minority. I am sorry to say that this is very different from how political decisions have usually been made at least here in the UK. Indeed I think Paul’s words could be taken as a broad condemnation of making decisions on a majority vote, although there might be circumstances where that is unavoidable.

However, given that the UK is a democracy and no one, including myself, is seriously wanting to change that, then how can Paul’s principle best be reconciled with democracy? The ideal might be to elect MPs by a consensus of the voters in each constituency, and then for them to make decisions in Parliament by consensus. However, given the wide range of strongly held views among voters, there is no way that this could happen. Perhaps the best that could be hoped for is to find a candidate in each constituency who is acceptable, if not ideal, to 80-90% of the voters. But I don’t know how this could be put into practice.

Now the Alternative Vote is not going to deliver even this kind of partial consensus. But it will ensure that each successful candidate is acceptable to at least 50% of those voting. It will put an end to the current situation in which many MPs, and sometimes whole governments, are elected with the support of only one third of those who voted.

The Alternative Vote won’t mean the end of political parties. But it will make it in the interests of those parties to select candidates who can command broad support. Where extremists or people tainted by scandal are selected, even in apparently safe seats, they will be in danger from other parties working together against them. So AV will weaken extreme tendencies within parties and increase the number of MPs supporting moderate policies and consensus solutions. Even when there is not a hung Parliament, there will be less of the traditional rapid policy swings when new governments are formed. All in all, in Paul’s words, there should be more people “not looking to [their] own interests but … to the interests of the others.”

I hope what I have written here will help to guide Christian voters at the referendum in May. Personally I hope that you will join me in voting YES! But first you should think through the issues involved and come to your own decision.