Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Proportional Representation
- Thread starter goldstone
- Start date
I've always supported it on the basis that it seems to me to be a far more democratic process. There was of course a recent referendum on a very watered-down version of PR, which got roundly rejected. Neither of the big two parties will ever support it since it will inevitably mean that it's massively less likely that any party will achieve an overall majority in the Commons ever again. We'd have to learn how to govern with perpetual hung parliaments.
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 35,290
Neil Hamilton is currently sitting in the Welsh Assembly, as a consequence of PR.
under PR the current "fiasco" of no overall majority and government formed from coalitions would become the norm. some may say thats a good thing and it has merits, but its certainly not the solution if you dont want this sort of political wrangling.
under PR the current "fiasco" of no overall majority and government formed from coalitions would become the norm. some may say thats a good thing and it has merits, but its certainly not the solution if you dont want this sort of political wrangling.
How would it work with regard to the smaller parties ie Greens UKIP etc - maybe 10 to 15 seats under PR - where would the MP be represented as only one seat won under 1st past the post in 2917.
You will have an MP whom the electorate haven't voted for.
You will have an MP whom the electorate haven't voted for.
clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,297
Not pure but I'm a huge advocate of electoral reform.
Probably alternative vote.
The argument that changing the electoral system leads to unstable coalitions is flawed since we've had two in recent history under first past the post.
The current system is helping to create division.
What AV can give you is actually a stronger single party with a clearer mandate. It's much harder to argue with.
In 2015 such a system would have given the Tories MORE seats not less.
Our current system that can elect an MP with less than half the "only round" votes is indefensible.
I'd would however be happy with the Lords being decided on a pure PR basis. They can be elected every 10 years and come and go based on the popular vote.
Sent from my LG-K520 using Tapatalk
Probably alternative vote.
The argument that changing the electoral system leads to unstable coalitions is flawed since we've had two in recent history under first past the post.
The current system is helping to create division.
What AV can give you is actually a stronger single party with a clearer mandate. It's much harder to argue with.
In 2015 such a system would have given the Tories MORE seats not less.
Our current system that can elect an MP with less than half the "only round" votes is indefensible.
I'd would however be happy with the Lords being decided on a pure PR basis. They can be elected every 10 years and come and go based on the popular vote.
Sent from my LG-K520 using Tapatalk
Arthur
Well-known member
Very much in favour. I live in Wealden so my vote is totally pointless. The tories could put Rolf Harris up and he'd still probably get in.
The Brexit referendum was the first election where I've felt my vote was actually worth something.
The Brexit referendum was the first election where I've felt my vote was actually worth something.
clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,297
I hate the expression "proportional representation" since there are a myriad of alternatives to the current one.
You don't nees to break the link between MP and constituents to make it better and it doesn't mean you get minority extreme king maker parties.
.. that's our CURRENT system
Sent from my LG-K520 using Tapatalk
You don't nees to break the link between MP and constituents to make it better and it doesn't mean you get minority extreme king maker parties.
.. that's our CURRENT system
Sent from my LG-K520 using Tapatalk
I am wholeheartedly against ANY system that includes lists of party toadies and lickspittles.
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 35,290
you understand that Wealden would still return a Conservative MP under nearly any form of PR? only if you want regional/national party lists and a complete overhaul of elections in this country will most see any change. its not as simple as altering how you count the votes.
Gritt23
New member
I used to be in favour of PR, but the reality of always having a coalition has turned me off it. We've had 2 in the last 3 General Elections, and the chaos that it creates doesn't look like something I would want to change the electoral process to virtually guarantee we end up with each and every time.
Cian
Well-known member
List PR, which is only good if you trust parties to not nominate donkeys. Which they do.
Multi-seat single-transferrable allows you to vote for people, not parties and get a significantly proportional result.
Da Man Clay
T'Blades
- Dec 16, 2004
- 16,254
Not sure the lib dem/cons coalition was that bad to be honest. I think it did a better job than the last Tory overall government.
Mo Gosfield
Well-known member
- Aug 11, 2010
- 6,284
On a pure PR system it would have resulted in...........
Con.............276
Lab..............260
LD.................48
SNP..............20
UKIP.............12
Grn................10
PC...................3
DUP................6
Sinn F..............5
Others............10
Clearly the Liberals would be far more influential and thats why PR was part of their manifesto for years.
Con.............276
Lab..............260
LD.................48
SNP..............20
UKIP.............12
Grn................10
PC...................3
DUP................6
Sinn F..............5
Others............10
Clearly the Liberals would be far more influential and thats why PR was part of their manifesto for years.
Gritt23
New member
I agree, but it didn't do the Lib Dems any favours, which potentially makes it harder to agree coalitions with centre parties. Who wants to be the next Lib Dem party?
Da Man Clay
T'Blades
- Dec 16, 2004
- 16,254
Yes fair point. It is a shame that. I imagine history will look favourably on Nick Clegg.
Lenny Rider
Well-known member
- Sep 15, 2010
- 5,424
The fact that May 'lost' but polled more votes than Blair did for the 1997 landslide clearly shows that our electoral system is outdated and flawed.
Getting a fairer voting system but keeping a degree of local representation is the key, don't they do something along those lines in the European elections? (Although we wont be having them anymore)
Getting a fairer voting system but keeping a degree of local representation is the key, don't they do something along those lines in the European elections? (Although we wont be having them anymore)
Silverhatch
Well-known member
We are the First of the first world nations. We are linked to a global economy that's always "ON" and we face very long term social, economic and cultural challenges that cannot be sorted out by Right or Left alone. It's about time that we had a government based on long-term (30+ years) planning for the NHS, social care and education. A government that can plan for the long-term because the voting system will nearly always deliver cross party/view power in the chambers. A version of PR that delivers this has to be preferable to the **** up that has caused the Conservatives (twice) to ill-advisedly go to the country, to satisfy their own narrow single party political objectives, and create the shit-storm we're now in.
There would likely be far more than that as people would feel it worth voting for smaller parties under PR.
I would simply split the country into larger areas (probably counties). Sussex has 16 MPs and you would end up with something like 5 con, 4 labour, 3 lib dem, 2 green, 2 UKIP, representing Sussex. Pretty much how it works on a District level. You would get more independents too.
But this, again, assumes that people would vote the same way under PR. We didn't even have a Green candidate in Lewes due to first past the post.
True, but I've not really understood why - they did a good job of moderating the tories.
Silverhatch
Well-known member
Politicians don't mind being the next Lib Dems if there always need to be partners in a wider system based on a version of PR.
I'm a big fan for the following reasons
1) Every vote counts.
2) I like the idea of political parties having to talk to other parties to govern. It's a check and balance of sorts.
3) It energises existing small parties e.g. a vote for the greens in Hove is a waste. Under PR it will count so people who previously didn't want to waste their vote will add to the Greens overall total.
4) From what I see it encourages new parties to form and importantly gain traction quickly.
5) Politically policy will generally occupy the centre ground, weaving between centre right and centre left, and hopefully stopping the endless and costly huge reforms the UK has to undertake every time it flip flops between red and blue.
There are disadvantages. The main one being niche groups proping up a government but I'd hope that my points 3) and 4) would enable a choice of partner(s) so you don't have to do deals with Northern Irish cavemen.
1) Every vote counts.
2) I like the idea of political parties having to talk to other parties to govern. It's a check and balance of sorts.
3) It energises existing small parties e.g. a vote for the greens in Hove is a waste. Under PR it will count so people who previously didn't want to waste their vote will add to the Greens overall total.
4) From what I see it encourages new parties to form and importantly gain traction quickly.
5) Politically policy will generally occupy the centre ground, weaving between centre right and centre left, and hopefully stopping the endless and costly huge reforms the UK has to undertake every time it flip flops between red and blue.
There are disadvantages. The main one being niche groups proping up a government but I'd hope that my points 3) and 4) would enable a choice of partner(s) so you don't have to do deals with Northern Irish cavemen.