Would Proportional Representation be the way forward.

Hippohunter

War Hero
No the Scots system devised by Blair et al was to keep Labour in power there, didn't work out too well did it!
IT was actually devised with the "list system" to make sure NO party had a majority. Both labour and the Tories were happy to concede a majority in Scotland if it meant no SNP majority ever. The list system ensures that a politician can be rejected time after time and yet still get a seat, Murdo the Turdo is a prime example. However the Scottish PR list system is a matter for its own thread.
 
And look whats happened there, no government for 2 years plus.
That's more to do with McGuinness being on his way out and the Provo's trying to chip off to much, to quickly, with the Gaelic language being given parity with English, as far as Unionists were concerned.
 

Truxx

LE
I think that there are quite a number of things that could be done to "improve" our system without abandoning FPTP. Then again, it rather depends on what one means by "improve".

Recent events have thrown up significant disparities, as shown by vote numbers equating to seat numbers. So there is scope there for work to address such discrepancies.

I think that ultimately I, as a voter, need to be sure that my vote counts no more or no less than anyone else. So boundary change is another area for consideration.

The subject of "representative democracy" needs addressing too. As an expression it trips off the tongue whereas in fact many, not least those who are supposed to be representing, see the phrase as a euphemism for "I can do what I like"

Next on my to do list would be to address the issue of those crossing the floor. In my opinion, should individual MPs decide to cross the floor, or else the matter is decided for them, then thay should re-affirm their position by way of a by election.

Finally there musty be some method of holding parties to account for their manifesto declarations.

So lots to look at, none of which is the manner in which we cast our vote.
 
Last edited:
To add another dimension, would it put an end to ‘safe’ seats? I don’t know how democracy is properly served with seats where the incumbent cannot realistically be removed. Would PR solve this (I genuinely don’t know)?
The one thing I would hope from a PR system is the abolition of the concept of a wasted vote, “winners”, “losers” etc which can be seen as negative and off-putting when encouraging people to take part.
 
I feel you're asking the wrong question, as Political reform is needed. The problem is not the voting system, but whom we are voting for.

Introduce a law requiring:
10 years work experience outside and totally unconnected to politics, any political party, or affiliated insitutions (EG unions).
MP's salary caped at Average national wage +50%. That way if they **** the economy their wages drop, want a better pay rate, raise the economy.
I also reckon compulsory voting, or pay £10, your choice.

A friend of mine, who is pretty much the lefty version of me also reckons a cap on number of terms served is needed, I'm not so sure as you'd loose experience. He argues its an end to safe seats for life, which I can see as a good thing.

Polotics used to be something you moved into after you'd earned some life experince. At current its generally a career you enter straight from university.
 
Northern Ireland votes in local MLA's on the Single Transferable Vote system. Thats to elect multiple MLA's from each voting boundary of Northern Ireland.. ie 5 MLA's from East Belfast.

Could it be tailored to elect a set number of MP's by county instead of a number single MP boundaries inside counties?
And look whats happened there, no government for 2 years plus.
Yes.Its great. Just a pity the cvnts are still getting paid. Throw another handful of taxpayers hard earned in the renewable furnace there... :rolleyes:
 

4(T)

LE
One of the traditional arguments against PR - apart from the hung parliament issue - was that it would sever the current democratic relationship whereby voters in a constituency choose an individual and accessible MP to represent them - whether thats through choice of his/her party or the MP's own personal qualities.

Today, given the extreme centralisation of the main parties and their common practice of parachuting non-local functionaries into constituencies, it could be said that this argument against PR is now obsolete.


A further strong argument for PR is that, of course, it is now apparent that constituency MPs evidently no longer feel obliged to represent their voters anyway. Vide Brexit.


Brexit aside, a large part of the electorate now feels disenfranchised because the three main parties are pretty much stood on the same left-of-centre to far left ground: big state, high tax, open ended welfare, limitless immigration, etc and so on. In the forthcoming election, probably a lot of voters don't have anyone on the ballot paper that they wish to vote for, given that smaller and niche parties are excluded from the ballot in many areas. Vide#2 TBP.
 
PR just ends up mostly with the tail wagging the dog. I’ve always in the past favoured FPTP because it has at least produced a government with a mandate to govern even if it’s not a government that I liked.

For several years now, that has not happened presumably because voter demographics has altered to such a degree from a geographical point of view.

There is also a certain national apathy about our democracy. For example, it is compulsory to register to vote despite the fact that possibly millions don’t register and it’s curious in a way that there has never been a single prosecution for not registering to vote.

I do think a way forward would be to make it mandatory to vote even if you just turn up and spoil your ballot paper.

I think if we value our democracy enough, that should happen and we should take those to task who don’t exercise their franchise.

There are other democracies that do insist on mandatory voting. Why not here?
 
PR is always the way forward if a political party has just lost an election. If they've won it then PR is a ridiculous suggestion...
I won the People's Vote?
 

Tyk

LE
What if the extremism is coming from the centre?

I did say "in theory", how often theory becomes actual practice is another matter.

Northern Ireland votes in local MLA's on the Single Transferable Vote system. Thats to elect multiple MLA's from each voting boundary of Northern Ireland.. ie 5 MLA's from East Belfast.

Could it be tailored to elect a set number of MP's by county instead of a number single MP boundaries inside counties?

Except some counties are very much larger than others, the only logical split is to decide how many seats there should be (650 as currently is too many in my book) and make each seat have approximately the same number of voters and make sure the Boundary Commission is protected from political interference (not like that's even vaguely possible).

The FPTP winner takes all and **** the rest has no place in a democracy of today. PR is the way to go and there are many forms of it. PR is far more representative of how the electorate voted. To be fair we gave the worst possible form of PR in the Scottish government foisted upon us with the devolution arrangements from Westminster in 1999. Hard not to conclude that this was deliberate to quash any moves for PR throughout the UK. There are far better methods available.

It's absolutely true that a form of PR voting results in more "representative" elections, but it's also totally wedded to the party system which quite frankly is a mess and it would inevitably lead to small parties with a small proportion of the vote having a disproportionate quantity of power as kingmakers and hostage takers.
 
I agree about the coalition governments. Italy have an horrendous problem with PR and their Coalition governments of the past, but other countries have worked out a system of voting for first, second and third preferences and that seems to work.

For a nation of people who could start an argument with their own shadows whoever though PR was the solution to their problems was clearly a madman.
 
PR just ends up mostly with the tail wagging the dog. I’ve always in the past favoured FPTP because it has at least produced a government with a mandate to govern even if it’s not a government that I liked.

For several years now, that has not happened presumably because voter demographics has altered to such a degree from a geographical point of view.

There is also a certain national apathy about our democracy. For example, it is compulsory to register to vote despite the fact that possibly millions don’t register and it’s curious in a way that there has never been a single prosecution for not registering to vote.

I do think a way forward would be to make it mandatory to vote even if you just turn up and spoil your ballot paper.

I think if we value our democracy enough, that should happen and we should take those to task who don’t exercise their franchise.

There are other democracies that do insist on mandatory voting. Why not here?
If a percentage turned up and voted ‘none of the above’, would the constituency have to re-vote with a new bunch of candidates? I could get behind that.
 

Tyk

LE
We should have a vote on who is our PM and also who is in the cabinet too.

I'm far from convinced about that! The cult of personality is too strong as it is and we really don't need a Presidential approach to Government, I don't think it would add anything and it has the potential to make Government even more feckwitted and potentially deadlocked.
 
We need to ensure the political system is for the benefit of the people of this country, not the few in Westminster.
 
I'm far from convinced about that! The cult of personality is too strong as it is and we really don't need a Presidential approach to Government, I don't think it would add anything and it has the potential to make Government even more feckwitted and potentially deadlocked.
Could we at least prevent shabby reporting? A few times this week I have heard phrases about voting Boris, Jezza, wosshername etc. The reality is no one can vote for Boris unless they live in his constituency.
My local MP leaflet this week has a couple of small pics of her and lots of the Tory party stuff, some of which are ambivalent to say the least. Vote thingy (unimportant drone), get Boris. Is this the way to get things done?
 
Every time someone suggests PR for here I can't help thinking about the bollocks it makes of Israeli politics where you can't form a government without having a coalition with small parties. The reason those parties are small is because they are often extremists of one sort or another, leaving the government with no option but to include some extreme policies they don't really want to implement and that most of the population doesn't actually want.
 
Last edited:
To add another dimension, would it put an end to ‘safe’ seats? I don’t know how democracy is properly served with seats where the incumbent cannot realistically be removed. Would PR solve this (I genuinely don’t know)?
In fact, it makes the 'safe seat' scenario worse.
The ANC in South Africa has won every election since 1994.
Joe Public has no say in who heads the Party Lists. You have to be a party member to vote on that.
So you have gross incompetents near the top of the list because they have a lot of sway in party structures.
Corruption, nepotism, cronyism, downright theft is no bar - if you are 'connected', then you get in.
 
We could ditch the House of Lords and turn that chamber into a separate PR House of Representatives, whereas the Commons is the House of Government with a reduced number of MPs and larger constituencies.
 
In fact, it makes the 'safe seat' scenario worse.
The ANC in South Africa has won every election since 1994.
Joe Public has no say in who heads the Party Lists. You have to be a party member to vote on that.
So you have gross incompetents near the top of the list because they have a lot of sway in party structures.
Corruption, nepotism, cronyism, downright theft is no bar - if you are 'connected', then you get in.
You sound surprised
 

Latest Threads

Top