Proportional Representation

[Churchill]

If they do change the system will it make more people vote when asked to do so I think it may do, however if poloticians were more open and more importantly frank, honest , down to earth no double talk plain talking and less patronising I think that would help.



I still think voting should be compulsory, and a " None of the above" box on voting slips that IMO would keep poloticians on their toes



They should also make it easier for Constituents to remove MP's

[johnofgwent]

With the election happening today, it has got me thinking, how fair is our electoral system. It was only a few elections ago UKIP had the third highest votes, but still only got one seat. At the same time the SNP picked up dozens with half the amount of votes. I'm not going to attempt to drag up the exact figures, but I know you all remember it. Of course, there are several types PR, but many other countries are quite envious of our system. Perhaps it's a case of "the other man's grass is always greener". I sit on the fence with this one, because I can see things from both angles. The system we have  at the moment is great in the sense that the parties not in power have some say on how the country is run, and loosely speaking represent the way the people voted. The only one real issue I have is how the constituencies are broken up, because it's crazy. Scotland for example have far to many seats for the volume of people. There are wards in Scotland that consist of two men, one woman, three pigs, and cow, and in a place like Scotland it's even more unfair because many of the woman look like pigs.



So, I am here to be convinced. Forget your allegiance to any political party, and tell me, what is the fairest system, and why !

True PR one man one vote against a party list system.



Keele University kept records now on wikipedia and other places that show certain seats (like newport east) have such an entrenched majority for the sitting mp that nothing short of death will ever unseat them. These seats seem to have an ingrained surplus of voters for that party and actions by the boundary commission seem to.have heightened not ameliorated the situation



The upshot of this penalty to FPTP is that if you like me hate the sitting mps party with a loathing the Sunni moslem reserves for the Shia, and vice versa, your vote is wasted and everyone knows it.



Huntingdon, Cambs is the tory equivalent of Newport east.



A vote in the golden triangle seats south east of Birmingham are supposedly the ones where a voter has the most chance of deciding the government.



The only way to sort this is a party list system where every vote counts.



Of course this will impact the degree to which an individual.mp.waz elected by a set of constituents but since so few give a flying F@@@ about their voters, why does this matter

[Ciaphas]

I think PR would help break down the unhelpful tribalism which dominates UK politics if it meant politicians of different loyalties had to work together to get anything done. Certainly we'd probably end up with more coalition governments since it is less likely that one party would secure a clear majority.



Granted the last three years perhaps indicates that the political establishment is not quite ready for such grown-up behaviour but change is never going to be easy.

[Thomas]

This is exactly the point.



Everyone agrees that FPTP is rubbish, except when they win via it, and of course, they are then loathe to change it.



This sub forum was created to discuss the various merits, faults and features of voting systems. Not to carry on the partisan battles held elsewhere.



Despite my remian politics, I'm going to try my hardest not to bring brexit or remain into the discussion.



The "it's always sour grapes" argument is a logical fallacy (the appeal to motive fallacy). You are implying that the motive of the proposer (in this case they lost an election because of the FPTP system) is grounds to ignore the argument.



You mentioned you have advocated electoral change for many years, so perhaps you could stick to discussing any advantages of FPTP?  Or maybe a disadvantage of PR?

you havent quoted me but i assume you are replying to me.



You need to read thorough my discussion with phantom and others on here.



From what i was picking up , FPTP was a two edged sword to them.A bittersweet system. While most seem over the moon the tories got 43% of the vote which gave them a large majority in your parliament , they were less than happy and appeared to be moaning that with 45% of the scottish vote it gave the snp 48 /59 scottish seats. Seemed to me as i earlier said it only bothers those when it goes against them.



As far as im aware phantom from previous discussions with him is a tory in wales , so im not sure how he lost the election , he didnt. He just isnt happy the snp won in scotland like many others.



Thats was all im responding to.



For the record , again , im not interested what system you use , i want out of your parliament and my country independent. I dont agree from a democratic point of view there actually is any advantages to FPTP , its a divisive disgusting system that doesnt reflect what people want.



i also pointed out with my graphic of the disadvatages of the system your country foisted on my parliament ,AMS ,  where someone like tory murdo fraser can lose every election he ever stood in as a scottish msp candidate , but because of the list system , still warm benches in the scottish  parliament picking up taxpayers money despite being roundly rejected 7 times now.



Neither scotland , ireland nor wales  , nor any of our political parties can change englands electoral system. You hold 82 % of the seats in what is your defacto parliament .



only you the english people can do that, and as i said it isnt going to happen while you vote labour /tory tennis.

[BeElBeeBub]

This is exactly the point.



Everyone agrees that FPTP is rubbish, except when they win via it, and of course, they are then loathe to change it.



This sub forum was created to discuss the various merits, faults and features of voting systems. Not to carry on the partisan battles held elsewhere.



Despite my remian politics, I'm going to try my hardest not to bring brexit or remain into the discussion.



The "it's always sour grapes" argument is a logical fallacy (the appeal to motive fallacy). You are implying that the motive of the proposer (in this case they lost an election because of the FPTP system) is grounds to ignore the argument.



You mentioned you have advocated electoral change for many years, so perhaps you could stick to discussing any advantages of FPTP?  Or maybe a disadvantage of PR?

[Thomas]

You may indeed be right, and I haven't commented on the rights or wrongs of Independence, or a referendum, I have tried to just point out the unfairness of a system whereby some political parties have an advantage over others, and that there may indeed be case for reform.

not sure how old you are phantom , i myself can remember elections back to the eighties , and everytime a result comes along that people dont like , wether its bittersweet elections like this where the tories win england and the snp win scotland , we hear about unfairness of the voting system.



I as many old forum members know have been an advocate about voting change all my life , to a fairer system. It gets ignored by the majority while they are happy when things go  their way.



im telling you now there is no way labour or conservatives are going to change any voting system that damages their chances. They were happy to use fptp when the snp where kept out of power by it for decades and now its only a problem when it goes against them.



Doesnt matter what system you use , you effectively stopped catholics and nationalists in northern ireland from having a democratic voice for decades under the sectarian apartheid system supported by westminster and used by stormont until eventually the people forced change .



As far as scotland is concerned pr wont stop constitutional change it will further enhance it.



I will be best pleased when people in your country keep your noses out of our affairs , and we will do the same with yours.

[PhantomPhlyer]

You may indeed be right, and I haven't commented on the rights or wrongs of Independence, or a referendum, I have tried to just point out the unfairness of a system whereby some political parties have an advantage over others, and that there may indeed be case for reform.



As far as Scotland is concerned, I was until recently, always a firm believer in keeping the Union together, and I dislike Sturgeon's SNP, almost as much as I dislike Corbyn's Labour Party, but if there is a majority of citizens in Scotland who want independence, then good luck , ' go with god'!

[Thomas]

Listening to right wing english and tories complaining because the snp won in scotland under a system of election they designed and brought in is laughable.



Here in scotland  , we have brit nats and unionist tory politicians like murdo fraser , who has lost every election he ever stood in , yet still gets a seat in scotlands parliament as a list mp in a parliament he never wanted to sit in the first place while he constantly moans about the snp and scottish democracy all the while taking scottish taxpayers money and warming a seat



...and you bleat about the unfairness of the FPTP system? :roll:



https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ELsS7CoWoAAGxo0.jpg">

[Thomas]

Well i for once agree with margaret thatcher......



https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ELvEPjLWkAIB_P3.jpg">



Doesnt matter what system you use , we will still beat you. Scotland has a proportional system for election to our national parliament designed by the mandarins in your country to stop the SNP governing. We still got in.



Meanwhile while you cook up systems to stop the snp winning in scotland , your own government  , of either red or blue , will not tolerate the dodgy FPTP system being changed in england. ::



If england at the height of its imperial power couldnt stop 62 countries around the world leaving london rule , i dont think cooking up a system in jockland to stop the jocks leaving is going to work do you?

[PhantomPhlyer]

There may be some merit in a change of voting system?



Just looking at some of the results of the GE  , especially in Scotland (not commenting on rights or wrongs) only because of the SNP demands for another referendum due to the idea / opinion that they now have  the mandate for independence , or a mandate for a referendum on Independence , at least , and it is clear that they need to work fast before any border changes are announced?



The SNP , under the FPtP system attracted some  45% of the vote and were rewarded with 49 seats/ MP's, whilst the other  parties attracted 55% of the vote, yet only returned  11 seats / MP's -  that is inequitable , and unsustainable?



 1.24 million SNP votes equates to just under 24500 votes per MP returned, compared to The Tories who had the support of 692,000 , or around 56% of the SNP votes yet returned only 6 MP's , which equates to 115000 votes per MP,  and the LibUndems ,needed 66000 votes for each  MP, and then,  Labour which attracted some 500,000 plus votes, yet only returned 1 MP?



In Wales the situation is -



Labour attracted about 28700 votes per MP , Tories 39800 votes per MP, PC  82500 votes per MP, LibUndems  92000 votes yet no MP, and Brexit Party 84000 votes - no MP!



As far as the UK overall is concerned, The Tories attracted 38260 votes per MP, Labour 44600 per MP, IibUndems  32,700 per MP, the Greens attracted some 857,000 votes yet only 1 seat/MP,  & the Brexit Party had more than 632,000 ( around 50% of the SNP vote)  yet did not even get one seat/MP!

   ⁃   the Libs attracted over 3 times the votes of the SNP, for a return of only 11 MP's ?



This is not equitable, and surely not sustainable?

[BeElBeeBub]

This is now done.  :hattip

Wow, that was fast!



 :hattip

[Forum admin]

Maybe the mods could set up a "voting systems" sub forum?

This is now done.  :hattip

[BeElBeeBub]

Proportional Representation is probably the fairest method. However, in the UK the ruling party rarely gets more than 50% of the vote. For example, the Tories have just picked up 44.7% which means while they are cock of the walk now, if they passed legislation supporting PR they would become a minority party and have to go into a coalition with the Lib Dems or some such.



To some extent this is why we are stuck with our current House of Lords. If reformed with the peers being directly elected under PR we would end up with 44% Tory,  33% Labour and 23% totally gaga.

PR would almost certainly result in coalitions being the norm.



Personally I see that as a feature, not a bug.



Obviously party leaders would see it differently!



One point missing from this is how we currently form our executive



It is currently drawn from Parliament and is a "winner takes all" affair  



Just "spit balling" but what if the executive (PM & Ministers) *wasn't* made up of MP/Lords?



What if, instead, it was made up of appointees.



So as part of party manifesto a shortlist of executive candidates is published.  Effectively there are the people we would put into the executive"



After election, the places in the executive are divided up between the parties according to the result (either popular vote or maybe MPs) who then get to appoint individuals from their shortlist into those places.



Thus the whole executive is then formed as a coalition, and put to an approval of the parliament



Parliament is the legislature with the sole power to pass legislation.  The executive is the servant of parliament, serving at parliament's pleasure but incharge of the administration of government.

[Borchester]

Proportional Representation is probably the fairest method. However, in the UK the ruling party rarely gets more than 50% of the vote. For example, the Tories have just picked up 44.7% which means while they are cock of the walk now, if they passed legislation supporting PR they would become a minority party and have to go into a coalition with the Lib Dems or some such.



To some extent this is why we are stuck with our current House of Lords. If reformed with the peers being directly elected under PR we would end up with 44% Tory,  33% Labour and 23% totally gaga.

[Churchill]

"Tactical" voting would be unnecessary - it would give a more true reflection of the wishes of the electorate.

Yes that is a good thing people would be encouraged to vote more in so called safe seats , I would advocate voting should be compulsory draw back is lots of people in the UK don't want to be found for one reason or another