Proportional Representation

[cromwell]

If I could plug my "thought experiment" solution to the issue.



https://politicalforums.uk/pol/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=149">https://politicalforums.uk/pol/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=149



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

No can do if you ask admin though

[BeElBeeBub]

If I could plug my "thought experiment" solution to the issue.



https://politicalforums.uk/pol/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=149">https://politicalforums.uk/pol/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=149



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

[BeElBeeBub]

I am also of the opinion FPTP is a bad thing.



I have some reservations about PR.



One reservation is that PR often relies on some sort of party list.



I feel this gives too much power to the parties.  There is little space for a "local" candidate.



Constituencies will have MPs "parachuted" in to what are effectively safe seats.



This centralises power within the party structures. In effect the MPs become mere voting chips for the party leadership who have the power (via deselection) over their career.

[Wiggles]

My Mum (senior nurse) tells me that for her PR stands for per rectum...

And public relations of course

[patman post]

OK, if the form of PR you refer to means the % of votes obtained reflects in the % of seats held in parliament, that means after the 2015 election UKIP would of won 81 seats and the SNP 30. As it happens, I voted UKIP in that election, so perhaps you are winning me around to your way of thinking. Of course, there are other forms of PR

My Mum (senior nurse) tells me that for her PR stands for per rectum...

[Barry]

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

[papasmurf]

OK, if the form of PR you refer to means the % of votes obtained reflects in the % of seats held in parliament, that means after the 2015 election UKIP would of won 81 seats and the SNP 30. As it happens, I voted UKIP in that election, so perhaps you are winning me around to your way of thinking. Of course, there are other forms of PR

It is really is impossible to compare pre PR voting with post PR voting, as many people would probably vote differently.

[Barry]

Despite the pitfalls I have brought up in the Israel elections thread, my preference is true PR by party list.

it does require cooperation between parties if there is no clear winner. It moderates extremist policies.

It can cause a log jam, but it also teaches politicians to act like adults and compromise. Very few votes are wasted in this method.

The drawback is how to administer what party has the MP in a particular constituency. As almost all communications are by electronic methods these days, this could be much easier than having physical "surgeries" for people.

[Wiggles]

Well I have no allegiance to any political party but full proportional representation is the only way the country can get out the current political mess.

It would have the emergent property of letting a few more nasty bastards into parliament but given the ones already there it would be a price worth paying.

OK, if the form of PR you refer to means the % of votes obtained reflects in the % of seats held in parliament, that means after the 2015 election UKIP would of won 81 seats and the SNP 30. As it happens, I voted UKIP in that election, so perhaps you are winning me around to your way of thinking. Of course, there are other forms of PR

[papasmurf]

Well I have no allegiance to any political party but full proportional representation is the only way the country can get out the current political mess.

It would have the emergent property of letting a few more nasty bastards into parliament but given the ones already there it would be a price worth paying.

[Wiggles]

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 !