[Politics] Proportional Representation

[Tim Over Whelmed]

Sorry, I could not read on the words Lib dem and green party so close together, was enough to kill this thread for me.

No offence to you Tim but when are we going to get that Arundel bypass?

I am happy to get my 2 stroke chainsaw out and whack a few trees over for a road if that helps.

Agreed, can't believe that one Govt funded body can take another Govt funded body to court both using tax payers money! If you don't like the first outcome keep asking for what you wanted in the first place like petulant children! Bypass NOW!

 

[Tim Over Whelmed]

Part of my case for a Benevolent Dictatorship is based on the fact that so many people are already disengaged from politics already. If we had ten years of dictatorship for better or worse, you would see the first election afterwards have an astronomic turn out by todays standards. Then, we'd have politicians with a mandate and hopefully some degree of consensus about getting things done.

OK, but can I be the Dictator please? (I guess Dictators' don't ask like that?)

 

[vegster]

OK, but can I be the Dictator please? (I guess Dictators' don't ask like that?)

Ok, you can have first go, but, remember how dictatorships usually end.

 

[maltaseagull]

With PR you would have a hung Parliament pretty much every time. Would not be a recipe for strong leadership, although to be honest none of the party leaders inspire any confidence in me at the moment!

The other issue with PR is that the local constituency you reside in will be 'allocated' an MP as opposed to voting for someone who you think represents the local area adequately.

Who may or may not get to ask the odd question in PMQT but get told what to vote by their whips?

 

[East Staffs Gull]

Needs a poll.

 

[Diablo]

Yep and Jeremy is the man to do it!

 

[worthingseagull123]

I would keep PR as it keeps nutters like the Green Party, UKIP and the BNP out.

 

[beorhthelm]

Part of my case for a Benevolent Dictatorship is based on the fact that so many people are already disengaged from politics already. If we had ten years of dictatorship for better or worse, you would see the first election afterwards have an astronomic turn out by todays standards. Then, we'd have politicians with a mandate and hopefully some degree of consensus about getting things done.

if the Benevolent Dictatorship had worked for 10 years, why would they vote against? the Benevolent Dictator is probably the ideal form of government, but how would we find or chose that figure? trouble is that those with the fundemental qualities are less likely to put themselves forward.

 

[dazzer6666]

Or the strong will of the people?

Good idea - we should have a referendum - that'll then give us a result that everyone can accept, whatever the outcome.

 

[Sorrel]

I don't like the party list aspect of some PR systems. I want to be able to vote against an MP I dislike - or for an MP I like - without having to further the career of others higher up on the list of any particular party.

Open lists are much better - at least giving the chance to vote for someone on the list (though often losing the local aspect of our system). But I can't trust that any new PR system won't be a closed list - like they have in Scotland - and I would rather keep FPTP than that.

 

[blue-shifted]

A lot of people say that we should get rid of the current voting system. Fewer offer detailed proposals of how it should be replaced. Obviously because we're replacing one set of serious drawbacks with another.

Lab/Con are turkeys who will never vote for xmas on this. There was one chance to get this changed. The AV referendum (AV is a type of proportional representation, i've heard lots of people say it isn't) was the once is a lifetime chance to get something like that in. It would take full on revolution to get a voting system change now.

 

[The Antikythera Mechanism]

In a similar manner as potential Britons have to take the UK British citizenship test, I feel that there should be some sort competence level that needs to be achieved in order to be eligible to cast a vote in our local and national elections. Surely a voter should be able to demonstrate that they understand the basics of what they are voting for rather than blindly following family traditions, peer pressure or brain washing by the media. How this would be achieved, I have no idea, but it just seems wrong to me that someone who has taken the time to try and understand pros and cons of an argument, listened to and taken part in debates, and cast a vote for whatever candidate or cause they feel will be best for their constituency or country, can have their vote negated by someone who really doesn’t care about the issues but just puts a cross in a box for no reason other than “my parents / friends / workmates” vote for them. My thoughts are not party biased as there are people in all spectrums of society who make reasoned decisions and have wholly valid opinions as they should do.

 

[clapham_gull]

The main argument against PR is that produces coalition governments and/or weak governments.

Not sure where everyone has been this Blair gave up the throne.

All the current system is giving is weak governments or coalitions where a minority party (i.e. the Anti Falmer Party) has a disproportionate degree of power.

 

[GT49er]

Or the strong will of the people?

Which was 67% against it last time we were asked. Should we have another referendum on this? How often? How many? Do we stop when you get the 'right' result?

Bad idea. No thanks from me (even though if we'd had it in 2015 an overwhelming Tory/UKIP coalition would have smashed Brexit by now and we'd be safely out with no shilly-shallying!)

 

[clapham_gull]

Which was 67% against it last time we were asked. Should we have another referendum on this? How often? How many? Do we stop when you get the 'right' result?

Bad idea. No thanks from me (even though if we'd had it in 2015 an overwhelming Tory/UKIP coalition would have smashed Brexit by now and we'd be safely out with no shilly-shallying!)

To be honest, much of that was due to a major stitch up by the Tories who (understandably) want to qualify for the champions league every few years.

Now I'm just talking tactics, not my politics:

If the Lib Dems had got into bed with Labour instead of the Tories.

1) Gordon Brown would have been forced to stand down as Prime Minister. You would have ended up with a centrist leader and not our honorable member for Venezuela
.
2) They would have ensured Labour did not campaign over negatively about changes to the electoral system.

However - they

1) Effectively killed their own party by jumping in with the Tories. Nick Clegg's book is fascinating about what happened internally.

2) Made Cameron PM who called the EU referendum.

The utter irony of the Lib Dems bleating about Labour moving to the left, being pro Europe and pro PR is that they are as responsible as everyone else of f##### that up.

 

[ATFC Seagull]

A lot of people say that we should get rid of the current voting system. Fewer offer detailed proposals of how it should be replaced. Obviously because we're replacing one set of serious drawbacks with another.

Lab/Con are turkeys who will never vote for xmas on this. There was one chance to get this changed. The AV referendum (AV is a type of proportional representation, i've heard lots of people say it isn't) was the once is a lifetime chance to get something like that in. It would take full on revolution to get a voting system change now.

That's because it really isn't. It's majoritarian system with a slight tweak from FPTP to help alleviate tactical voting (although not that effectively).

 

[ATFC Seagull]

Which was 67% against it last time we were asked. Should we have another referendum on this? How often? How many? Do we stop when you get the 'right' result?

Bad idea. No thanks from me (even though if we'd had it in 2015 an overwhelming Tory/UKIP coalition would have smashed Brexit by now and we'd be safely out with no shilly-shallying!)

It was a closed question though, asking the public to choose between 2 very similar systems. I am a huge supporter of introducing PR, however I nearly voted "no" in that referendum, as I didn't want the only change in my lifetime to be one that made minimal impact.

 

[clapham_gull]

I basically blame the Lib Dems for everything.

 

[vegster]

if the Benevolent Dictatorship had worked for 10 years, why would they vote against? the Benevolent Dictator is probably the ideal form of government, but how would we find or chose that figure? trouble is that those with the fundemental qualities are less likely to put themselves forward.

I was just floating the premise that people do not appreciate the vote they have when it comes to elections, this combined with push-me pull-you politics which never seems to get us anywhere. Anyway, Dictatorships invariably end in tears or bloodshed and there is usually an attempt to restore democracy, and I'm willing to bet there would be a massive turnout if people went say, ten years without any say in the direction of the country.

 

[Eeyore]

With PR you would have a hung Parliament pretty much every time. Would not be a recipe for strong leadership, although to be honest none of the party leaders inspire any confidence in me at the moment!

The other issue with PR is that the local constituency you reside in will be 'allocated' an MP as opposed to voting for someone who you think represents the local area adequately.

Most countries have it. Germany being a good example. It's a myth that it doesn't work.

Where there's a will..