Proportional representation..

[SmudgetheClaret]

Imperative we get this ..

[Imploding Turtle]

For once you and I agree. The funny thing being that PR will not get you what you want though. It will keep people like Farage out of #10 because they'll never command a majority with it.

[nil_desperandum]

IT beat me to it, but I was just posting that I think a lot of posters on here will agree entirely - irrespective of their political persuasion and whether leavers or remainers, and I hope that this week's antics in Parliament will increase pressure on all sides for this.
If it comes down to it it will be a major vote winner for the new Independent if they make it a part of their mission.

[dsr]

I suppose this last week or two in Parliament is a foretaste of what it would be like under PR, when nobody has a majority for anything. It would be interesting!

[Vino blanco]

Is this a political thread?

[SmudgetheClaret]

Is this a political thread?

sorry VB it must be truly annoying..

[Damo]

We should definately have more referendums

[SmudgetheClaret]

For once you and I agree. The funny thing being that PR will not get you what you want though. It will keep people like Farage out of #10 because they'll never command a majority with it.

Not so sure about that turtle there are a hell of a lot of people who thought voting leave would give them the result they wanted and now someone will have to suffer and it's going to be LabCon and I've got no sympathy for either..

[dsr]

We should definately have more referendums

And if they get the right result, they could even be put into practice.

[Imploding Turtle]

Not so sure about that turtle there are a hell of a lot of people who thought voting leave would give them the result they wanted and now someone will have to suffer and it's going to be LabCon and I've got no sympathy for either..

There'll certainly be suffering if you get the kind of leader you want, but the suffering will be by experienced by minorities and people you hate. But that's kinda the point of you supporting them, isn't it? PR will prevent that because support for the policies of hatred and suffering would require 50% or above among the public which is far less likely to happen than a party like Farage's getting into power with 30 or 35% support under FPTP.

But at least you are pretending to support a better democracy, for now. Until you realise that it is against your interests. But then again, so is Brexit. So is Council Tax over Land Value Tax and you're still bid fans of those because people lefties like me aren't.

[Tricky Trevor]

PR could work if they combined blocks of three seats to elect two MPs. The bonus being it would get rid of a third of these scroungers.
The negative being there would be some proper gerrymandering to get the boundaries they wanted.

[Clarets4me]

IT, you are a patronising two-hat at times ! Under pure PR, UKIP would have had 80-85 MP's after the 2015 General Election, and would have had a major say as to who governed !

[SmudgetheClaret]

There'll certainly be suffering if you get the kind of leader you want, but the suffering will be by experienced by minorities and people you hate. But that's kinda the point of you supporting them, isn't it? PR will prevent that because support for the policies of hatred and suffering would require 50% or above among the public which is far less likely to happen than a party like Farage's getting into power with 30 or 35% support under FPTP.

But at least you are pretending to support a better democracy, for now. Until you realise that it is against your interests. But then again, so is Brexit. So is Council Tax over Land Value Tax and you're still bid fans of those because people lefties like me aren't.

I don't hate minority's that's just your perception also I will support a leader who genuinely loves this country as I do...

[Imploding Turtle]

IT, you are a patronising two-hat at times ! Under pure PR, UKIP would have had 80-85 MP's after the 2015 General Election, and would have had a major say as to who governed !

I suppose to some people I would come across as patronising. I know that. I also know that UKIP would've got many more seats than they got under PR, and i don't care.

I've been annoying people on here and the other board for years about electoral reform. I've had to deal with people like you who take pleasure in telling me that UKIP would gain political influence under PR, because they think i'm like them and that I would change my view based on who would benefit. But i'm not like them. I'm much, much better.

My principles aren't changed just because people I don't like will benefit from them, unlike some people on here.

[Imploding Turtle]

I don't hate minority's that's just your perception also I will support a leader who genuinely loves this country as I do...

Sure. You love the country, it's just the people and its values you don't like.

[SmudgetheClaret]

Sure. You love the country, it's just the people and its values you don't like.

I'm not sure how you get to that I'm patriotic and support the indigenous population whereas you support illegals and immigrants...

[Imploding Turtle]

I'm not sure how you get to that I'm patriotic and support the indigenous population whereas you support illegals and immigrants...

You're not a patriot, you're a white nationalist.

If you were a patriot of this country you'd want to defend its values against people like you who hate the values this country stands for. You don't love this country, you want to completely change this country into something you can love. That's not patriotic.

[SGr]

Agreed re proportional rep. Ideally I’d like an elected upper house as well but that idea would be considered too radical a change.

[Imploding Turtle]

Agreed re proportional rep. Ideally I’d like an elected upper house as well but that idea would be considered too radical a change.

It's ******* ridiculous that we still have an unelected upper chamber.

[SmudgetheClaret]

[quote="Imploding Turtle"]You're not a patriot, you're a white nationalist.


that sounds a tad racist..

[Lord Beamish]

Pigeon Chess.

[South West Claret.]

Imperative we get this ..

I think that it is well worth a try.

[djt2006]

It will never happen because the people who decide are the ones with the most to lose.

[Lancasterclaret]

Can't see it

Would require common sense and agreement to break out in Parliament, and imagine having to make sure that more than just you own nodding donkeys agreed with you?

The Conservative and Labour quite like it the way it is, so it won't change.

[box_of_frogs]

PR worked well for the Weimar Republic, and nothing bad came from that........

[Lancasterclaret]

Works perfectly well though in the vast majority of current democracies.

And Hitler only took control when the majority of people (normal people, like you and me!) voted for it.........

[Tricky Trevor]

IT, you are a patronising two-hat at times ! Under pure PR, UKIP would have had 80-85 MP's after the 2015 General Election, and would have had a major say as to who governed !

Could you put some figures to that statement please?

[houseboy]

I suppose this last week or two in Parliament is a foretaste of what it would be like under PR, when nobody has a majority for anything. It would be interesting!

Absolutely. PR is a good idea in principle and one that I would support 'testing'' but when you look at it more slosely it does have major problems, the main one (as in Italy) is that it produces 'weak' government and quite often nothing gets done because of it. The whole difficulty with PR is the stalemate problem. I'm not sure how many countries use PR but I don't know of one where it actually works properly, that's not to say there isn't one, just I don't know of one. If anyone can give me an example of where it does please feel free to let me know and I will happily concede.

The other potential problem with it is that deals can be done 'behind closed doors' and this can occasionally lead to back door extremism. I believe Hitler came to power through a weak government situation (although not PR as far as I know).

[Clarets4me]

Could you put some figures to that statement please?

Certainly .... as I said on a pure PR system, ie: Percentage of votes received Nationally, reflects the seats obtained in the Commons, the split of the 650 seats would have been .......

Conservative 239 ( 36.8% )
Labour 197 ( 30.4% )
UKIP 82 ( 12.6% )
Lib Dem 51 ( 7.9% )
SNP 30 ( 4.7% )
Green 23 ( 3.6% )

The other 28 seats would be filled by smaller, regional or fringe parties, such as the DUP, SDLP, and Plaid Cymru etc ..

[nil_desperandum]

Certainly .... as I said on a pure PR system, ie: Percentage of votes received Nationally, reflects the seats obtained in the Commons, the split of the 650 seats would have been .......

Conservative 239 ( 36.8% )
Labour 197 ( 30.4% )
UKIP 82 ( 12.6% )
Lib Dem 51 ( 7.9% )
SNP 30 ( 4.7% )
Green 23 ( 3.6% )

The other 28 seats would be filled by smaller, regional or fringe parties, such as the DUP, SDLP, and Plaid Cymru etc ..

These figures are correct, but of course under a PR system people wouldn't necessarily vote for the same parties as they did, so you can't say that this is how the result would have been if it had been held under PR rules.
(i.e. in the FPTP system people often vote for a party to try to stop another party getting in since they know that their first chance "candidate" has no chance in a particular constituency.)
I very much doubt that Conservative and Labour would be so high if it had been an election run on a PR basis.

[Clarets4me]

These figures are correct, but of course under a PR system people wouldn't necessarily vote for the same parties as they did, so you can't say that this is how the result would have been if it had been held under PR rules.
(i.e. in the FPTP system people often vote for a party to try to stop another party getting in since they know that their first chance "candidate" has no chance in a particular constituency.)
I very much doubt that Conservative and Labour would be so high if it had been an election run on a PR basis.

That's true, but this is the best indication we can get. I'm also slightly suspicious of the idea that people would get all of a quiver, and vote differently purely because of PR. However, if what you say is correct, then UKIP may well have received more votes as people would know that their vote would count towards a national total & increased representation ... for good or ill, depending on your view-point !!

[houseboy]

One good thing about PR is that you wouldn't get the 'wasted vote' syndrome. Many people would vote other than they do if they thought their vote would actually count. The downside would be probably an increase in influence by the awful, turncoat, we will jump in bed with any one and abandon our principles for power, Lib Dems. Dreadful little party who will do anything for a modicum of power and who would sell our souls to the Eu.

[mdd2]

Good and bad things come from both PR and FPTP.
The SN MP on question time put a good case for it and how well it had done in Scotland where only on one occasion had there been a majority administration so that the Government had had to rule by agreement.
But you can see how it might work from London with the utter shambles of minority Government since 2017 although 2010-15 didn't do too badly, lasting a full 5 years but the adversarial nature of London Politics will not disappear overnight.
Also if your assessment had come to pass what would 239 +82 +4 from the 28 have looked like these past 2 years-I dread to think how 197+51+ 30+23+24 from 28 would have fared. BUT maybe no Government would be better than this lot.
We must be nearer to CIvil War than at anytime since the 1600's
Any guesses what will happen if having not got an extension Parliament votes against the present deal and a second referendum (again) but votes to unilaterally rescind Article 50 and thus deny Brexit? We know that the UK can legally unilaterally rescind Article 50 for the status quo.

[AndrewJB]

PR would create governments of consensus. I think our current adversarial style of politics turns people off, but the very nature of PR - the fact no party is likely to govern alone - will change the tone of politics. There will still be disagreement, and possibly more extreme views (big tent parties like the Conservatives and Labour would probably fracture over time), however parties would look more often to ways in which they might work together.

[aggi]

Interesting to compare the 2017 results. A lot of seat losses for the tories and a big gain for the Lib Dems plus UKIP and the Greens adding a fair few seats. Obviously the SNP have lost a decent amount as they've always been over-represented in comparison to votes.

Arguably the Lib Dems would have ended up with even more as, anecdotally, a fair few Lib Dem voters sided with Labour as an anti-Tory vote.

Capture.JPG (42.46 KiB) Viewed 3261 times

Imagine the ruling parties would end up as some hybrid of Labour, Lib Dem and SNP which would be a laugh

[mdd2]

PR would create governments of consensus. I think our current adversarial style of politics turns people off, but the very nature of PR - the fact no party is likely to govern alone - will change the tone of politics. There will still be disagreement, and possibly more extreme views (big tent parties like the Conservatives and Labour would probably fracture over time), however parties would look more often to ways in which they might work together.

I suppose with PR you would never get the NHS sorted until the tax rate was 99.9999999% of all income and everyone could get sticking plasters, aspirin condoms and STs for free

[Falcon]

Personally I'd have a 2nd chamber elected fully PR to replace the Lords, but keep the current style local MP in the Commons (elected on an STV style so the winner gets >50% of the votes).

[basil6345789]

Interesting to compare the 2017 results. A lot of seat losses for the tories and a big gain for the Lib Dems plus UKIP and the Greens adding a fair few seats. Obviously the SNP have lost a decent amount as they've always been over-represented in comparison to votes.

Arguably the Lib Dems would have ended up with even more as, anecdotally, a fair few Lib Dem voters sided with Labour as an anti-Tory vote.

Capture.JPG

Imagine the ruling parties would end up as some hybrid of Labour, Lib Dem and SNP which would be a laugh

Interesting to see Yarkshire starting to figure - especially now that they've got their own airline. No stopping it now!

[bfcjg]

a cucumber would represent my proportion.

[dsr]

a cucumber would represent my proportion.

If you were the size of the Houses of Parliament.

[GodIsADeeJay81]

I suppose with PR you would never get the NHS sorted until the tax rate was 99.9999999% of all income and everyone could get sticking plasters, aspirin condoms and STs for free

Free season tickets??

I'm all for it.

[Winstonswhite]

Has everyone forgotten we had a vote on this in 2011 and FPTP won.

Therefore we can’t possibly have another vote on it as it would be undemocratic and against the will of the people.

[AndrewJB]

I suppose with PR you would never get the NHS sorted until the tax rate was 99.9999999% of all income and everyone could get sticking plasters, aspirin condoms and STs for free

100%

[keith1879]

PR would create governments of consensus. I think our current adversarial style of politics turns people off, but the very nature of PR - the fact no party is likely to govern alone - will change the tone of politics. There will still be disagreement, and possibly more extreme views (big tent parties like the Conservatives and Labour would probably fracture over time), however parties would look more often to ways in which they might work together.

Interesting comment in the press this week that the other countries in the EU are mostly used to attempting cross-party concensus when deciding things and can't understand why we are so adversarial. I think it's a particular puzzle when you consider that both our major parties are split on the matter and yet TM still seems to be concentrating on unifying the Tories to the exclusion of all else. If ever there was a subject that needs a different approach it is Brexit......to get it done at all(for the leavers) and to get it done right (for all of us).

[Erasmus]

The argument is that whilst Proportional Representation is certainly more democratic, it will give rise to more divided and hence less efficient forms of government. It is a pragmatic argument.

Holding referendums is the most democratic form of government, but as we see it is terribly inefficient. It is a matter of finding the right balance between democracy and functionality.

[Pstotto]

It won't make any difference, it's not about politics in this country, it's only about the Queen's horses.

[Bosscat]

It won't make any difference, it's not about politics in this country, it's only about the Queen's horses.

No thats not the country just Blackburn

[keith1879]

The argument is that whilst Proportional Representation is certainly more democratic, it will give rise to more divided and hence less efficient forms of government. It is a pragmatic argument.

Holding referendums is the most democratic form of government, but as we see it is terribly inefficient. It is a matter of finding the right balance between democracy and functionality.

I'm not convinced that your first (pragmatic) argument is true. In general it leads to more co-operative government - such governments are sometimes said to be "weaker" but that is really a way of interpreting a compromise between two extremes as weakness. Tories hated Tony Blair and his administration - Labour supporters hated Maggie Thatcher and hers ....but under PR it is likely that the "excesses" (dpending on your point of view) of both would have been curbed. Italy is oft quoted as a reason not to have PR......well post war Germany use PR and they seem to do well. The USA have first past the post and their administration has many features that we would consider unacceptable. In a world which includes both Nigel Farage and Derek Hatton I would prefer to be somewhere in the middle of the spectrum.

[Cryssys]

Best figures I can find suggest that approx two thirds of countries use some form of PR. As far as I can tell we are the only European country that doesn't use some form of PR. What's interesting is that FPTP systems are most frequently found in countries that were once part of the British empire.

PR is widespread and has proved very successful. In my opinion it results in progressive governments where all views are represented. By its nature it creates consensus and stable policies rather than the adversarial and divisive two tribes politics created by FPTP where one party, having been elected, seeks to reverse policies introduced by the other.

Many people in the UK feel disenfranchised and are disillusioned with politics, I believe this will continue until we have a system that people can believe in, one that represents the views of everyone and one which forces politicians to seek the middle ground.

That for means that PR is the only way forward.

[Caballo]

Not for me, at least we have someone fighting our geographical corner at the moment, under PR the big cities will dominate even more than the already do.