Proportional representation..
-
- Posts: 814
- Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2016 6:39 pm
- Been Liked: 180 times
- Has Liked: 97 times
Proportional representation..
Imperative we get this ..
These 2 users liked this post: nil_desperandum basil6345789
-
- Posts: 19799
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:12 am
- Been Liked: 5483 times
- Has Liked: 2540 times
- Location: Burnley, Lancs
Re: Proportional representation..
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.
This user liked this post: SammyBoy
-
- Posts: 7310
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:06 pm
- Been Liked: 1827 times
- Has Liked: 3964 times
Re: Proportional representation..
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.
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.
This user liked this post: basil6345789
Re: Proportional representation..
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!
These 2 users liked this post: Corky houseboy
-
- Posts: 5363
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:42 pm
- Been Liked: 1904 times
- Has Liked: 1978 times
-
- Posts: 814
- Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2016 6:39 pm
- Been Liked: 180 times
- Has Liked: 97 times
Re: Proportional representation..
sorry VB it must be truly annoying..Vino blanco wrote:Is this a political thread?
Re: Proportional representation..
We should definately have more referendums
-
- Posts: 814
- Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2016 6:39 pm
- Been Liked: 180 times
- Has Liked: 97 times
Re: Proportional representation..
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..Imploding Turtle wrote: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.
Re: Proportional representation..
And if they get the right result, they could even be put into practice.Damo wrote:We should definately have more referendums
This user liked this post: Damo
-
- Posts: 19799
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:12 am
- Been Liked: 5483 times
- Has Liked: 2540 times
- Location: Burnley, Lancs
Re: Proportional representation..
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.SmudgetheClaret wrote: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..
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.
-
- Posts: 8467
- Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 10:06 pm
- Been Liked: 2461 times
- Has Liked: 1992 times
Re: Proportional representation..
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.
The negative being there would be some proper gerrymandering to get the boundaries they wanted.
This user liked this post: basil6345789
-
- Posts: 4979
- Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 9:31 pm
- Been Liked: 2335 times
- Has Liked: 1040 times
- Location: Ightenhill,Burnley
Re: Proportional representation..
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 !
-
- Posts: 814
- Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2016 6:39 pm
- Been Liked: 180 times
- Has Liked: 97 times
Re: Proportional representation..
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 wrote: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.
-
- Posts: 19799
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:12 am
- Been Liked: 5483 times
- Has Liked: 2540 times
- Location: Burnley, Lancs
Re: Proportional representation..
Clarets4me wrote: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.
-
- Posts: 19799
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:12 am
- Been Liked: 5483 times
- Has Liked: 2540 times
- Location: Burnley, Lancs
Re: Proportional representation..
Sure. You love the country, it's just the people and its values you don't like.SmudgetheClaret wrote: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...
-
- Posts: 814
- Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2016 6:39 pm
- Been Liked: 180 times
- Has Liked: 97 times
Re: Proportional representation..
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 wrote:Sure. You love the country, it's just the people and its values you don't like.
-
- Posts: 19799
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:12 am
- Been Liked: 5483 times
- Has Liked: 2540 times
- Location: Burnley, Lancs
Re: Proportional representation..
SmudgetheClaret wrote: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.
These 2 users liked this post: Tricky Trevor Falcon
Re: Proportional representation..
Agreed re proportional rep. Ideally I’d like an elected upper house as well but that idea would be considered too radical a change.
This user liked this post: basil6345789
-
- Posts: 19799
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:12 am
- Been Liked: 5483 times
- Has Liked: 2540 times
- Location: Burnley, Lancs
Re: Proportional representation..
It's ******* ridiculous that we still have an unelected upper chamber.SGr wrote:Agreed re proportional rep. Ideally I’d like an elected upper house as well but that idea would be considered too radical a change.
-
- Posts: 814
- Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2016 6:39 pm
- Been Liked: 180 times
- Has Liked: 97 times
Re: Proportional representation..
[quote="Imploding Turtle"]You're not a patriot, you're a white nationalist.
that sounds a tad racist..
that sounds a tad racist..
-
- Posts: 5001
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:00 pm
- Been Liked: 3435 times
- Has Liked: 2881 times
Re: Proportional representation..
Pigeon Chess.SmudgetheClaret wrote:
This user liked this post: Imploding Turtle
-
- Posts: 5642
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:55 pm
- Been Liked: 766 times
- Has Liked: 499 times
- Location: Devon
Re: Proportional representation..
I think that it is well worth a try.SmudgetheClaret wrote:Imperative we get this ..
Re: Proportional representation..
It will never happen because the people who decide are the ones with the most to lose.
This user liked this post: houseboy
-
- Posts: 23343
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
- Been Liked: 8058 times
- Has Liked: 4714 times
- Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing
Re: Proportional representation..
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.
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.
This user liked this post: Caballo
-
- Posts: 4955
- Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 11:47 am
- Been Liked: 1087 times
- Has Liked: 996 times
Re: Proportional representation..
PR worked well for the Weimar Republic, and nothing bad came from that........
These 2 users liked this post: houseboy Bosscat
-
- Posts: 23343
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
- Been Liked: 8058 times
- Has Liked: 4714 times
- Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing
Re: Proportional representation..
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.........
And Hitler only took control when the majority of people (normal people, like you and me!) voted for it.........
-
- Posts: 8467
- Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 10:06 pm
- Been Liked: 2461 times
- Has Liked: 1992 times
Re: Proportional representation..
Could you put some figures to that statement please?Clarets4me wrote: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 !
-
- Posts: 7065
- Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2017 4:43 pm
- Been Liked: 2238 times
- Has Liked: 1617 times
- Location: Baxenden
Re: Proportional representation..
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.dsr wrote: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!
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).
-
- Posts: 4979
- Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 9:31 pm
- Been Liked: 2335 times
- Has Liked: 1040 times
- Location: Ightenhill,Burnley
Re: Proportional representation..
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 .......Tricky Trevor wrote:Could you put some figures to that statement please?
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 ..
This user liked this post: Tricky Trevor
-
- Posts: 7310
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:06 pm
- Been Liked: 1827 times
- Has Liked: 3964 times
Re: Proportional representation..
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.Clarets4me wrote: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 ..
(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.
These 2 users liked this post: Burnley Ace Falcon
-
- Posts: 4979
- Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 9:31 pm
- Been Liked: 2335 times
- Has Liked: 1040 times
- Location: Ightenhill,Burnley
Re: Proportional representation..
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 !!nil_desperandum wrote: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.
This user liked this post: nil_desperandum
-
- Posts: 7065
- Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2017 4:43 pm
- Been Liked: 2238 times
- Has Liked: 1617 times
- Location: Baxenden
Re: Proportional representation..
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.
Re: Proportional representation..
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.
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.
Re: Proportional representation..
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.
These 2 users liked this post: basil6345789 nil_desperandum
Re: Proportional representation..
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.
Imagine the ruling parties would end up as some hybrid of Labour, Lib Dem and SNP which would be a laugh
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.
Imagine the ruling parties would end up as some hybrid of Labour, Lib Dem and SNP which would be a laugh
Re: Proportional representation..
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 freeAndrewJB wrote: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.
-
- Posts: 3214
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 1:40 pm
- Been Liked: 892 times
- Has Liked: 1170 times
- Location: Proudsville
Re: Proportional representation..
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).
-
- Posts: 2713
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 10:22 pm
- Been Liked: 482 times
- Has Liked: 2292 times
Re: Proportional representation..
Interesting to see Yarkshire starting to figure - especially now that they've got their own airline. No stopping it now!aggi wrote: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.
Imagine the ruling parties would end up as some hybrid of Labour, Lib Dem and SNP which would be a laugh
Re: Proportional representation..
a cucumber would represent my proportion.
Re: Proportional representation..
If you were the size of the Houses of Parliament.bfcjg wrote:a cucumber would represent my proportion.
-
- Posts: 14566
- Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
- Been Liked: 3435 times
- Has Liked: 6339 times
Re: Proportional representation..
Free season tickets??mdd2 wrote: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
I'm all for it.
-
- Posts: 2542
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:04 am
- Been Liked: 608 times
- Has Liked: 310 times
Re: Proportional representation..
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.
Therefore we can’t possibly have another vote on it as it would be undemocratic and against the will of the people.
Re: Proportional representation..
100%mdd2 wrote: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
Re: Proportional representation..
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).AndrewJB wrote: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.
Re: Proportional representation..
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.
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.
Re: Proportional representation..
It won't make any difference, it's not about politics in this country, it's only about the Queen's horses.
Re: Proportional representation..
No thats not the country just BlackburnPstotto wrote:It won't make any difference, it's not about politics in this country, it's only about the Queen's horses.
This user liked this post: keith1879
Re: Proportional representation..
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.Erasmus wrote: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.
Re: Proportional representation..
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.
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.
This user liked this post: Falcon
Re: Proportional representation..
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.