-
Posts
-
Would you like to see an overhaul of Britain’s “First past the post” electoral system?
Have a look at this article from here in Ireland last week..… The most likely candidate is the Conservative leader, David Cameron, but everything suggests that in order to become prime minister, he is going to have to enter a formal coalition or an informal alliance with Clegg and the Lib Dems.
Clegg cannot stand Brown and yesterday, for the first time, he said that if Labour gets more seats but fewer votes than the Conservatives, he will not prop it up in government.
Clegg’s problem with the Conservatives, has, until now, been Cameron’s reluctance to change the voting system for the House of Commons from first-past-the-post to some kind of proportional representation.
The present system is now regarded by most commentators as completely undemocratic. To take just one example, if, as is quite conceivable, the Labour Party, the Conservatives and the Lib Dems each get exactly 30pc of all the votes that are cast, with the remaining 10pc divided among the smaller parties, then computer projections show that Labour would get about 315 seats, the Conservatives 206 and the Lib Dems a paltry 100.
It is this arithmetic, based on calculations prepared for the BBC, which explains why Clegg believes that a switch to PR is “unavoidable”.
The most intriguing opinion poll last week showed that if voters considered that Clegg had a genuine chance of winning the election, then 49pc of them would support the Lib Dems. That would give them a massive 548 seats in the Commons out of 650. The hot favourite with the bookmakers is for the final result to be far less conclusive with a hung parliament now regarded as an odds-on near-certainty.
Much may depend on the final debate between the three party leaders on Thursday. Clegg romped away from Brown and Cameron in the first debate 11 days ago but his rivals put on vastly improved showings last Thursday.
The former Conservative chancellor, Ken Clarke, has been trying to frighten voters away from a hung parliament at Westminster by reminding them of the economic crisis in the 1970s when Labour had to rely on the Liberals to stay in power. It was, said Clarke, “a farce and a fiasco”.
But the opinion polls show a large number of voters are now keen to have a hung parliament and the abrupt emergence of Clegg as a credible political performer in the TV debates has encouraged them to think about voting Lib Dem as a way of ensuring it. However, the polls also show that as many as one-third of all voters have yet to make up their mind.
– Nicholas Leonard
Irish Independent
Great isn’t it.
At a time when clear and decisive leadership is needed more than ever, and not soppy watered-down policies, we Brits face the likelihood of the country being run by committee, hamstrung by compromise and based on hidden machinations in back rooms by the power-hungry.
The real lack of decision rests with the general populace of course, as we stare into the abyss of Coalition on the European model.
.
yeah … Sad that folks have no interest in voting, as we explain that in some countries a vote is a main Right.
everywhere i go i hear ” och there all the same”..
Oh Wake up !!!!!! it is this kinda apathy that lets the fascists in.
VOTE Labour .. (please)
Sad then that this democracy doesnt quite cover such things as the decision to vote upon the role of attorney general and the puppets medling with buisness and commerce behind the scenes…..Curse them all
It looks like we could see a situation where the Lib Dems could get more votes than Labour but less than half as many seats. That is clearly undemocratic.
What I would favour is halving the number of constituencies but each one electing 2 MPs – the winning candidate and the one who came second. That would be much more representative.
I don’t think the present system is democratic, but i cant get my head around the PR alternative i’ve read and reread and listened abt it but still dont get it, there seems to be different ways of applying this !!! im either thick or its a mental block to get my head around it, probably both but its all very complicated and each time i think to myelf they should do it like this or that it seems confusing or flawed … i think i just dont get it!
So … anyone fancy explaining like really really simply and how it would work better in a different format and exactly how they would go abt it all?wow poli, you dont seriously expect a reply to that do you lol??? I am still trying to get my head round this system of democracy, your gonna confuse me even more now…. If you ever find out, please do share :o :wink:
We have the SINGLE TRANSFERABLE VOTE system of Proportional Representation here in Ireland, and as stated in the above explanatory link I truly believe it to be the fairest of all democratic voting systems in that it ” provides proportionality by transferring votes to minimise waste, and therefore also minimises the number of unrepresented or disenfranchised voters”.
No democratic system is perfect.. but I believe this to be the least imperfect :roll:
As always, very interesting Mr Pepper.
I can’t see enough ‘tactical’ voting to bring about such change.
I do see another election in the autumn.God help us.
.
I do see a hung parliament providing electoral reform in order to shore up a coalition government involving the Liberals.
I’m looking forward to it. I reckon Great Britain should always be a nation looking to further its own democracy. I just hope there’s some proper thought put into any new system and establishment interests are left firmly to one side. It has the possibilty of reinvigorating the country from the top down and paving a more enthused path into the future. Among these dark Satanic Mills and all that, eh?
Get involved in this discussion! Log in or register now to have your say!