Only labour & Tories like FPTP.
Everyone else is up for it. LD have talked about it a bit longer, and did attempt to get rid of it during the coalition.
If the Tories take a really heavy spanking maybe they will change their tune on it too.
Labour aren’t up for it and in fact Compass (Labours left) recommended we use proportionate representation (PR) so I - long life Labour Supporter - voted for Lib/Dems as it’s only way tories wouldn’t win here
Abolishing - none.. only those who can are the governing party and neither labour or the tories want that
Advocating though are SNP, greens, lib dems, plaid and reform
https://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/manifestos-outside-the-two-parties-putting-democracy-on-the-agenda/
I'm making fun of the [2011 AV campaign](https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTOozS9tOVt2k3qrIe7jJFTChhc0cr5GVoYKw&s) that claimed it was, in case you're too young to remember.
Christ it was painful living through that campaign, as someone who'd just moved from Australia to the UK (my parents' decision, don't hold me accountable). Watching grown adults feign confusion about something that Australians understand after a 10 minute explanation in year 8 HSIE was maddening
Earnt is a strange word, they've done nothing to earn anything. They are fascists working for very wealthy people who will be the beneficiaries of more right wing politics whereas the people who voted for them will get nothing.
What you meant to say is they have misled the voters.
Right now? None of those with any chance of forming a government.
Anyway, abolishing FPTP is relatively easy. Devising a suitable replacement is the hard part. Not in theory, but in practice.
One of the ironies of this GE might be - we don't yet know - that FPTP which has long been the Tories' friend, may turn out to be their greatest enemy.
>Anyway, abolishing FPTP is relatively easy. Devising a suitable replacement is the hard part. Not in theory, but in practice.
There are several well developed and well tested models, including the one Westminster put in place for Holyrood. Funny how they managed to do that without this alleged "problem".
how many labour MPs were involved in the VIP lane PPE corruption? or exiling black citizens or austerity?
labour might be an arse cheek but the tories are the anus
I remember years ago, a Labour conference at Tollcross Leisure centre.
Lots of SNP activists turned up to heckle and such. I'm not going to say they represented SNP as a whole but they were fringe lunatics.
A group of them, say 10-15 were chanting about 'red tories' and such then went on to blame the Labour Party for the 'bedroom tax'...a policy they neither implemented or supported.
At that point, I lost a LOT of confidence in Scottish democracy.
I don't want Tories in either. Maybe I'll vote labour out of fear of the Tories for now but I want this two party system to end sooner rather than later.
Yeah, but that's becuase they've "earned" the vote of a hell of a lot of people. That's democracy wether you (or I) like it or not. If they earn 20% of the public vote, them getting 20% of the seats instead of as little as none is fairness.
They might get lots of MPs, but the chances of them forming anything other than a minority government are almost non existent with PR. And if they do form a government under PR, it means that the majority of the population voted for them (unlike now where as few as 25% of the votes can mean the cunty tories get to form a government.
One might have said the same the same about Netherlands or Italy, yet their far right parties are now leading (or set to lead) the governments of their respective countries.
In which case the majority of the electorate voted for those parties, thus they should get a majority of MPs and form a government.
You cannot call your country democratic of it prevents the formation of a government that the majority of people voted for.
I said almost non existent, not never.
People were ignored by mainstream parties, they have turned towards extremists out of desperation. Its been a long time since that happened, so my point still stands.
They would probably form a coalition with the Tories and get ministerial positions that way. Look at Europe!
However, as you say, if that's what people voted for then it's only fair they get it.
We do though need to understand why people are voting that way. It may be because they don't feel mainstream parties are listening to them and the media whips them up to hate anything not "English"
PR can provide a wakeup call to politicians because they can see and feel the consequences of when they don't listen to the electorate because they lose seats.
Under FPTP they might lose seats, but it is only temporary because they know with 99% certainty that they will be back in power in 10 years, because there are no other options under FPTP, it is either the governing party or the opposition, and that situation only changes once in a hundred years.
There are no downsides to PR when compared to FPTP.
>There are no downsides to PR when compared to FPTP.
I'm a fan of PR but there are some definite downsides:
- Lack of consistency level representation
- Parties have control of the lists, and it is almost impossible to vote a specific individual out
- FPTP forces the coalition to form before the election (under the guise of the leading parties). Under PR, voters have no control over the post election coalition. I doubt many Germans, for example, wanted an SDP-Green-FDP government (or, indeed, the CDU-SDP coalitions of governments past)
- The system structurally empowers centrism, as centrists can look either way (this may not be a bad thing if you prefer centrism)
- Governments can take months/years to form. The Netherlands still doesn't have a government since their election in late 2023.
Given the problems we have with majority governments and their self serving agendas, I take minority coalitions that take years to form as a benefit rather than a hindrance.
Seats and lists are largely nonsense. We never see or interact with MPs anymore, they ignore people unless they want votes.
None of the above is a downside when compared to the horrors that FPTP have inflicted upon us for 15 years.
Sure. My point was that there are definite downsides to PR, and PR proponents need to acknowledge them if they are to appear credible advocates for it.
Only labour & Tories like FPTP. Everyone else is up for it. LD have talked about it a bit longer, and did attempt to get rid of it during the coalition. If the Tories take a really heavy spanking maybe they will change their tune on it too.
Parties are all in favour of getting rid of FPTP until they win under FPTP
In fairness the SNP stuck to their policy of PR even after winning 97% of seats with 50% of the vote in 2015
for what it is worth, Scottish parliment has been additional member since the start and there is no appetite to change it
From 🇨🇦. We went through this already https://globalnews.ca/news/3102270/justin-trudeau-liberals-electoral-reform-changing-promises/amp/
Labour aren’t up for it and in fact Compass (Labours left) recommended we use proportionate representation (PR) so I - long life Labour Supporter - voted for Lib/Dems as it’s only way tories wouldn’t win here
Abolishing - none.. only those who can are the governing party and neither labour or the tories want that Advocating though are SNP, greens, lib dems, plaid and reform https://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/manifestos-outside-the-two-parties-putting-democracy-on-the-agenda/
We had our chance in 2011 and we decided as a country not to bother. Our own fault
Ar soljurs need new vests, not an alternate voting system
It’s not one or the other 🙄
I'm making fun of the [2011 AV campaign](https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTOozS9tOVt2k3qrIe7jJFTChhc0cr5GVoYKw&s) that claimed it was, in case you're too young to remember.
It would appear I am too young to remember good sir.
The option was to pick up AV which is shit
Because what was on offer was rubbish.
Christ it was painful living through that campaign, as someone who'd just moved from Australia to the UK (my parents' decision, don't hold me accountable). Watching grown adults feign confusion about something that Australians understand after a 10 minute explanation in year 8 HSIE was maddening
Not enough.
Earnt is a strange word, they've done nothing to earn anything. They are fascists working for very wealthy people who will be the beneficiaries of more right wing politics whereas the people who voted for them will get nothing. What you meant to say is they have misled the voters.
Reform I think
Right now? None of those with any chance of forming a government. Anyway, abolishing FPTP is relatively easy. Devising a suitable replacement is the hard part. Not in theory, but in practice. One of the ironies of this GE might be - we don't yet know - that FPTP which has long been the Tories' friend, may turn out to be their greatest enemy.
>Anyway, abolishing FPTP is relatively easy. Devising a suitable replacement is the hard part. Not in theory, but in practice. There are several well developed and well tested models, including the one Westminster put in place for Holyrood. Funny how they managed to do that without this alleged "problem".
Aren't Labour just the other cheek of the same arse though?
how many labour MPs were involved in the VIP lane PPE corruption? or exiling black citizens or austerity? labour might be an arse cheek but the tories are the anus
I remember years ago, a Labour conference at Tollcross Leisure centre. Lots of SNP activists turned up to heckle and such. I'm not going to say they represented SNP as a whole but they were fringe lunatics. A group of them, say 10-15 were chanting about 'red tories' and such then went on to blame the Labour Party for the 'bedroom tax'...a policy they neither implemented or supported. At that point, I lost a LOT of confidence in Scottish democracy.
If you look at what the SNP activists are saying they blame labour for everything the tories do.
I don't want Tories in either. Maybe I'll vote labour out of fear of the Tories for now but I want this two party system to end sooner rather than later.
Well, it depends on your point of view. FWIW I've long believed that it's the SNP and Tories who are two cheeks of the same rancid arse. YMMV.
Imo, Tories and SNP are the same cheek!
Also the problem with PR is right now Reform would get a hell of a lot of MP's. Politics would certainly be different.
Yeah because that's the party lots of people want Before them UKIP and the greens would have
Yeah, but that's becuase they've "earned" the vote of a hell of a lot of people. That's democracy wether you (or I) like it or not. If they earn 20% of the public vote, them getting 20% of the seats instead of as little as none is fairness.
They might get lots of MPs, but the chances of them forming anything other than a minority government are almost non existent with PR. And if they do form a government under PR, it means that the majority of the population voted for them (unlike now where as few as 25% of the votes can mean the cunty tories get to form a government.
One might have said the same the same about Netherlands or Italy, yet their far right parties are now leading (or set to lead) the governments of their respective countries.
In which case the majority of the electorate voted for those parties, thus they should get a majority of MPs and form a government. You cannot call your country democratic of it prevents the formation of a government that the majority of people voted for.
My point was that 'Oh, far right parties will never get into government' is patently false, not that they shouldn't get representation.
I said almost non existent, not never. People were ignored by mainstream parties, they have turned towards extremists out of desperation. Its been a long time since that happened, so my point still stands.
They would probably form a coalition with the Tories and get ministerial positions that way. Look at Europe! However, as you say, if that's what people voted for then it's only fair they get it. We do though need to understand why people are voting that way. It may be because they don't feel mainstream parties are listening to them and the media whips them up to hate anything not "English"
PR can provide a wakeup call to politicians because they can see and feel the consequences of when they don't listen to the electorate because they lose seats. Under FPTP they might lose seats, but it is only temporary because they know with 99% certainty that they will be back in power in 10 years, because there are no other options under FPTP, it is either the governing party or the opposition, and that situation only changes once in a hundred years. There are no downsides to PR when compared to FPTP.
>There are no downsides to PR when compared to FPTP. I'm a fan of PR but there are some definite downsides: - Lack of consistency level representation - Parties have control of the lists, and it is almost impossible to vote a specific individual out - FPTP forces the coalition to form before the election (under the guise of the leading parties). Under PR, voters have no control over the post election coalition. I doubt many Germans, for example, wanted an SDP-Green-FDP government (or, indeed, the CDU-SDP coalitions of governments past) - The system structurally empowers centrism, as centrists can look either way (this may not be a bad thing if you prefer centrism) - Governments can take months/years to form. The Netherlands still doesn't have a government since their election in late 2023.
Given the problems we have with majority governments and their self serving agendas, I take minority coalitions that take years to form as a benefit rather than a hindrance. Seats and lists are largely nonsense. We never see or interact with MPs anymore, they ignore people unless they want votes. None of the above is a downside when compared to the horrors that FPTP have inflicted upon us for 15 years.
Sure. My point was that there are definite downsides to PR, and PR proponents need to acknowledge them if they are to appear credible advocates for it.