Voting Reform - How would it work?

[John]

With 1 Representative Candidate per Constituency, how does this transform
into proportionate representation?

[Ivanhoe]

With 1 Representative Candidate per Constituency, how does this transform
into proportionate representation?

Everybody's vote would count, that's how it would work.

[John]

Can you supply an example of this?

[Ivanhoe]

Can you supply an example of this?

You dont know how P.R. works ?

[John]

I do - but not when there is one elected Candidate per Constituency.

It does not work.

First past the post is the only way on that.

[Papaumau]

John....

I don't think you understand how PR works.....

There are MANY different kinds of proportional representation that could be used and the, ( STV ), or "Single Transferrable Vote", that the Liberal Democrats want, is the most effective of them.

Sadly for BOTH of the big two the STV system would be disastrous as this system would provide for the party with the greatest share of the actual votes to get the most seats. This would mean that the Liberal Democrats might be in line for a working majority on their own in any future elections under that kind of a PR system.

For your edification here is a link to read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportional_representation

[John]

Papaumau

Thanks for that - many years ago the Electoral Reform Society had various systems on the go.
I can't even remember what I was voting for now. But I look part in a fair number of postal
votes for the same thing in different rounds.

To be honest at the time it was not easy to put down preferences if you were taking the matter seriously. Because you needed to read about every candidate etc. When  you had already made up your mind with one. How annoying it was to find that in subsequent rounds that candidate had been eliminated.

In short - I want to cast a vote for the candidate I want to represent me. Not give a preference that for many will not be based on any real judgement.

[Papaumau]

I feel that the "STV" system is the best, the simplest and the most effective at allocating the right number of seats per votes cast.

That is why the Liberal Democrats want that specific form of PR. I doubt very much if the Tories will let them have STV-type PR.

Now that Nick Clegg has sold out his principles for the vice-Premiership thirty pieces of silver I can see the Lib Dems falling apart with in-fighting. They are certainly going to be wiped out in Scotland after cow-towing to The Tories.

[John]

Papaumau

I have to agree over Nick Clegg.

I had put this down to the trappings of government which boil down to pieces of silver.

The Liberal Democrats could have given support just to get Brown out (YES!!!) and
then to form a government.

Future voting deals are then horse traded.

If Liberal Democrats wanted to keep their opposition independence - that was the way forward.

Nick Clegg going on so much about the old parties so strongly - then jumping into bed with one.

Not even a one night stand - more of a political marriage.

[Papaumau]

I think John that your "one-night-stand" analogy might be closer to the truth than you imagine.

We have to remember that the Liberal Party were originally formed up to destroy a minority Tory government and that as far as political philosphies are concerned the Liberal Democrats are just about as far left as the Tories are far right.

Both parties - ignoring the plausible public face at the moment - are driven by hard-liners that are poles apart from each other and I think that these not-so-far underground groups could rip this coalition apart if they so desired.

The term that comes to mind here is "unholy alliance" as leaving the few minor cabinet posts aside for a moment I think that there are actually more differences between them than there are similarities and these cracks are going to show through very quickly.

[John]

'allocating the right number of seats per votes cast'

Where does this leave constituency representation?

It doesn't work.

You could have representatives who do not get a seat.

Then need extra people from that represent nothing except occupy a seat.

As for preferences, it is a non starter. Many people just about manage an X.

I like the PC Change from Spoilt to Rejected Voting Slips (now Papers).

[Papaumau]

I think the electorate - especially the voting electorate - are smarter than you are trying to make out.

When the share of the vote is correctly connected to the number of seats gained via the STV/PR voting system the result will be much more equitable for everybody.

Both the Tories AND the Labourites have depended on getting more seats per ratio of votes than any of the other minority parties have in the past using the FPTP system and that is why they DO NOT want any kind of PR voting system to come in.

The worst possible scenario for them would be the Single Transferrable Vote or ( STV ) PR system as that would then give the minority parties many more seats than they get at the moment.

That would inevitably include the likes of the BNP and the UKIP parties too.

[John]

But it will not match Constituencies. How will this work?

It worked for Europe because they are in large regions.

Allowing BNP a platform (and of course the compulsory expense excesses).

This is something that Liberal Democrats have not worked out.

At least they now have a Party that can mentor them.
 

[Papaumau]

It is the present layout of the constituencies that is the problem as with FPTP many hard-line constituencies get elected with only very small numbers of votes and a lot of second and third votes are completely wasted.

( It is true that when we are asked to vote using numbered choices rather than putting "X"s in boxes we are going to have to find out more about each candidate. ( This can only be a good thing for democracy ) ).

The general share of the votes has overall - in the FPTP system - been very bad for minority parties as no matter what share of the votes they get they do not get any more seats.

If STV-type PR ever comes in I think you may find that boundary lines between some constituencies will have to be redrawn so that fairness is SEEN to be operating in all of them.

Here is another view of the pro's and con's of the STV system:

http://aceproject.org/ace-en/topics/es/esd/esd02/esd02d/esd02d01