It's hard to imagine a world where voting reform happens. We all know what we need. Scrapped or massively widened voter ID and proportional representation. But everyone who has the power to change these things will have gotten their job from the current state. They don't want to change what worked for them.
this post was submitted on 19 Dec 2023
60 points (98.4% liked)
United Kingdom
4077 readers
328 users here now
General community for news/discussion in the UK.
Less serious posts should go in [email protected] or [email protected]
More serious politics should go in [email protected].
Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.
Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.
Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.
If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.
Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.
Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
RANKED CHOICE VOTING
We had a chance for that, but the electorate was too stupid to vote for it anyway.
Referendums. Huh. What are they good for? Fucking over the rest of us, that's what.
The only way I can see it is with lib dems as a coalition partner. For a time a while ago it looked like that might be possible. But then the Tories kept shitting the bed the the point it looks like a labour landslide is incoming.
The problem is the LibDems already had their chance at this and completely screwed it up, ruining their credibility
Yeah sadly so. It's still the only long shot I can see. Unless labour actually manages to remember that the current system only seems to let them in once every twenty odd years.
Mixed Member PR is a way to go. Like New Zealand and Germany. Then there is still local MPs.
Do you actually feel any benifit from local MPs under fptp.
Seems party whips make them of no real value locall
It's someone you can go see, or write to, to help you with issues. A point of contact.
But I do think party whips need to go. If parties can't hold together without the whips, maybe they shouldn't be held together.
As long as your issue fits the party line. If not its someone who will go out of their way to avoid answering the question. Or just send out form letters that are of no value.
Unfortunatly with the current system. If your MPs is tory nothing is done about anything because 99% of issues are austerity related.
As for labour. Currently they dont seem to have a party line beyond being competent non corrupt tories.
Seriously in 50 plus years. I have never known anyone who had a positive result from seeking an MPs help. Just the same crap answers you hear from national figures.
Local politicians are more help. Or at least were before austerity hit them so hard.
My local MP got an unjust parking ticket cancelled for me, and my family and me, with a distinctive last name, write to her often upset with her party and her voting with them. Every. Single. Time.
Others have similiar with her. Lots of MPs are like this and it's often stuff that doesn't fit into party lines.
MPs who aren't there for their constituency need kicking out. We need better systems for that.
I don't but it is the argument that people always make against introducing PR
...and there's multiple ways of achieving it. It's a valid criticism of a number of PR systems, so I don't see why you wouldn't choose a PR system that doesn't have the issue.
I like STV with multi-member constituencies. You merge a number of existing neighbouring constituencies together (Say 5) and vote to elect 5 representatives for that new large constituency based on people's ranked preferences. There's a few things I like about it:
- It avoids the "Party List" concept, which is just the ultimate safe seat.
- It still allows for independent candidates, as party affiliation is not a material concern in any aspect of the election.
- It gives people a choice of representatives. Ever lived in a constituency where your MP doesn't share your values? Well, now you have a much better chance of at least one of them being on your side of an argument.
- People can vote for candidates who have "no chance" of winning, safe in the knowledge that their 2nd/3rd/4th preference will still get their support if their first preference is eliminated.
It's not a "failed election" the UK is heading for per se, it would simply work as intended by the current law. It's just that the predictable results are anything but favourable for the Tories.
Those Tories have been against changes to the system for ages. Now that they notice that without methods of proportional representation they will be out of jobs after the next election, this kind of change suddenly looks good.
As are Labour. The Tories are not the only culprit here. It was listed in the 1997 Labour manifesto pledge.
We are committed to a referendum on the voting system for the House of Commons. An independent commission on voting systems will be appointed early to recommend a proportional alternative to the first-past-the-post system.
The problem is people also don't want Labour, it's just the lesser evil, so instead of voting pro labour they're voting anti Tory. Id call that a failed election.