Why do people wanna change the electorial system?

Degenerate

tomterm8 wrote: »

Whereas, the current system generally gives dictatorial power to a minority party who ends up with the ability to game the system so they stay in for the next decade. When that party gets so unpopular even weasels wouldn't be in the same room with them, another minority party is given dictatorial power, even though most people don't agree with its policies.

Exactly how do they "game the system"?

pwllbwdr

Ask the Germans - in their system the 3rd party is almost ALWAYS in power.

tomterm8

Degenerate wrote: »

Exactly how do they "game the system"?

Let me count the ways:

1. Bribing the electorate in marginal constituancies.
2. Boundary Reform.
3. Constitutional Reform.

and our favourite:

4. Electoral reform.

It's noticeable that every single one of the three main parties has a proposal for electoral reform in their manifesto that would benefit them. The conservatives also plan to have a boundary reform that would benefit them. First thing Labor did when they got into power was constitutional reform in the Lords to get rid of opposition there, and boundary changes that meant the Conservatives couldn't get in even when Labour has a share of the vote the same as their nadir in 1983.

I mean, those are just the legal roots they use. I'm not even talking about the rotten boroughs, like my one, where you could put up a donkey and it would be elected if it wore the right colour. Or the rampant corruption with postal votes labour are engaged in.

kennyboy66_2

tomterm8 wrote: »

Whereas, the current system generally gives dictatorial power to a minority party who ends up with the ability to game the system so they stay in for the next decade. When that party gets so unpopular even weasels wouldn't be in the same room with them, another minority party is given dictatorial power, even though most people don't agree with its policies.

Nothing makes my blood boil more than the Ulster / Welsh / Scottish parties rubbing their hands at how much they can gouge out of the taxpayer to secure there vote.

ruggedtoast

I'm looking at the flash chart on the front of the Indy's site.

The Tories have 36% of the vote and 290 seats.

Labour are on 29% of the vote with 247 seats. The Lib Dems are on 23% of the vote, just 7% less than Labour but barely scrape 50 seats.

Theres something wrong there.

Kohoutek

I'm not a UKIP supporter, but surely this shouldn't be possible in a 'democracy':

Alliance Party 42,325 votes (0.2%) 1 Seat in Parliament
UK Independence Party 868,054 votes (3.1%) 0 Seats in Parliament

Twenty times as many votes, but no seats!

treliac

kennyboy66 wrote: »

Labours 1997 manifesto included a pledge to hold referendum on electoral reform, so it hardly a new issue for them.

The problem is Turkeys don't vote for Xmas - PR would surely give both main parties less seats. In addition Gordon Brown was dead set against it.

How he can say he is "passionately” in favour and keep a straight face is beyond me.

Because he's as big a liar as Blair before him. He's a self-serving, bullying bigot and we need to be rid of him.

WhiteThierry

abaxas wrote: »

That is an interesting question, under the proposed PR system how many BNP candidates would have got seats in the house?

Someone needs to work that out.

Well its easy to work out, whatever their % of total votes is (about 1.9%) then give them this share of the seats (about 650) so 13 seats in this case.

but the point is, if 1.9% of the public vote for a party then that party deserves 1.9% of the power, irrespective of how abhorrent we find their policies, you cant pick and choose which parties are allowed mp's or its no longer a democracy!

and thats the point, no form of govt is flawless, but democracy is the best, and no form of democracy is flawless, but Prop. representation is the fairest to the voter.

bo_drinker

Kohoutek wrote: »

I'm not a UKIP supporter, but surely this shouldn't be possible in a 'democracy':

Alliance Party 42,325 votes (0.2%) 1 Seat in Parliament
UK Independence Party 868,054 votes (3.1%) 0 Seats in Parliament

Twenty times as many votes, but no seats!

Shows it for the farce that it is.

Mr_Mumble

abaxas wrote: »

That is an interesting question, under the proposed PR system how many BNP candidates would have got seats in the house?

Someone needs to work that out.

Based on the current BBC shown results (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/election2010/results/) here is how a pure PR system of % national vote, converted into seats, would work out:

235      Conservative        
190      Labour        
149      Liberal Democrat    
20       UK Independence Party    
12       British National Party    
11       Scottish National Party        
7        Green                    
4        Democratic Unionist Party        
4        Plaid Cymru        
3        Sinn Fein        
3        Social Democratic & Labour Party    
3        Ulster Conservatives and Unionists - New Force            
1        Alliance Party        
1        English Democrats        
1        Respect-Unity Coalition        
1        Traditional Unionist Voice        
1        Christian Party        
1        Independent Community and Health Concern        
0        Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition        
0        Scottish Socialist Party        
7        Others

(btw Excel is awesome, did this in a couple of minutes using its import function.)