Associate
- Joined
- 20 Sep 2008
- Posts
- 799
- Location
- Yeno that place
Sinn Fein here 
leading my lovely Northern Ireland into a better future!
leading my lovely Northern Ireland into a better future!Poll: *** 2010 General Election Result & Discussion ***
- Thread starter Cosimo
- Start date
FPTP with a PR 2nd house would be ideal, where the 2nd house is filled based on the FPTP %ages
Aren't they basically terrorists?Sinn Fein here
The amount of replies to this thread has now surpassed the **now drinking** thread, priorites people, come on
What an outrage! This forum is going to the dogs
Not just that but the constituencies are the key link between the voter and MP's and in my opinion should not be got rid of. Without the constituencies you need to completely change the system.
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
Clearly they didnt - or they'd have been sustainable. We had begun to buy elsewhere because its cheaper.
You cant have a rich society with minimum wages etc etc AND a competitive nonskilled manufacturing industry. It doesnt work.
That's a fair point re: tolerance vs endorsement.
I'm not sure how valid the vote share argument is though, a representative government is representative, not what you would prefer to be the case
If say 30% vote for Labour and 30% vote for them as a 2nd choice over the Tories, then arguably a 60% share reflects the will (tolerance) of the people. 
Because it's not up to me to do that, you've have to be seriously mentally problematic to think that it's fine as it is. Don't expect it to change by itself. Besides, i'm not the organizer of the event. It's clear to see that it's a good idea, i posted it to inform people of it and to spread the word, not to have to spend my time explaining to right wing bigots as simply as possible that it is
The constituency thing isn't representative at all, it means that there isn't anywhere near 1 vote per person. You're really fine with the fact that 36% Tory, 29% Labour, 26% Liberal in votes turns into 47% Tory, 39% Labour, 9% Liberal in terms of seats?
Part of me would definitely prefer PR, part of me would prefer a better FPTP system without the dodgy constituencies. Both have their advantages and their disadvantages, which is something you seem to be missing entirely.
I'd fully support PR in conjunction with strict limits on what parliament can do based on popularity in both lawmaking and taxation
Currently, rural consituencies are typically larger (in terms of number of voters) than city constituencies so I don't know how you figure that.
Suspended
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 9,480
Part of me would definitely prefer PR, part of me would prefer a better FPTP system without the dodgy constituencies. Both have their advantages and their disadvantages, which is something you seem to be missing entirely.
I'd fully support PR in conjunction with strict limits on what parliament can do based on popularity in both lawmaking and taxation
Genuine question - how could PR be implemented fairly in the UK? I've been trying to reason it through and there just seems to be so many obstacles. I believe PR has to be the answer if it guarantees that the popular vote is reflected accurately in Parliment, but I can't work out, if it were agreed, how we'd progress from the current system to PR.
Soldato
- Joined
- 7 Jul 2009
- Posts
- 16,234
- Location
- Newcastle/Aberdeen
I also don't think that you should get rid of the idea of a local MP either.
Perhaps have completely separate local and general elections, who you want to run the country may well not be who you want to look after your local area.
Perhaps have completely separate local and general elections, who you want to run the country may well not be who you want to look after your local area.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Nov 2008
- Posts
- 8,725
- Location
- UK
The Electoral Commission has been lobbying the government about revising the "creaking and breaking" system for years, they say
How about PR for the main house, and representatives (elected using a AV system) for the second chamber?
Larger constituencies reduce representation
The system is already biased towards the cities as that is where the MP/Population ratio is higher. Cities are also dramatically overfunded compared to rural areas.Remove the constituencies entirely though, and pandering to the cities will become worse, as on a purely popular vote basis, the urban areas are much more valuable than the rural ones.
Soldato
- Joined
- 7 Jul 2009
- Posts
- 16,234
- Location
- Newcastle/Aberdeen
We already do, that's why I filled in two ballots yesterday
I meant completely separate. With different rules governing each one.
I have a few thoughts (especially around negative voting, AMS with a positive and negative vote for the top up vote would be very interesting), but the biggest problems (to me) are ensuring that the constituency link remains (means STV or AMS/MMP) and constitutional change to ensure that the prime minister always comes from the biggest party (perhaps strict rules around coalition forming) to prevent back room deals and continue to allow the public their choice.
If you have loads of spare time you can read this research paper on the Jenkins Report to see what Labour rejected in 1998
For what it's worth, I actually like the US system where you vote separately for the Executive and the Legislature, that truly would be a huge shift though and I can't see it happening in the UK for many, many years, although perhaps one day.
Last edited:
I guess I am too old fashioned hence the rose tinted glasses, funny how dysfunctional we all are nowadays, but we are so much better off....
and I am just as bad cos got 3 kids who live online and heres me with no kids for 1 night a fortnight sat online typing on here lol.
and I am just as bad cos got 3 kids who live online and heres me with no kids for 1 night a fortnight sat online typing on here lol.