Will you email UK media to demand proportional representation? Big 3 parties' clear faults = PR just & vital?

One comment demands this new question





';Have you ever lived in a Labour/Tory stronghold where your vote is just wasted if you want the existing incumbent Party removed? Might as well disenfranchise me?';





I've twice voted UKIP as EU revived Roman Empire fulfils Daniel 7





%26amp; will soon spawn the NWO worst totalitarian Revelation 13 tyranny ever





But I really support the Christian Party's stand on he eternal Word of God





Will you email UK media to demand proportional representation? Don't Big 3 parties' clear faults make PR the only just way to vote?Will you email UK media to demand proportional representation? Big 3 parties' clear faults = PR just %26amp; vital?
English please, English......





Anyway - I think I get the gist...and in answer to your first question - yes I do live in a stronghold - a Tory one. My vote is totally wasted where I live. However, one day it may just make a small difference...you never know!





No, I don't want PR. You need three strong parties in government - PR would give us weaker parties overall without the power to push through legislation in parliament and the whole thing would grind to a slow crawl. In fact it would disenfranshise us even further because no matter who had a majority, there would never be a clear enough winner to create a government which acurately represents the politics of that party.Will you email UK media to demand proportional representation? Big 3 parties' clear faults = PR just %26amp; vital?
Well, PR has its advantages, but you have inadvertently pointed out its disadvantages. You are clearly mad and so are many of the fringe parties - monomaniacs like UKIP (whose record of corruption and incompetence outstrips any major party) and straightforward evil bastards like the bnp. PR leads to these people gaining MPs and upsetting some constituency or other. In the end, PR would not actually lead to any of these nutters gaining real power so you would still be back to trying to see the end of the world in some EU directive or other.
With any government elected by PR you will get fudge %26amp; compromise, with the real power lying in the hands of the lobbyists. Give me a clear choice every time.


I take your point about ';safe seats';, but the way to change the staus quo is perhaps get yourself elected! Anyway, a ';safe seat'; does not of itself influence the outcome of the election as a whole. Concentrate on the policies of whatever party you fancy and work to reduce/ increase the share of the vote they get. PR will not give you the party of your choice necessarily.
It is PR that got us BNP MEPs - if for no other reason it is a totally inefficient way of conducting elections.





With PR you wouldn't have a local MP - there would just be percentages from each party elected from a list according to how many votes they got. That is what happens with your MEPs - have a look at who they are and then ask yourself how many of them you have heard of. I'll tell you the answer - none.





And don't quote the Bible to justify election practices - that book has caused more trouble than all the politicians who have ever lived.
As long as one of the big two parties keep winning a general election, then you will never have PR. That may go for any party that wins an election. Why should they give themselves a chance to lose next time!
NO Because proportional representation is the worst form of election you can introduce .With proportional representation the protected inner circle of party members would be guaranteed a seat in government no matter how the people in their constituency voted .No matter how bad their behaviour was they could never be voted out of office .You could end up with an MP from a different party representing your area despite that party not winning the local vote because the seats would be shared out rather than won.Better to make it compulsory to vote and have a box for none of the above or just spoil your ballot paper if you do not vote.My areas last local election had a turnout of 4% and the winner had the nerve to say the majority of people had voted for them despite 96% not voting.
We have PR in Northern Ireland, Scottish Parliament, Scottish councils, Welsh Assembly, Greater London Assembly, and European Pariament constituencies. We need it for Westminster. The current system delivers a ';majority'; government, which 60% of the electorate voted against. The next election result is likely to be even worse. Consider this very feasible result:


Lab 34%, Con 34%, Lib 17% - Labour win 10 seat majority (and therefore 100% of the power!), despite 66%, or two thirds, of votes cast being for someone other than Labour. At least PR in this case would make sure each party is represented as it merits, and the probable outcome is a coalition, or even a grand coalition of Lab/Con, or Lab/Con/Lib.





There is a petition on the number10 website calling for PR for Westminster.





All those other assemblies have a system of democracy. It is time Westminster did too.





All 3 main parties plan a degree of electoral reform if they win the next election. Their plans are:


Lib Dem - STV PR, as used in Northern Ireland. Pure PR, not the hybrid uses in Scotland/Wales.


Labour - Alternative vote (or ';instant run off';) - used for Mayor of London election. List candidates in order of preference. Candidate with fewest votes eliminated and his second preference votes redistributed until someone has 50%+1 of the votes. It is not PR.


Tory - slash the number of MPs. Bad plan, even if popular (they excel at populism.) The FPTP system needs the ';marginal'; seats to make it work. Remove them, and we could be stuck with one party rule for 30 or 40 years. It also makes it harder for an MP to see his constituents, by giving him 3 times as many of them to see!





Tony Blair promised before 1997 to look into PR. Of course with a 180 seat majority he was no longer interested in it. But it was introduced in all the new assemblies Labour created. If it is right for Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, London and Europe, it is right for Westminster.





Expect Tory support for it to increase if they achieve the very likely result of winning more votes than Labour, but still ending up on the opposition benches.





The argument that a PR system would always create a minority or coalition government cannot be credible. A change to a PR system may create a change in voting behaviour. There would be no need to vote tactically as many do under FPTP. People in several areas vote for a party they don't want to vote for, just to help defeat a party they want even less, because the one they really want stands no chance of winning locally. PR lets people vote honestly, and makes sure all votes are of equal value, and none are wasted.