Please help introduce proportional representation, instead of first past the post. Watch

username2553161
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#1
PLEASE Ask your MP to vote for Caroline Lucas's Bill to introduce PR INSTEAD OF FPTP

http://www.makevotesmatter.org.uk/caroline-lucas-bill

On Wednesday 20th July, Caroline Lucas - Green Party MP for Brighton Pavilion - will put before Parliament a Ten Minute Rule Bill to introduce Proportional Representation for UK General Elections.GET RID OF FIRST PAST THE POST, AND INTRODUCE PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION FOR A FAIRER BRITAIN.

VOTES IS TOMORROW. SIGN IT TONIGHT, TAKES TWO MINUTES.
1
reply
L i b
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#2
Report 3 years ago
#2
To be honest, I'm so indifferent about voting systems that I couldn't even be bothered doing that.
0
reply
AngryJellyfish
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#3
Report 3 years ago
#3
(Original post by Rover73)
PLEASE Ask your MP to vote for Caroline Lucas's Bill to introduce PR INSTEAD OF FPTP

http://www.makevotesmatter.org.uk/caroline-lucas-bill

On Wednesday 20th July, Caroline Lucas - Green Party MP for Brighton Pavilion - will put before Parliament a Ten Minute Rule Bill to introduce Proportional Representation for UK General Elections.GET RID OF FIRST PAST THE POST, AND INTRODUCE PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION FOR A FAIRER BRITAIN.

VOTES IS TOMORROW. SIGN IT TONIGHT, TAKES TWO MINUTES.
Your link doesn't work. This one does.
0
reply
Sebastian Bartlett
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#4
Report 3 years ago
#4
Would love PR but the Turkey's won't ever vote for christmas
2
reply
username1539513
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#5
Report 3 years ago
#5
(Original post by Rover73)
PLEASE Ask your MP to vote for Caroline Lucas's Bill to introduce PR INSTEAD OF FPTP

http://www.makevotesmatter.org.uk/caroline-lucas-bill

On Wednesday 20th July, Caroline Lucas - Green Party MP for Brighton Pavilion - will put before Parliament a Ten Minute Rule Bill to introduce Proportional Representation for UK General Elections.GET RID OF FIRST PAST THE POST, AND INTRODUCE PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION FOR A FAIRER BRITAIN.

VOTES IS TOMORROW. SIGN IT TONIGHT, TAKES TWO MINUTES.
I sent my MP a letter, lets hope something gets done about this
0
reply
ByEeek
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#6
Report 3 years ago
#6
We voted against this only 5 years ago. Why should we have yet another referendum?
0
reply
viffer
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#7
Report 3 years ago
#7
(Original post by ByEeek)
Weg voted against this only 5 years ago. Why should we have yet another referendum?
That was for AV rather than PR iirc
0
reply
ByEeek
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#8
Report 3 years ago
#8
(Original post by viffer)
That was for AV rather than PR iirc
Same difference. AV was seen as a watered down version of PR. I was very much in favour but the result was unanimous. I am soundly against polling until you get the right answer and then going with that.

If you are going to introduce PR we also need wholesale reform of the political system and that isn't going to happen any time soon.
0
reply
jamestg
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#9
Report 3 years ago
#9
(Original post by ByEeek)
Same difference. AV was seen as a watered down version of PR. I was very much in favour but the result was unanimous. I am soundly against polling until you get the right answer and then going with that.

If you are going to introduce PR we also need wholesale reform of the political system and that isn't going to happen any time soon.
AV is a majoritarian system, list systems (essentially pure PR) is proportional.

There are numerous differences between AV and PR, and some even say AV is worse and can give even bigger majorities than PR. I think someone said in 1997 - Labour would have increased their majority quite substantially under AV.

Whether we should adopt PR - no, it's an awful system.
0
reply
username2553161
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#10
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#10
PETITION BY OWEN WINTER TO INTRODUCE PR INSTEAD OF THE OUTDATED FTPT.

https://www.change.org/p/make-this-t...Yws5foSuLmPAiV
0
reply
Josb
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#11
Report 2 years ago
#11
The first past the post is the best system. Don't change it.
0
reply
ByEeek
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#12
Report 2 years ago
#12
I am all for proportional representation, but I am more for democracy. In 2011 we voted against the alternative vote. In 2012, we voted against having mayors. We have now just elected a mayor for Manchester against the 2012 vote and now we have another measure to introduce a new voting system. What is the point in voting if it counts for nothing?
0
reply
ScottishBrexitor
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#13
Report 2 years ago
#13
I'm for a mixed system, AMS or AV Plus. Have 300 constituency MPs and 146 MPs elected under list PR in regional constituencies used for EU Parliamentary elections e.g North East, London, Scotland etc
0
reply
SHallowvale
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#14
Report 2 years ago
#14
(Original post by Josb)
The first past the post is the best system. Don't change it.
Why is it the best?
0
reply
Josb
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#15
Report 2 years ago
#15
(Original post by SHallowvale)
Why is it the best?
Because it is the most stable. The UK has not experienced a regime change since 1688.

With a proportional representation, 100 UKIP MPs would have been elected in the 2015 elections -- same for the Lib Dems, the Greens, etc.; the political system would have been shaken by so many parties in parliament, because governments would not be able to form a solid majority.

The First Past the Post prevents extremist parties from reaching prominence. In another country, UKIP would have been a strong party thanks to its MPs (who bring funding and grassroots presence), whilst in the UK, they broke against the FPTP wall and are going to disappear.
0
reply
SHallowvale
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#16
Report 2 years ago
#16
(Original post by Josb)
Because it is the most stable. The UK has not experienced a regime change since 1688.

With a proportional representation, 100 UKIP MPs would have been elected in the 2015 elections -- same for the Lib Dems, the Greens, etc.; the political system would have been shaken by so many parties in parliament, because governments would not be able to form a solid majority.

The First Past the Post prevents extremist parties from reaching prominence. In another country, UKIP would have been a strong party thanks to its MPs (who bring funding and grassroots presence), whilst in the UK, they broke against the FPTP wall and are going to disappear.
Having many parties in Government doesn't necessarily mean that no majority can be formed. Germany, France, Denmark, Belgium and the Netherlands, to name a few, all have coalition governments - some including three or more parties.

An extreme party may get MPs but even if they were part of a coalition it isn't likely that their extreme policies would be implemented as their presence would be dwarfed by that of larger parties. Using the 2015 election as an example - a Conservative-UKIP coalition would be dominated by Conservative policy.

If an extreme party is the dominant party in a coalition then that would mean they'd have had the most amount of votes - in which case they'd probably have the same number of MPs (if not more) under FPTP anyway.
0
reply
mojojojo101
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#17
Report 2 years ago
#17
(Original post by ByEeek)
I am all for proportional representation, but I am more for democracy. In 2011 we voted against the alternative vote. In 2012, we voted against having mayors. We have now just elected a mayor for Manchester against the 2012 vote and now we have another measure to introduce a new voting system. What is the point in voting if it counts for nothing?
You say you are for democracy, but your words say differently. The vote in 2011 was for/against A/V, you have extrapolated from 'we don't like AV' to 'we do like FPTP' which is not a fair representation of that referendum result.

(Original post by Josb)
Because it is the most stable. The UK has not experienced a regime change since 1688.

With a proportional representation, 100 UKIP MPs would have been elected in the 2015 elections -- same for the Lib Dems, the Greens, etc.; the political system would have been shaken by so many parties in parliament, because governments would not be able to form a solid majority.

The First Past the Post prevents extremist parties from reaching prominence. In another country, UKIP would have been a strong party thanks to its MPs (who bring funding and grassroots presence), whilst in the UK, they broke against the FPTP wall and are going to disappear.
You say barrier against 'extremists I say barrier to true democracy. As you have pointed out, FPTP is deeply conservative and helps to maintain a single coherent agenda in Westminster even when that may be antagonistic to the views and interests of the wider population.

That British politicians are too childish to work in coalition is a pretty poor argument against PR in my opinion.
1
reply
LibertarianMP
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#18
Report 2 years ago
#18
No, then idiots would vote for fellow idiots LIKE CAROLINE LUCAS and Tim Farron. Sure, I'd like it if the SNP had less MP's and UKIP had more, but the tories are doing ok right now so I'd be happy enough with things staying the same.
0
reply
ByEeek
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#19
Report 2 years ago
#19
(Original post by mojojojo101)
You say you are for democracy, but your words say differently. The vote in 2011 was for/against A/V, you have extrapolated from 'we don't like AV' to 'we do like FPTP' which is not a fair representation of that referendum result.
Not really. People voted against AV because they didn't understand it. Nor do they understand PR. Ironically, I note that the mayoral elections (which we didn't vote for either) we done using PR. Very odd.
0
reply
Josb
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#20
Report 2 years ago
#20
(Original post by mojojojo101)
You say barrier against 'extremists I say barrier to true democracy. As you have pointed out, FPTP is deeply conservative and helps to maintain a single coherent agenda in Westminster even when that may be antagonistic to the views and interests of the wider population.

That British politicians are too childish to work in coalition is a pretty poor argument against PR in my opinion.
"True democracy" is not a desirable system, precisely because of the danger of opinion rush and extremist parties. A political system that guarantees pluralism whilst eliminating one issue parties or extremist ones is the best imo.
2
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

People at uni: do initiations (like heavy drinking) put you off joining sports societies?

Yes (224)
67.47%
No (108)
32.53%

Watched Threads

View All