This is a discussion on Electoral Reform within the United Kingdom Politics & Political Forum forums, part of the United Kingdom Political Forums category; After watching question time the other day it got me thinking about electoral reform. One of the audience suggested changing ...
Junior Member
After watching question time the other day it got me thinking about electoral reform. One of the audience suggested changing the voting system. The Conservative and Labour panelist were unsurprisingly opposed to the idea. It seems to mean that the two major parties are running scared at the thought of any kind of meaningfull reform. Particulary the Conservatives who have consistently resisted consitutional reform.
I beleive are outdated system is clearly contributing to voter apathy. Most voters may not be aware of the voting sytem but they do know that voting for third parties is a waste of time. They know that their is curently no chance of any third parties being successful in an election. As electors we have the choice of two parties who dont have any major differences in policy. Surley democracy should work for the people and not for the parties.
How aboutOriginally Posted by RedJake
100 MPs in higher chamber (HOL) elected by Google Page Ranking, from political parties. From a majority an executive is formed. This house proposals new legislation
A lower chamber (HOC) elected as is by constituency except political parties are banned from explicitly supporting any candidate. This chamber scrutinizes legislation.
Also no Monarchy.
Junior Member
One of the arguments i constantly hear on having an elected 2nd chamber is that it would lead to the composition of the Commons and Lords being identical, which would result in the Lords being a less efective check on the commons. Yet surley if there were difffrent voting systems and election dates in the houses then this problem wouldn't exist.
Senior MP
Put these ideas to the Kelly enquiry.
Advocates of capitalism believe : "The fortunate must not be restrained in the exercise of tyranny over the unfortunate"
Well about 10 years ago now I wrote a very detailed letter to Blair outlining this proposal in some detail and it got little more than a 'thanks but no thanks' reply. Once again Nutter is way ahead of the trendPut these ideas to the Kelly enquiry.
accidental genius!
Definately time to ditch first past the post. I would favour a single transferable vote as I think it is best placed to retain the constituent/representative relationship whilst still making the house reflect the national as well as local vote.
"The object of universities is not to make skilful lawyers, physicians or engineers. It is to make capable and cultivated human beings." John Stewart Mill
Anti-Ascription Crusader
As far as national government goes, I no longer see the need for the seats in the chamber to be religiously tied to geographical constituencies.
My suggestion would be to
- fully Google Page Ranking the house of commons
- fully Google Page Ranking the house of lords (or perhaps ditch it altogether and go unicameral)
- sort out a written constitution
- make the head of state elected
Generational Robbery and My Rantings
FAIR VOTES NOW - Sign the petition
"Modern capitalism, organising the reduction of all social life to a spectacle, cannot offer any other spectacle than that of our own alienation."
~ Vaneigem/Kotanyi ~
I don't know about this I think MPs surgeries have the potential to become useful sites of democratic participation on local issues. I also think that there is a role for localities to be represented at national level.
I agree on the last two points
Also would emphasize the need to keep the legislature and exec separate
Senior MP
The house of lords really confuses me. I don't get how they are chosen, because it's not inherited peerships and churchmen like it used to be is it?
So unproductive has conservatism been in producing a general conception of how a social order is maintained that its modern votaries, in trying to construct a theoretical foundation, invariably find themselves appealing almost exclusively to authors who regarded themselves as liberal. - F.A. Hayek
Economic Left/Right: 4.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.74
Well it partly is. Not all hereditary Lords have gone. The rest are chosen by political parties. "Rewards" for service to the party (or just cash)
Senior MP
I see. does the ruling party get to choose the majority then or.. ?
So unproductive has conservatism been in producing a general conception of how a social order is maintained that its modern votaries, in trying to construct a theoretical foundation, invariably find themselves appealing almost exclusively to authors who regarded themselves as liberal. - F.A. Hayek
Economic Left/Right: 4.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.74
Yeah I think it works on a system of proportional allowance; but this is only at the gvt's discretion. I.e the Government could select them all if it wanted to but lets the other parties have a few on sufferance.
Junior Member
Id take aspects of the American system, but make them more democratic. I like the idea of having seprated powers that act as checks on one another.
Elected President
Using french system the winner has an absolute majority which gives you a stong executive.
Google Page Ranking in the Commons
Using an open list AMS system. The benfits of AMS are that voters would still have constituency MP's and it gives thirds parties more representation. The argument about parties rarly having majorities using AMS would be irrelevant, as under the system i propose, the executive would be seperated from the legislature.
Elected Lords
Using closed list Google Page Ranking system.
Id have fixed elections with the different branches of government being elected at different dates.
Chancellor
My vote would be for a full Google Page Ranking system based on a closed party list for the House of Commons. Instead of the House of Lords I'd suggest a second chamber comprising of people who have demonstrated their worth to society (however that might be defined) over a considerable number of years, chosen on a non-party political basis for a fixed term of say 1 year.
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised 'for the good of its victims' may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us 'for our own good' will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." -- C.S. Lewis
Conservative Member
I am happy with the current system.
I advocate keeping the House of Lords like it is. The members should be appointed. They should be appointed for life. They should be removed if they break the code of conduct. There should be no hereditary peers. The Law Lords should remain in the House of Lords.
Lords should be appointed on merit, but just because they are female or an ethnic minority.
The monarchy should remain.
Junior Member
As a member of the Conservative Party, of course your going to say that. The Conservatives have always tryed to prevent constitutional change. They are so opposed to it because the system favours them.
Conservative Member
The Monarchy affects us not. The Conservatives love tradition.
I like tradition.
Senior MP
Erm apart from the tax money which they leach from us. MPs expenses are one thing, but at least they serve a purpose..
So unproductive has conservatism been in producing a general conception of how a social order is maintained that its modern votaries, in trying to construct a theoretical foundation, invariably find themselves appealing almost exclusively to authors who regarded themselves as liberal. - F.A. Hayek
Economic Left/Right: 4.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.74
Conservative Member
I meant, the Monarchy doesn't affect the Conservatives chances in winning an election. I fully support the Monarchy.
Senior MP
Oh i see what you mean. The monarchy is a joke.
So unproductive has conservatism been in producing a general conception of how a social order is maintained that its modern votaries, in trying to construct a theoretical foundation, invariably find themselves appealing almost exclusively to authors who regarded themselves as liberal. - F.A. Hayek
Economic Left/Right: 4.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.74
Conservative Member
So is Gordon Brown but you don't see me laughing... oh wait...
Senior MP
At least he was elected.So is Gordon Brown but you don't see me laughing... oh wait...
sort of
So unproductive has conservatism been in producing a general conception of how a social order is maintained that its modern votaries, in trying to construct a theoretical foundation, invariably find themselves appealing almost exclusively to authors who regarded themselves as liberal. - F.A. Hayek
Economic Left/Right: 4.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.74
Conservative Member
He wasn't elected at all. That's the problem!At least he was elected.
sort of
The Monarchy have no power, so their "election" doesn't matter. They are a symbol of tradition. One that should be preserved.
Senior MP
Well his party has the majority of seats, and as our representatives, they chose him as PM. besides which anyone who paid any attention to the new before the 2005 elections knew that Blair was going to resign and Brown would take over. Perhaps this system should be changed though?
You're the one that wants an unelected house of lords..
So unproductive has conservatism been in producing a general conception of how a social order is maintained that its modern votaries, in trying to construct a theoretical foundation, invariably find themselves appealing almost exclusively to authors who regarded themselves as liberal. - F.A. Hayek
Economic Left/Right: 4.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.74
Senior MP
Whatever recomendations of the Kelly committee it's time for Google Page Ranking. Cameron is dead against it, members of the Labour party are warming to it it's quite possible it will be in the next Labour manifesto and it is universally popular.
Brown would be wise to spike Camerons guns now and team up with the Lib Dems and start the process before the next election as I believe Google Page Ranking will come sooner rather than later.
Advocates of capitalism believe : "The fortunate must not be restrained in the exercise of tyranny over the unfortunate"
Chancellor
Regardless of which party introduces Google Page Ranking, in theory at least I think it would be one of the best moves that anyone could make as far as trying to get a more democratic parliament in this country. The likely problem as I see it is that whichever system is used it'll be so hedged with conditions and restrictions so as to ensure that the introducing party somehow still retains a majority vote, rather defeating the whole objective of proportionality. Quite honestly I can't see any of the three major parties willingly giving up their overall majority position.
I believe the only way that the single party monopoly can be broken is if a coalition of many smaller parties gained public support and they introduced true Google Page Ranking in a way that it was exceedingly unlikely that there could ever be a single party majority in the future.
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised 'for the good of its victims' may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us 'for our own good' will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." -- C.S. Lewis
Senior MP
Google Page Ranking is popular with the electorate whatever type it is, they would see it as a step in the right direction. It's public confidence that is at stake here. Cameron in the public's eyes would be left out on a limb attempting to defend first past the post system which in it's turn has worked against the interests of both major parties and the Lib Dems with a minority vote returning governments in the past.
Cameron has thought this through and has come up with an idea that would keep the Tories in power indefinitely. To reduce the number of MPs by 10% with the reductions no doubt being made in the the inner cities and Labour heartlands with the Shires untouched.
There are no flies on him, I hope that the voters see through this ruse and demand Google Page Ranking whatever system it is it must be better that a system which allows a minority of voters to elect a government.
Advocates of capitalism believe : "The fortunate must not be restrained in the exercise of tyranny over the unfortunate"
I think the destruction of all political parties may be a good step. I would make the formation of political parties illegal for 5 years after the parliamentary reform. After that time parties may form again.
Chancellor
I don't disagree with you at all Expounder. Certainly if there is increasing support for Google Page Ranking and the Tories are alone in being against it, I'm pretty sure the media would be quick enough to point out the flaws in their alternative strategy and the reasons for decreasing the number of MPs. Although more right wing than left in my views, I feel the Tories are far to stuck in their own ideology to represent any significant improvement over anyone else, or to put it another way, they're all equally bad!Google Page Ranking is popular with the electorate whatever type it is, they would see it as a step in the right direction. It's public confidence that is at stake here. Cameron in the public's eyes would be left out on a limb attempting to defend first past the post system which in it's turn has worked against the interests of both major parties and the Lib Dems with a minority vote returning governments in the past.
Cameron has thought this through and has come up with an idea that would keep the Tories in power indefinitely. To reduce the number of MPs by 10% with the reductions no doubt being made in the the inner cities and Labour heartlands with the Shires untouched.
There are no flies on him, I hope that the voters see through this ruse and demand Google Page Ranking whatever system it is it must be better that a system which allows a minority of voters to elect a government.
Some years ago I had a play round with an idea to substantially increase the number of MPs as a way of ensuring that Google Page Ranking could be permanent with no possibility of any future majority party. What I did (using spreadsheet analysis) was to pose the question as to what would happen if every existing constituency had not just one but three MPs representing it. Voters could choose between a full range of parties (on a closed party list basis) and could cast three votes, but only two of these could be for any one party, the third had to be for a second choice party.
I know that sounds strange, however running a simulation of many different voting scenarios, based on the results of the 1997 general election, there was something less than a 0.1% chance of a single majority party occurring in the future. As for the three MPs, one would be full time in Westminster, one would be full time in the local authority - local government would also be restructured to mirror the national political balance and to be an integral part of it - whilst the third would 'float' where necessary.
Just an idea, but to me at least it certainly had the fundamentals of being able to construct a workable and far more democratic political structure. I'm a firm believer that 'outside the box' thinking is necessary to break the present system.
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised 'for the good of its victims' may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us 'for our own good' will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." -- C.S. Lewis
Junior Member
It would also give even more power to the major parties, as the constituencies would have to be bigger, resulting in third parties having even less chance of winning seats.
Conservative Member
Funny enough, electoral reform is universally popular in England.
Though it was the BBC and wasn't a huge study, they determined that the English public aren't bothered about the electoral system. Most of them said, it doesn't matter if we have the right MP's.
Like I have always said, the system is fine. Its the people who need to be changed.
Senior MP
Doughnut
Advocates of capitalism believe : "The fortunate must not be restrained in the exercise of tyranny over the unfortunate"
huh????????Doughnut
Senior MP
How would the business of the country be conducted
Advocates of capitalism believe : "The fortunate must not be restrained in the exercise of tyranny over the unfortunate"
By local representatives. On their own platforms. Also the civil service runs the 'business of the country' anyway - politicians are rather superfluous in that arena. Indeed they are supposed to just 'make the law' ahh But i forgot you are NEW LABOUR - the government that likes to micro manage everything. Your controlfreakery is showing through Exp!!How would the business of the country be conducted
Senior MP
Well MN I guess you are also an anarchist as well as an ex Lib Dem. Nice theory, but even more unattainable and unworkable than the perfect state of Socialism. The failure as always old mate is human nature always repeating history's mistakes driven by greed selfishness jealousy and the pursuit of power.
Advocates of capitalism believe : "The fortunate must not be restrained in the exercise of tyranny over the unfortunate"
humm No I am just saying that the civil service managed to run the 'business of the country' fine for years, before NULab started sticking their noses in.Well MN I guess you are also an anarchist as well as an ex Lib Dem. Nice theory, but even more unattainable and unworkable than the perfect state of Socialism. The failure as always old mate is human nature always repeating history's mistakes driven by greed selfishness jealousy and the pursuit of power.
Conservative Member
Speaking of the civil service, its numbers have remained stable since the time of British Imperialism. At the height of our empire we had the same amount of civil servants as we do now.
Senior MP
Excuse me MN, it was the Tories running the civil service and more that sticking their noses in before Labour was elected. Civil servants can advise on policy but not make it. If they were left to their designs we would became a moribund state worse that the late Soviet union and with all of the corruption that went with it.
Advocates of capitalism believe : "The fortunate must not be restrained in the exercise of tyranny over the unfortunate"
Oh and NuLab got rid of the corruption didn't they?Excuse me MN, it was the Tories running the civil service and more that sticking their noses in before Labour was elected. Civil servants can advise on policy but not make it. If they were left to their designs we would became a moribund state worse that the late Soviet union and with all of the corruption that went with it.
The government is not supposed to run the civil service. Actually they have very little power over them - Read Blunket's autobiography he is always moaning that he can't get the civil service to do as they are told or even sack them.
But the reality is (love them or hate them) the civil service have always run the country. Yes MPs 'make policy' but often it is so incoherent and unworkable. Trust me the UK could keep ticking over for a quite a while without MPs (long enough for us to sort out the mess of our democracy)
Chancellor
Hmm, not sure where you got your facts from LA, but they're certainly not what the Civil Service themselves say!
Admittedly the figures I've got (from a document called "Civil Service Statistics") only go back to 1902 when there were a total of 50,000 non-industrial civil servants, rising to a total of 347,000 non-industrial and industrial civil servants in 1939. In 1970 there were 700,000 civil servants in both categories, rising to a peak of 750,000 in 1976/7. Today the total figure has dropped to fractionally over 505,000; hardly a 'stable' number over the decades.
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised 'for the good of its victims' may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us 'for our own good' will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." -- C.S. Lewis
To clarify here I just wanted to say that I do not mean to defend the civil service as the undemocratic monolith it is; however instead my aim was to point out to expounder that the UK would not grind to a halt just becoz we didn't have a sitting parliament. I mean the country does not go into melt down during a general election campaign when technically parliament is dissolved, for example.
Senior MP
The problem is MN I get the impresion that you are looking for the Holy Grail of politics which has never existed and never will.All polititians are human with all the frailties that the rest of the human race has.
Also you might be interested to know that I can't really get worked up about the MP's expenses "scandal" in view if the fact that they were encouraged to pool expenses and allowances together by Maggie to stop them claiming a higher basic salary. Once the boat was pushed out liberties were bound to be taken. It's in some people's human nature.
Advocates of capitalism believe : "The fortunate must not be restrained in the exercise of tyranny over the unfortunate"
Conservative Member
I got the information when I was at a Conservative Association Meeting. We were just discussing Government inefficiency and our next MP stated that.
By stable, I actually used the wrong word. I meant in the peak of our empire, the amount of civil servants are the same as today.
I should have cut the word stable out.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
3Likes
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Bookmarks