Just some comment from an outsider:
There is much talk about this system or that… but surely this is the wrong approach. The first step is to reach some general agreement about the degree to which seats should reflect votes… and only then consider the pros and cons of those systems that go someway to meeting such a “fair votes” criteria.
The present FPTP system quite clearly has some very unfair aspects: such as in 2005 where Labour, with only 3% more votes than the Tories, achieved nearly 25% more seats. At the other end of the spectrum, pure PR also has flaws in that it can place small parties in a position of power and continual involvement in government out of all proportion to their level of support. As with most things in life: the answer lies somewhere in between the extremes.
My view, for what it is worth is there is nothing wrong with coalition government when voting patterns dictate. The “however” is that any system should also allow for coalition governments to be voted out.
May I make a suggestion that a simple
30 : 45 : 55 rule may represent a reasonably fair target.
This target is based on the following:
30% of the vote – an expectation of a similar proportion of seats
45% of the vote – an expectation of a modest majority government
55% of the vote – an expectation of a landslide victory
The reality is that there may be no system that fully matches such criteria; but its acceptance would provide a basis to immediately exclude systems that go nowhere near achieving such results and provide a challenge to systems that approach the target to demonstrate they have other positive attributes to keep them in the mix.
Your thoughts!
A dropper of pebbles
Into still waters
