Electoral Reform

varian

The narrow majority for Leave in the EU referendum was brought about by lies, cheating and roreign interference and the vote would have been annulled had it been mandatory.

In a true democracy a major constitutional reform would always require a supermajority. Brexit was inflicted upon us by a minority of the electorate. David Cameron has a lot to answer for.

One thing we do agree on is that David Cameron has a lot to answer for. What a pity it was Nick Clegg who handed him the keys of number 10. The Lib Dems had the best chance yet of getting PR and they cocked it up.

We need compulsory voting at GE (with a none of the above box), and postal voting only for those who really need it. A postal vote shouldn't be a choice for those who can get to the polling station. Personally I think we should have to show ID to vote too.

Sir Keir Starmer is facing a wave of pressure from within the Labour party to back electoral reform for UK general elections, with more than 100 delegations set to issue motions at this weekend’s party conference in Liverpool.

Last year the Labour leader’s team saw off an attempt to force the party into backing proportional representation, or PR, despite more than 80 per cent of local party delegates supporting an end to the current “first past the post” voting system in Britain.

The motion from 150 constituency Labour parties (CLPs) was defeated after opposition from several of the party’s large affiliated trade unions. This year, however, some of the biggest unions have indicated they would support a similar proposal for the party to back PR.

One aide to Starmer said he was “relaxed on electoral reform” if that was something the conference wanted to discuss.

www.ft.com/content/538f9b25-0a2b-4e0f-a462-58949b19c1ab

At least 140 local Labour parties have backed conference motions calling for Labour to support a switch to a proportionally representative electoral system, making it the most popular issue among local parties for the second year running.

Campaigners from Labour for a New Democracy (L4ND) said they welcomed the “continued and growing demand” for electoral reform within the party. 370 Constituency Labour Parties (CLPs) – about 60% of the total number – have now formally passed policy in favour of PR.

L4ND encouraged local Labour Parties to submit their motion on PR to conference, which seeks to commit Labour to introducing PR for general elections. The motion received the backing of both Momentum and Open Labour.

A similar motion proposed by L4ND at last year’s conference was rejected despite being supported by close to 80% of CLP delegates, as 95% of trade union delegates voted against.

Unite and UNISON – the UK’s two largest unions – have both since backed electoral reform, joining other Labour-affiliated unions including ASLEF and the TSSA.

labourlist.org/2022/09/pr-conference-motions-most-popular-among-clps-for-second-year-running/

By accepting the ballot paper and spoiling it you are acquiescing with a system that says you must mark or submit a voting paper in some form.

I would simply refuse to engage with the voting system in any way.

But if you spoil your ballot paper you aren't actually voting; you are abstaining.

M0nica

If there was compulsory voting, I would refuse to vote and if it meant fines and imprisonment, so be it.

We are talking democracy here, and compulsory voting means we no longer have a democracy. because you are being forced to vote. The choice should lie with the individual.

That is easily sorted, vote from home and spoil your ballot paper.

If there was compulsory voting, I would refuse to vote and if it meant fines and imprisonment, so be it.

We are talking democracy here, and compulsory voting means we no longer have a democracy. because you are being forced to vote. The choice should lie with the individual.

MaizieD

^yggdrasil nothing undemocratic about the referendum. People could choose whether they voted or not.^

This is precisely why I would like to see compulsory voting. Then we can't argue like this about the result.

I agree with compulsory voting.

No doubt there would be many more spoilt papers, but all eligible voters would have been in the voting booth.

yggdrasil nothing undemocratic about the referendum. People could choose whether they voted or not.

This is precisely why I would like to see compulsory voting. Then we can't argue like this about the result.

varian

A vote won by lies, cheating and foreign interference , as the Leave vote was ( the evidence was conclusive) is certainly undemocratic. It is an abuse of democracy.

Putin was instrumental in achieving his aim of destabilising the West.

Do we really want to be the only European country to elect a government by FPTP apart from Putin's puppet state of Belarus?

Yes

A vote won by lies, cheating and foreign interference , as the Leave vote was ( the evidence was conclusive) is certainly undemocratic. It is an abuse of democracy.

Putin was instrumental in achieving his aim of destabilising the West.

Do we really want to be the only European country to elect a government by FPTP apart from Putin's puppet state of Belarus?

yggdrasil nothing undemocratic about the referendum. People could choose whether they voted or not.

My point was not about the conduct of, specifically, a referendum, more that here was a clear yes/no vote on a single topic and that such a paper thin majority can make such a seismic change to the conduct and future of a country.

Any form of democratic governement requires the government to go against the wishes of varying sized minorities groups in the country, whatever the issue. What needs to be decided is what is the fairest way of deciding to go against those wishes and how to make sure these minorities are not oppressed unduly.

quote fro Monica: <Surely the Brexit referenda showed how undemocratic a government that represents the majority could be.>

That referendum did not represent the majority. The voting was 48-52 but only 1/3 of the people voted. (The usual method for referenda involves a 60% count at least)

That’s still your main bugbear varian and always will be.

One thing for sure if any form of PR becomes law the Tories are going to look sick.

Perhaps we should have PR and compulsory voting?

To give a truer picture of what voters want, and no-one could complain that decisions are being made by a minority of voters.

The narrow majority for Leave in the EU referendum was brought about by lies, cheating and roreign interference and the vote would have been annulled had it been mandatory.

In a true democracy a major constitutional reform would always require a supermajority. Brexit was inflicted upon us by a minority of the electorate. David Cameron has a lot to answer for.

A true democracy must surely entail having a government representing the majority of those who voted in a general election.

Surely the Brexit referenda showed how undemocratic a government that represents the majority could be.

No, a true democracy must entail having a government that represents ALL of the people - and that, of course, is impossible.

What we should aim at is doing everything we can to develop a form of democracy that is as fair as possible to as many as possible

But as Churchill once said ^Democracy is the worse form of government, except for all the others

Correct Casdon my constituency has yo-yoed from left to right over the last half century!

There’s no such thing as a ‘true’ democracy varian. What we have now is a democracy, it just doesn’t work the way some would like it to because of the electoral process. I’ve got some reservations about PR, because the people in a constituency don’t have a choice of an individual politician in the same way that they do now, and voting along party lines could easily elect an individual chosen by party members who lives miles away, knows nothing about the area and is consequently less effective than a local individual even if they aren’t from your preferred party. We have experience of this in Wales with some seats allocated regionally on a PR basis, and it has not been an unalloyed success,

I agree greatly with moving towards a balanced system of PR. so few people actually vote when you look at turnout for elections, and that has to be because people feel, "what's the point? My POV won't be counted.

So many people vote time after time, in every election, knowing full well their vote will go straight into the bin and not count. Every single time- because of where they live.

There are so many electoral reforms I would like to see but proportional representation would be a good start. I hope that the ridiculous whip system would go as well and Mp's could at last freely represent the people and not the party.

A true democracy must surely entail having a government representing the majority of those who voted in a general election.

That may not be a perfect democracy if there are restrictions on eligibility to vote or inadequate controls on the power of wealthy vested interests to distort opinion or in effect buy votes.

It is impossible to claim that a country which allows a minority of votes to result in an effectual dictatorship until the next election to call itself a democracy.

Proportional representation is an essential first step towards us becoming a true democracy.

There is no such thing as 'true democracy' only a successon of approximations.