2 replies to this topic

[Dauth]

We all know there are dozens of possible systems, Proportional representation, First past the post, mixes, variations in Parliament size. So what would be the best system that you can come up with?

Just for comparison, the US is Governed by less than 600 elected members (435 + 100 + 1 IIRC). We have 637 (IIRC) and the House of Lords.

How would you make a fair and representative Government that would not result in several hung Parliaments?

[Vortigern]

Australian system. I can't remember the technical name, but it involves proportional representation in regions. So, like, you'd bunch twelve constituencies together and they'd all vote for their top three candidates (each party can put forward as many candidates as they like for the area) and then the top twelve get elected. This way not only do you give minor parties a chance, but you get to keep the link between parliament and the people, which I'm told is important.

Apart from that, I think the US system is actually pretty good. I can't think how it would translate to Britain, but it works well there, apart from the electoral college thing, I'm not so enamoured of that. Presidential elections aside, America has a good system.

[Dauth]

My point about America is that for 260m people they have less than 600 people running the country at a national level, yet for the 65m in the UK we have 646. (Checked number)

I do like the regional PR system, however it has the problem that unless the populations are all equal then one person's vote is worth more or less than another's.

BTW PR votes. Labour 9.5m
Tory 8.7m
Lib Dem 6m
UKIP were the only other party with more than 500,000 votes.

How many seats in your new Parliament?