We would probably end up with more alliance. Governments with larger parties have to court smaller parties
It would put more democracy back into the UK’s democracy and hopefully result a more rational policy debates and decrease the abrupt changes of direction whenever a different party takes power.
All for it, would I produce the government I personally want? Still probably not, but would it mean that the large swathes of the country where you might as well be pissing into the wind disagreeing with the local hive mind might actually feel their vote matters again? Yes and I’m all over that.
Starmer will never agree to that, it could be remotely controversial with the right wing voters he’s relying on!
And even if he did make it an official pledge, he’ll probably just go back on it like he does all his other pledges…
At this point the Tories are more likely (it’d still be a cold day in hell) than Labour to go for PR of some description.
The coalition of special interest groups that currently calls itself Labour would be utterly un-herdable if they could all get some fraction of the power. Whereas the right might think PR would allow them to make use of farage’s lot and the nats without ever putting their repulsive nonsense on a manifesto.
Cos labour will win under the current system?
Yeah! Great idea, not like it returns the tories time after time. There is a reason the conservatives never want electoral reform, it’s labours record in elections
For those who think Labour would be foolish to adopt it when they’d be giving up on a status quo whereby they get to share power with the Tories, it might be time to admit that only being in power for 18 of the past 50 years isn’t exactly a brilliant status quo.
[deleted]
Irony of Burnham saying this when he shot it down in 2011 (as a leadership candidate no less). Guess career politicians will say whatever they need to get exposure.
A man who said he has no regrets over the shit show handling of the Stafford Hospital crisis (hundreds of people died and he blocked enquiries)
Should really never ever be a leader.
Good lets position the Overton window to include PR.
Yes, and fucking yes!
Sick of my vote not meaning fucking jack shit
>”I would include in that a senate of the nations and regions to replace the unelected lords, I would also include in that more devolution of power out of the Westminster system, which is clearly working in Greater Manchester.”
So America…right down to our very dysfunctional tripartite federalism of national / administrative state / municipal devolution.
If you want to introduce remarkable corruption, where an even less representative body of local admins have even more power over your daily life, federalism is the *perfect* system: apathetic electorate with low turnout, very cheap for bad faith actors to influence, more and more powers held by less qualified persons
Wouldn’t be shocked to see him running in a Labour seat somewhere in Manchester soon..
No major party is going to do away with a system that puts them in decisive power. Even if that is undemocratic.
There have sadly been a few times we have missed the boat on electoral reform when it could have happened.
Labour will support PR if it gets them in. If they get elected without it, they will quietly drop it.
You only call for PR when you aren’t winning, that’s the game. Andy didn’t get the email clearly.
All you need to know about PR, is that the tories use it instead of first past the post to decide their own leadership. Yet they refuse to support it for elections.
Why this is even a question is beyond me. Labour would have been the dominant party for the past 20 years of British politics if PR was a thing, instead, the not gerrymandered but definitely looks gerrymandered FPTP system has keep them in the wings all that time. Yes, they may have to share power, but PR rationalised debate and prevents the extremes that have dominated British politics in recent years. Starmer seems to be aiming to be a centerist, this is the most centerist move he could make while guaranteeing the future success of his party.
I wonder if the Tories will make it a thing right before the election to limit Labour’s control and force consensus with the LDs.
This would probably force Labour to take a more anti-Brexit stance to appease LD which the current Tory lot would try to stoke up as “against the will of the people”.
MMPR would literally be the best possible thing for the country, no matter what your political persuasion. However neither of the big 2 political parties will ever do it on their own, they’d need to be forced to by a coalition with a smaller party. Both big parties lose out on seats if parliament becomes more representative, so they each have significant benefits of sticking with first past the post.
Starmer was all in favour of PR, until they predicted a Labour landslide.
I would be for it, but I remember the UKIP voters which made up a massive proportion of the 2014 vote. No thanks. Also, it would be an end for the SNP.
Unfortunately, PR lies outside the UK’s ever-shrinking Overton window.
Starmer has made it abundantly clear that he won’t introduce left-leaning policies, and is far more concerned with centrism, incrementalism, and appealing to angry Boomers.
Democracy in this country is totally broken. We are heading for a US-style system of politics, with little to distinguish the two main parties.
Labour will only call for PR is they think they will lose.
PR is a great thing but nobody with the power to implement it will do it by choice since they are giving up their power ny doing so
Lol, like labour would give up the chance of a FPTP majority
Only one other country in Europe alongside the UK uses a FPTP system and that’s Belarus(a brutal dictatorship). There is a reason the rest of Europe has moved away from it in one form or another.
We did consider it. We voted for it at conference and the unions blocked it.
“Why are labour wasting their time on this, they should be telling us how they will fix the NHS” got spouted by a coworker yesterday.
There’s just no pleasing a lot of people. Even positive changes aren’t apparently positive enough because there’s other things to fix too, we deserve this stale and stagnant country we’ve become.
This will only ever be the idea of a party not in power, as soon as they get in they’ll not want to change the rules especially to a system that actually means MPs have to work collaboratively. The ancient UK system relies on 1 party running the shots while the other party moans about it and they occasionally swap roles with a minority of other MPs who seemingly just make up some numbers getting to take part but don’t really impact anything.
Andy lost his chance of being labour leader so he wants pr so he can form his own party
What’s the difference between Keir starmer and Andy Burnham?
One started off.being a blairite adviser in his young days while the other was busy saving ppl.from the death penalty
Never gonna happen. As long as there’s even a midgie’s bawhair of a chance of Labour winning a majority in FPTP they will never give up that dream of ultimate, unchallenged power
Tories want “fairness” when they lose but win they win demand absolute control due to winning.
Just more conservative spin doctors aided by online trolls/bots
Maybe I’m biased having lived in Manchester recently but why this dude never goes for leader I don’t know, he’s far from perfect but how many other politicians do we have atm that project pride, integrity and something between the ears? He’s one of our better ones imo but admittedly the competition is non existent
It’s wild we got Brexit by a fraction of the population but can’t get proportional representation past.
It will never happen because that would be a path to democracy for the UK, maybe even have a written codified proper constitution or God forbid abolish the monarchy.
37 comments
Just a reminder that proportional representation isn’t the all singing anti Tory wonder weapon.
https://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/how-the-2019-election-results-could-have-looked-with-proportional-representation/
We would probably end up with more alliance. Governments with larger parties have to court smaller parties
It would put more democracy back into the UK’s democracy and hopefully result a more rational policy debates and decrease the abrupt changes of direction whenever a different party takes power.
All for it, would I produce the government I personally want? Still probably not, but would it mean that the large swathes of the country where you might as well be pissing into the wind disagreeing with the local hive mind might actually feel their vote matters again? Yes and I’m all over that.
Starmer will never agree to that, it could be remotely controversial with the right wing voters he’s relying on!
And even if he did make it an official pledge, he’ll probably just go back on it like he does all his other pledges…
At this point the Tories are more likely (it’d still be a cold day in hell) than Labour to go for PR of some description.
The coalition of special interest groups that currently calls itself Labour would be utterly un-herdable if they could all get some fraction of the power. Whereas the right might think PR would allow them to make use of farage’s lot and the nats without ever putting their repulsive nonsense on a manifesto.
Cos labour will win under the current system?
Yeah! Great idea, not like it returns the tories time after time. There is a reason the conservatives never want electoral reform, it’s labours record in elections
For those who think Labour would be foolish to adopt it when they’d be giving up on a status quo whereby they get to share power with the Tories, it might be time to admit that only being in power for 18 of the past 50 years isn’t exactly a brilliant status quo.
[deleted]
Irony of Burnham saying this when he shot it down in 2011 (as a leadership candidate no less). Guess career politicians will say whatever they need to get exposure.
A man who said he has no regrets over the shit show handling of the Stafford Hospital crisis (hundreds of people died and he blocked enquiries)
Should really never ever be a leader.
Good lets position the Overton window to include PR.
Yes, and fucking yes!
Sick of my vote not meaning fucking jack shit
>”I would include in that a senate of the nations and regions to replace the unelected lords, I would also include in that more devolution of power out of the Westminster system, which is clearly working in Greater Manchester.”
So America…right down to our very dysfunctional tripartite federalism of national / administrative state / municipal devolution.
If you want to introduce remarkable corruption, where an even less representative body of local admins have even more power over your daily life, federalism is the *perfect* system: apathetic electorate with low turnout, very cheap for bad faith actors to influence, more and more powers held by less qualified persons
Wouldn’t be shocked to see him running in a Labour seat somewhere in Manchester soon..
No major party is going to do away with a system that puts them in decisive power. Even if that is undemocratic.
There have sadly been a few times we have missed the boat on electoral reform when it could have happened.
Labour will support PR if it gets them in. If they get elected without it, they will quietly drop it.
You only call for PR when you aren’t winning, that’s the game. Andy didn’t get the email clearly.
All you need to know about PR, is that the tories use it instead of first past the post to decide their own leadership. Yet they refuse to support it for elections.
Why this is even a question is beyond me. Labour would have been the dominant party for the past 20 years of British politics if PR was a thing, instead, the not gerrymandered but definitely looks gerrymandered FPTP system has keep them in the wings all that time. Yes, they may have to share power, but PR rationalised debate and prevents the extremes that have dominated British politics in recent years. Starmer seems to be aiming to be a centerist, this is the most centerist move he could make while guaranteeing the future success of his party.
I wonder if the Tories will make it a thing right before the election to limit Labour’s control and force consensus with the LDs.
This would probably force Labour to take a more anti-Brexit stance to appease LD which the current Tory lot would try to stoke up as “against the will of the people”.
MMPR would literally be the best possible thing for the country, no matter what your political persuasion. However neither of the big 2 political parties will ever do it on their own, they’d need to be forced to by a coalition with a smaller party. Both big parties lose out on seats if parliament becomes more representative, so they each have significant benefits of sticking with first past the post.
Starmer was all in favour of PR, until they predicted a Labour landslide.
I would be for it, but I remember the UKIP voters which made up a massive proportion of the 2014 vote. No thanks. Also, it would be an end for the SNP.
Unfortunately, PR lies outside the UK’s ever-shrinking Overton window.
Starmer has made it abundantly clear that he won’t introduce left-leaning policies, and is far more concerned with centrism, incrementalism, and appealing to angry Boomers.
Democracy in this country is totally broken. We are heading for a US-style system of politics, with little to distinguish the two main parties.
Labour will only call for PR is they think they will lose.
PR is a great thing but nobody with the power to implement it will do it by choice since they are giving up their power ny doing so
Lol, like labour would give up the chance of a FPTP majority
Only one other country in Europe alongside the UK uses a FPTP system and that’s Belarus(a brutal dictatorship). There is a reason the rest of Europe has moved away from it in one form or another.
We did consider it. We voted for it at conference and the unions blocked it.
“Why are labour wasting their time on this, they should be telling us how they will fix the NHS” got spouted by a coworker yesterday.
There’s just no pleasing a lot of people. Even positive changes aren’t apparently positive enough because there’s other things to fix too, we deserve this stale and stagnant country we’ve become.
This will only ever be the idea of a party not in power, as soon as they get in they’ll not want to change the rules especially to a system that actually means MPs have to work collaboratively. The ancient UK system relies on 1 party running the shots while the other party moans about it and they occasionally swap roles with a minority of other MPs who seemingly just make up some numbers getting to take part but don’t really impact anything.
Andy lost his chance of being labour leader so he wants pr so he can form his own party
What’s the difference between Keir starmer and Andy Burnham?
One started off.being a blairite adviser in his young days while the other was busy saving ppl.from the death penalty
Never gonna happen. As long as there’s even a midgie’s bawhair of a chance of Labour winning a majority in FPTP they will never give up that dream of ultimate, unchallenged power
Tories want “fairness” when they lose but win they win demand absolute control due to winning.
Just more conservative spin doctors aided by online trolls/bots
Maybe I’m biased having lived in Manchester recently but why this dude never goes for leader I don’t know, he’s far from perfect but how many other politicians do we have atm that project pride, integrity and something between the ears? He’s one of our better ones imo but admittedly the competition is non existent
It’s wild we got Brexit by a fraction of the population but can’t get proportional representation past.
It will never happen because that would be a path to democracy for the UK, maybe even have a written codified proper constitution or God forbid abolish the monarchy.