Sensible thread on change of UK constitutional and electoral system
#46

The number of seats is not represented by the number of votes. You're simplifying it with garbage about whingeing losers.
#47

#48

The Remain cause came very close to succeeding in November 2019 - very, very close. The opposition parties made a fatal error in agreeing to a general election. They could have forced a government of national unity and held a referendum on EU membership, to get that question completely out of the way so that the country could reboot.
Moving on.
How could opposition parties ignore the demands and pressure of citizens' assemblies? They will be a crucial part of the base for the parties' own support. Moreover, the continued insistence on a final say provides the opposition parties with a reason to cooperate and to benefit from the fact that such an option has ever-growing majority support in the country (remember demographics!), a factor that no intelligent opposition politician could overlook even if he or she did not care about the principles at stake.
But would "the second party" buy in? Until they do, then the electoral system is destined to remain flawed, imo.
I'll have another read of the article tomorrow.
@GeniB it's never too late...
Last edited by BuckinghamshireBoy; Feb 1st 2020 at 7:02 pm.
#49

b) No, my objections are as previously stated, several times. Have another read.
#50

As Labour hasn't been in power long enough or with enough security at any one time, I doubt they ever had the confidence to want to implement it.. We are a one party country now .No real opposition .Nothing will change unless the people change it ..Thats what the establishment most fears .We do have the power to do it. But no leader and no direction to go in.other than the one chosen for us. I would love to have an answer to this The establishment thrives on the old divide and rule theory. Look how well it worked for them in Brexit.
#51

As Labour hasn't been in power long enough or with enough security at any one time, I doubt they ever had the confidence to want to implement it.. We are a one party country now .No real opposition .Nothing will change unless the people change it ..Thats what the establishment most fears .We do have the power to do it. But no leader and no direction to go in.other than the one chosen for us. I would love to have an answer to this The establishment thrives on the old divide and rule theory. Look how well it worked for them in Brexit.
#52
BE Forum Addict







Joined: Jan 2017
Posts: 2,900












The problem here remains that radical posters are still in denial about the causes of the election defeat. They do not want to have to undergo any sort of introspection, or adjust policies to suit a larger number of people . . . and admitting what happened, means to also admit their read of the landscape was wrong almost to an astonishing degree and they feel they are too smart to have been that wrong. So, therefore, they want to make the argument that Labour and the New Democrats didn't "lose," they were just unfairly held back by an unfair system. They hope to achieve their intended result by manipulating election rules instead.
I think several of us predicted this back before the election, when certain posters were barracking on about hung parliaments when the polls all showed anything but.
I think several of us predicted this back before the election, when certain posters were barracking on about hung parliaments when the polls all showed anything but.
#53
BE Enthusiast





Joined: Nov 2019
Location: St Pée sur Nivelle
Posts: 974












Over my head, not at all. For example it wasn't debated after the last election. Sure, by some contributors to sites like this but that is just whinging!!! In fact it hasn't been seriously discussed anywhere for a long time.
#54
BE Forum Addict







Joined: Jan 2017
Posts: 2,900












There is only one leader in the last 50 years who has led the Labour Party to victory. Yet, bizarrely, instead of being revered, that leader is reviled and ostracized by party faithful.
Nor were those victories flukes. They were smashing landslides that resulted in huge majorities greater than anything the Tories have ever gotten in the modern era. When was the last time the Conservatives won multiple general elections with 400+ seats? During Blair's three wins they never even broke through 200.
The template for big Labour wins is there, and has proven durable over multiple elections. Why isn't that template ever copied? Every other major political party in the West takes a winning formula and at least tries to replicate it. Sometimes I think UK Labour is actually trying to lose.
It would actually be stupid of the left to change the current system, since Blair proved that Labour can compete in more of the country than the Tories can.
Labour does not need to change the rules to win (since, really, that is what this thread is about). It needs to tailor its policies to a big tent of the electorate, choose a leader with broad cross-party appeal (such people should be viewed as electoral assets, instead of how they are viewed now, as weaknesses to be treated with suspicion), and take the spotlight away from the radicals - by making the party climate so hostile to extremist strains of thought that those people just leave, preferably to the Liberal Democrats. They can go there, hopefully as loudly and publicly as possible, and strangle that party's growth.
Carcajou's three-step plan for a viable UK Labour Party that can actually hold government more than once a half-century. You're welcome.
Last edited by carcajou; Feb 2nd 2020 at 9:02 am.
#56

We campaign for your democratic rights and a democracy fit for the 21st century. We work across the political divide with all the parties and civil society to put voters at the heart of British politics.
#57
Account Closed









Joined: Jun 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 4,891












I've never been a fan of PR or the compromises that it entails. Calls for it to be introduced seem to be a familiar refrain these days from people who insist that losers in FPTP votes are somehow entitled to something.
#58
Heading for Poppyland










Joined: Jul 2007
Location: North Norfolk and northern New York State
Posts: 11,923












SW of a line between IoW and Gloucester, for instance?
#59
BE Forum Addict






Joined: Dec 2011
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,250












First past the post is government by the winners of a competition.
The British people like it that way. Why should they protest? They were given the opportunity to have PR in a referendum in 2011, and they voted overwhelmingly against (two-thirds to one-third).
Competition is deeply rooted in the British psyche. The concept of government by consensus is an anathema.
#60
Heading for Poppyland










Joined: Jul 2007
Location: North Norfolk and northern New York State
Posts: 11,923












What about the party list system, as in Israel? As I understand it, it would mean the end of geographically based constituencies. That would be a major change. Also, there are incentives for parties to successively split, so you end up with too many parties.
I realize that Israel has some serious issues to deal with in terms of forming effective administrations, and then governing effectively, but it’s not clear to what extent those are Israel-specific problems, or weaknesses in the party-list system..
I realize that Israel has some serious issues to deal with in terms of forming effective administrations, and then governing effectively, but it’s not clear to what extent those are Israel-specific problems, or weaknesses in the party-list system..