Sunday, 18 April 2010

Am I missing something?

The normally fairly astute Dizzy asks an interesting question:

This could soon become very interesting, because, if it's sustainable (still questionable) and the Lib Dems came first in the popular vote, they would probably still end up only the third largest party in the Commons. If that happened then PR will be inevitable, after all, none of the other parties could win the argument that the system produces an equitable outcome.

So, let;s play a game for a second, imagine the Lib Dems won the popular vote but were the third largest party. Would we perhaps see a very short Parliament that produced just one law change, the introduction of proper PR along the lines of the Single Transferable Vote, and then a quick dissolution and General Election under the new system?

Given the Teflon-coated behaviour of politicians since 1997 and the complete apathy of the British public, what makes him think that whoever wins would give a fuck about "winning the argument that the system produces an equitable outcome"?

Dizz, baby, I don't know if you've noticed, but our politicians don't give a flying fuck what we think.


penifi said...

It is important that the public take an interest in this subject. McDoom proposes a system which would entrench bias towards the left. Some systems of PR reflect the will of the people. Some systems give the party machine a strong grip on their MP's. Pure PR systems have been unstable in places like Italy and possibly Israel, but there is merit in a threshold system like that in Germany.

It was only as a result of PR in Scotland that after 30 years of voting I elected someone for the first time in my life at the last Scottish parliament election.

It might be boring, but it is important.

But I agree they don't give a fuck about us.

Blind Pugh said...

our politicians don't give a flying fuck what we think.

Exactamente, Obo baby. The spin coming off the current election campaign could generate enough electricity to drive 10 Large Hadron Colliders. But in the long run, the winners will take the money and run and fuck the rest of us. First past the post is far, far too lucrative to be given up lightly. If the demented Clegg did win, you'd see a U-turn so fast, your clownie's wig would spontaneously combust.

J Demetriou said...


Mark Wadsworth said...

What's new? In England in 2005, the Tories got slightly more votes than Labour but fewer seats. That's just the way it works.

This is partly down to judicious Gerrymandering by Labour, but mainly down to the way that Tory votes are evenly spread across the country but Labour votes are concentrated in (say) two-thirds of constituencies,

Mitch said...

They don't want us thinking cos that never ends well.