What would be your favoured voting system for Britain?

[EMF]

One problem is whether there needs to be a threshold to stop parliament from becoming too fragmented. Of course, such thresholds are arbitrary but on the other hand if over 600 MP's are elected on PR without any threshold then there would easily be dozens of small parties in parliamnet gridlocking the entire political decision-making system.

[Frigidweirdo]

Although that may be true to some extent, their judgement is likely to be a great deal better than those of the political leaders of the two main parties [who principally form the governments]- whose judgement seldom extends beyond the next GE and is significantly influenced by the wishes of their main backers - not the interest of the nation or its people. Examples - our membership of the EU, immigration, an English Parliament.

We have a system that rewards short term thinking. Those who do well are those who think short term. The Tories are spinning everything right now, they introduce something to gain political points and then take it away when they realise it is a load of trash and basically give a cheaper version of what Labour did but try to make out it is their idea.

As for our wishes over the EU etc, you mean, Murdoch’s wishes?

The Swiss seem to be doing rather well considering they have had a form of DD for more than 100 years. From Wikipedia:

In 1890, when the provisions for Swiss national citizen lawmaking were being debated by civil society and government, the Swiss adopted the idea of double majorities from the United States Congress, in which House votes were to represent the people and Senate votes were to represent the states (Kobach, 1993). According to its supporters, this "legitimacy-rich" approach to national citizen lawmaking has been very successful. Kobach claims that Switzerland has had tandem successes both socially and economically which are matched by only a few other nations. Kobach states at the end of his book, "Too often, observers deem Switzerland an oddity among political systems. It is more appropriate to regard it as a pioneer." Finally, the Swiss political system, including its direct democratic devices in a multi-level governance context, becomes increasingly interesting for scholars of European Union integration (see Trechsel, 2005)

I did about switerland for my uni dissertation, I know their political system quite well.

Their system works well because democracy has been a part of their life for a long time, they expect it, they know how to make it work by giving up some of their time and having things in place they understand. In the UK we don’t have that, so we need another system.

Switzerland cannot be reproduced elsewhere because the democratic traditions just aren’t there.

[Frigidweirdo]

One problem is whether there needs to be a threshold to stop parliament from becoming too fragmented. Of course, such thresholds are arbitrary but on the other hand if over 600 MP's are elected on PR without any threshold then there would easily be dozens of small parties in parliamnet gridlocking the entire political decision-making system.

You put a threshold you limit smaller parties from regional areas etc. Limiting smaller parties is not a good idea.

However you still want strong enough govt to be able to do something. It's a balancing act. In the UK our system isn't that bad, we have smaller parties and strong govt.

However I think our system is a little outdated and leads to people not voting they way they would like to vote.

[Millennium3]

We have a system that rewards short term thinking. Those who do well are those who think short term. The Tories are spinning everything right now, they introduce something to gain political points and then take it away when they realise it is a load of trash and basically give a cheaper version of what Labour did but try to make out it is their idea.

As for our wishes over the EU etc, you mean, Murdoch’s wishes?




I did about switerland for my uni dissertation, I know their political system quite well.

Their system works well because democracy has been a part of their life for a long time, they expect it, they know how to make it work by giving up some of their time and having things in place they understand. In the UK we don’t have that, so we need another system.

Switzerland cannot be reproduced elsewhere because the democratic traditions just aren’t there.

It is a pity that you separated the two parts of my post - because they were connected. This is the article I wrote when first proposing the change. As you will see, I did not envisage the scheme having great impact initially - only gradually over time, although the sooner started the better. Also I am not proposing the same system as the Swiss.

http://theghostofthomaspaine.wordpre...-present-form/

[Frigidweirdo]

[QUOTE=Millennium3;1412688]It is a pity thatyou separated the two parts of my post - because they were connected. This isthe article I wrote when first proposing the change. As you will see, I did notenvisage the scheme having great impact initially - only gradually over time,although the sooner started the better. Also I am not proposing the same systemas the Swiss.

http://theghostofthomaspaine.wordpress.com/2012/05/06/there-is-no-way-back-for-representative-democracy-in-its-present-form/[/QUOTE]

If your point can’t stand alone, is it worthanything? But then this isn’t an issue.

In a country that is large it can be difficultto have democracy. The first point to consider is the media.
You suggest that there should be the abilityfor the people to sack their representative. So instead of a representativedoing what they think is best for the country, they are going to be in constantfear of not following the will of the majority of those who are willing tocomplain, and will instead merely follow a mishmash course based upon which waythe media is working at the time.
Now, when I voted in the General Election, theTories won by a few hundred votes, it was close. Now, the Labour supporters inthat constituency could simply go for a sacking of their representative,knowing full well that many people would not turn out to vote, and get himsacked quite easily, then the Tories do the same, then we have a real mess onour hands.
Like I have said, in Switzerland they have asystem that works for them, they are used to it. In the UK we are not and thecountry is too large, and too controlled by the media for this sort of thing tonot turn into absolute chaos.
Look how many people turn out for EU elections,having non-important elections like EU elections, by-elections and so on, meannothing to most people. People want to vote for the govt, they don’t give adamn about their representatives.
In theory, having a system where people look atthe voting record of their MP and vote them out during the election should beenough, but people don’t bother with their representative, they care about theparty in charge of the country.
Now the Swiss system allows for laws to betaken down through initiatives, that is a possibility, but then again, is thisnot just going to be a media circus with the media inciting people to have oneevery so often just to make news for themselves?
The problem is there are lots of things you cando to “Improve” the system, but they all sort of end up leading to the sameresults.
In the US they don’t have whips. You vote theway your conscience dictates, or where the money is, as happens far too much.People are advertised because it is easier to tell the people what they wantthan to listen to them.
You want strong govt, but you don’t want stronggovt. You want the voice of lots of smaller parties but you don’t want thevoice of lots of smaller parties. You want the best MPs you can get, but youwant to kick them out every 2 minutes and replace them with inexperienced MPsand you’ll never get experienced ones again. Democracy is the worst kind ofgovernment, except all the others.

[angelman]

Like I have said, in Switzerland they have asystem that works for them, they are used to it. In the UK we are not and thecountry is too large, and too controlled by the media for this sort of thing to not turn into absolute chaos. Look how many people turn out for EU elections,having non-important elections like EU elections, by-elections and so on, meannothing to most people. People want to vote for the govt, they don’t give adamn about their representatives.

I have to agree with you that getting 30%-odd turnouts (or even less) for EU and local elections does demonstrate that people "don't give a damn about their representatives". With EU elections though, it isn't just UK that has this electoral ambivalence. I find that this is an interesting table: http://www.ukpolitical.info/european...on-turnout.htm of which the Belgian turnout is frankly amazing. I feel that one of the problems though with changing the voting system in this country, is that there is a deliberate obfuscation and intervention borne from self-interests. The recent referendum on voting change is a perfect example.

[Millennium3]

[QUOTE=Frigidweirdo;1413176]

It is a pity thatyou separated the two parts of my post - because they were connected. This isthe article I wrote when first proposing the change. As you will see, I did notenvisage the scheme having great impact initially - only gradually over time,although the sooner started the better. Also I am not proposing the same systemas the Swiss.

[FONT="]http://theghostofthomaspaine.wordpress.com/2012/05/06/there-is-no-way-back-for-representative-democracy-in-its-present-form/[/QUOTE][/FONT]

If your point can’t stand alone, is it worthanything? But then this isn’t an issue.

In a country that is large it can be difficultto have democracy. The first point to consider is the media.
You suggest that there should be the abilityfor the people to sack their representative. So instead of a representativedoing what they think is best for the country, they are going to be in constantfear of not following the will of the majority of those who are willing tocomplain, and will instead merely follow a mishmash course based upon which waythe media is working at the time.
Now, when I voted in the General Election, theTories won by a few hundred votes, it was close. Now, the Labour supporters inthat constituency could simply go for a sacking of their representative,knowing full well that many people would not turn out to vote, and get himsacked quite easily, then the Tories do the same, then we have a real mess onour hands.
Like I have said, in Switzerland they have asystem that works for them, they are used to it. In the UK we are not and thecountry is too large, and too controlled by the media for this sort of thing tonot turn into absolute chaos.
Look how many people turn out for EU elections,having non-important elections like EU elections, by-elections and so on, meannothing to most people. People want to vote for the govt, they don’t give adamn about their representatives.
In theory, having a system where people look atthe voting record of their MP and vote them out during the election should beenough, but people don’t bother with their representative, they care about theparty in charge of the country.
Now the Swiss system allows for laws to betaken down through initiatives, that is a possibility, but then again, is thisnot just going to be a media circus with the media inciting people to have oneevery so often just to make news for themselves?
The problem is there are lots of things you cando to “Improve” the system, but they all sort of end up leading to the sameresults.
In the US they don’t have whips. You vote theway your conscience dictates, or where the money is, as happens far too much.People are advertised because it is easier to tell the people what they wantthan to listen to them.
You want strong govt, but you don’t want stronggovt. You want the voice of lots of smaller parties but you don’t want thevoice of lots of smaller parties. You want the best MPs you can get, but youwant to kick them out every 2 minutes and replace them with inexperienced MPsand you’ll never get experienced ones again. Democracy is the worst kind ofgovernment, except all the others.

Let me see if I can explain the issue from a different angle:

On ‘This Week’ last night, Michael Portillo drew attention to the fact that the Ministry of Defence employ around 23,000 civil servants on military equipment procurement – the Israelis, with about the same sized defence budget - employ 400!

I think it is time to acknowledge that the top tier of Bankers, Global Corporations, Politicians, Civil Servants and probably the police are milking the nation and its people dry of its and their wealth – this is why austerity measures are needed and the cause of our rapid economic decline.

Presently, once a General Election is over, the leadership of the party in power can, and do, do whatever they wish - irrespective of what was contained in their manifesto. Is it any wonder that the people are not that interested in voting at elections.

If there were a debating forum for each constituency, the voters would, at least have some influence on the actions of their own MP [and, hopefully, eventually the right to sack them] – without this the people are totally helpless and can only watch this rape of the nation.

The Barclay’s fiasco has had the political leaders putting words into the people’s mouths. Cameron has declared that what the people want is a Select Committee to quickly establish what went wrong so that it can be speedily put right. Miliband, in contrast, says that the people want a thorough judge led inquiry so that all of the issues can be brought into the open.

Perhaps the people would prefer that Bob Diamond and the Deputy Governor of the Bank of England [the one Diamond accuses of encouraging false Libor rates to be reported] to be arrested and taken into custody for intense interrogation – until the truth was established and continuing this process until the truth of the whole affair was known – followed by criminal prosecutions.

In actuality, it is doubtful if anyone will face prosecution despite the enormity and ramifications of the fraud.

[Millennium3]

I have to agree with you that getting 30%-odd turnouts (or even less) for EU and local elections does demonstrate that people "don't give a damn about their representatives". With EU elections though, it isn't just UK that has this electoral ambivalence. I find that this is an interesting table: http://www.ukpolitical.info/european...on-turnout.htm of which the Belgian turnout is frankly amazing. I feel that one of the problems though with changing the voting system in this country, is that there is a deliberate obfuscation and intervention borne from self-interests. The recent referendum on voting change is a perfect example.

I think the above also responds to your points A.

[Frigidweirdo]

I have to agree with you that getting 30%-odd turnouts (or even less) for EU and local elections does demonstrate that people "don't give a damn about their representatives". With EU elections though, it isn't just UK that has this electoral ambivalence. I find that this is an interesting table: http://www.ukpolitical.info/european...on-turnout.htm of which the Belgian turnout is frankly amazing. I feel that one of the problems though with changing the voting system in this country, is that there is a deliberate obfuscation and intervention borne from self-interests. The recent referendum on voting change is a perfect example.

Why would the parties that do well, and know the system and know they can do well, go and change the system?
The problem is the arguments for AV were not great, people seemed happy to accept what they were told.

I think had PR been up for grabs it might have been different, but there is more to fear for pure PR. Then BNP might be thinking they could do better, because they're never going to get in through a constituency vote, but even with PR they'd struggle.

[DanSDP]

It is an improved version of the Additional Member System that doesn't use party lists:
Regional Top-Up

It would actually be better using AV I think; which would make it an improved AV+.

this is a good system i believe