PR STV is already on the books, has been ratified for well over a 100 years. Never rolled out, trialled in Ireland but the results weren't what they expected. So it was mothballed.
The point is that it is a signal, it won't achieve anything directly (or at least is very unlikely to) but it does raise the profile of the issue and show that change does have support.
The normal purpose of 10min rule bills is to allow the proponent to make a speech in favour of things. They aren’t normally pushed to a vote, so it was a surprise.
The government generally has control of what is presented except for specific gaps, so they won’t give more time for it.
It was pushed to a vote a) because a 12-year-old Tory spoke against it, and b) because enough people shouted No, so the deputy speaker had to call an unexpected vote.
The bill (which probably doesn't actually exist) has now been given a first reading. That's where it will stop.
Unfortunately despite Starmer being pro PR during his leadership campaign, he’s already stated no parliamentary time will be allocated….. but then Starmer was also pro FOM and kicked that into touch..so no surprise as he’s completely unprincipled
They’ve only voted to have a chat which will then not lead to a vote as some back bencher will filibuster it or they do have a watered down vote that gets buried. No big party wants PR simply because nobody would ever get a majority and would never have a mandate for power.
Bit ironic that a bill to introduce PR has only passed following the one election in which the LibDems have benefitted from FPTP - after decades in which LibDems were underrepresented because of it.
Beliefs and ideas are not our children. They're way points on getting closer to the truth. Knowledge and understanding are implicitly "to the best of our knowledge at that time". I prefer politicians who change their minds on getting better information. I'm tired of dogma.
Changing your mind on an issue of policy when presented with evidence is good. Abandoning a stance that is effectively “the UKs electoral system is anti democratic and needs changing” the moment you benefit from that unfairness would not be good.
That article appears to be about Labour. We were talking about the Liberal Democrats. Labour have never pretended very hard to be anything other than happy to continue taking advantage of te artificial duopoly between them and the Tories afforded by FPTP.
That is true, but nonetheless they wouldn’t have won nearly as many seats without the support of people who normally vote Labour, a sort of single transferred vote
In general, the electorate seems to have been ruthlessly efficient in working out who the likeliest non-Tory candidate was.
The other thing was £££. Cheltenham was a real marginal (981 Tory majority in ‘19). But almost no Tory posters/billboards etc. They had real cash problems. Donors fled.
This was also the most disproportionate election ever, and an outcome heavily influenced by tactical voting where the Lib Dem’s did well. Tactical voting is a uniquely FPTP quirk.
Exactly that. This was a 'no to Tories' as well as a 'yes for LibDems' election. Tactical voting is the only way of expressing yourself in FPTP. I know unsavoury parties will also benefit from PR, but that's the way to debate them, in Parliament, not on Question Time.
They haven’t benefited from FPTP though and it isn’t ironic— they actually matched extremely closely what their PR result would be for their percentage of votes through incredible vote distribution efficiency.
(It was Sarah Olney's 10 minute rule bill and there's a lot of complicated reasons why this probably still won't happen but it was certainly a surprise)
Certainly looks rather pathetic compared to the Korean version. Fair to say the people get the representatives they deserve. The mere fact that there are not enough seats for all MPs and the place is poorly attended should have millions on the4 streets...
Vile old toad. Have noticed on socials and local media that there appears to be quite the unseemly race going on between him and Tory councillors to claim credit for any local improvements. Rupe ahead at present for promising to get road signs washed & polished. Hoping he falls off his ladder.
It doesn't surprise me. This is the man who brought in a rugby coach to manage his premier league side. I mean, what can go wrong? Obviously the ball is differently shaped and you can't pick it up. But beside that....
And the cretin wondered why they were relegated.
OK, so we know it's not going to happen now but is this a real step towards it happening in the future? Does it mean it is more likely to get raised again in the next session?
I doubt any Tory would become leader if they believed in PR. Also they really wouldn't fit in with the post-Johnson Tory party, having principles that work against Tory interests.
Comments
Lindsey Hoyle puts his tea cup down... picks it up again, sips.
#wato
The government generally has control of what is presented except for specific gaps, so they won’t give more time for it.
The bill (which probably doesn't actually exist) has now been given a first reading. That's where it will stop.
“A man who doesn’t change his mind doesn’t think” (Freddie Laker)
Which feels right but you don’t want a chameleon.
These are not the same things.
Groucho Marx
It's a free ride when you've already paid
Meanwhile, there are many types of PR.
The other thing was £££. Cheltenham was a real marginal (981 Tory majority in ‘19). But almost no Tory posters/billboards etc. They had real cash problems. Donors fled.
Not ironic, poetic really.
Given that, it’s the opposite of ironic.
Just look at Lee Anderthal....
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8rjdgre3vpo
And the cretin wondered why they were relegated.
Standard for Reform to attack anything by a women.