Proportional Representation: More Conservatives Or More
Confusion?
For several years the Liberal Democrats have been calling for
proportional representation in the British parliament. As
Britain's third largest party they would have the most to gain,
leaving people to ask whether first past the post is really the
fairest voting system?
Proportional representation looks at the total amount of votes
cast per party, rather than per candidate. For example, in the
2001 general election the Conservatives gained 31.7% of the
vote, but only 25.2% of the seats in the House of Commons. If
proportional representation had been in place there would have
been more Conservative MPs. So why is it that the Liberal
Democrats are calling for P.R. and the Conservatives aren't?
P.R. benefits protest groups and single-issue parties. Groups
like the British National Party could pick up MPs even if they
came last in the actual elections. For proportional
representation to work candidates would not be selected for a
constituency, but for an area, similar to the European election
system. Voters would feel further removed from the process and
having the right candidate would have little effect. The
electorate would purely be making a party vote. As a system it
can be said to alienate voters from their elected
representatives and means that a candidate who has done no work
could be selected just because of their placing on a closed
party list.
On the other hand, democratically, it makes the electorate feel
that no vote is wasted. In a seat with a 25,000 Labour majority
for example, Conservative voters might stay at home at a general
election, knowing their candidate has very little chance of
getting in. With P.R. every single vote would count and politics
would be seen much less as a two horse race. The United Kingdom
Independence Party and the Green Party both have MEPs through
P.R., but no MPs through first past the post.
Different electoral systems have their benefits. It would be
unwise for any party to make too sudden a move however for short
term gain. The London mayoral and European elections have shown
how confused the public can be with all this experimenting with
new systems.
Tony Blair has introduced seven different types of P.R. since
Labour came to power in 1997. If a Labour defeat seems likely at
the next general election there is a very good chance that the
Labour Government will push for P.R., in coalition with the
Liberal Democrats. Change for short-term gain is never a good
strategy and serious thought needs to be given to how this would
affect democracy and accountability in the long run.