MPs from seven parties unite to begin electoral reform campaign

Last Updated: February 8, 2016By

vote

Knee-jerk reaction on seeing this was: “SNP on the same platform as Labour and Conservatives? How can they live with themselves? How long before we see campaigns against the ‘Tartan Tories’ (oh wait, that one’s already in use, isn’t it?) who turned out to have common cause with the Westminster parties?”

Oh, it’s different, is it? Sure it is.

So the SNP’s participation in this campaign highlights the hypocrisy of attacking Labour for campaigning in tandem with the Conservatives against Scottish independence. We can all agree on that and put it to one side because it really is a side-issue.

The main thrust of this campaign is important. It really is a scandal that a party with 3.8 million votes sent just one MP to Parliament, while one with just 1.5 million votes gained 56 seats.

This Writer doesn’t support either UKIP or the SNP – but I am a big fan of fairness.

MPs and activists will seek to jump-start the campaign for proportional representation with a conference in London on Monday intended to mobilise support for electoral reform.

Speakers from seven parties will address the event, which will highlight polling evidence apparently showing support for PR at an all-time high.

Campaigners believe the 2015 general election result, which saw UKIP get just one MP despite getting 3.8m votes, while the SNP secured 56 seats with just 1.5m votes, has made the case for voting reform stronger than ever. But they face an uphill struggle in light of the alternative vote referendum result in 2011, which was a big setback for the cause of electoral reform.

Five parties are formally committed to some form of PR: the Liberal Democrats, Ukip, the SNP, the Greens and Plaid Cymru.

Source: MPs from seven parties unite to begin electoral reform campaign | Politics | The Guardian

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

latest video

news via inbox

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

No Comments

  1. David February 8, 2016 at 12:58 pm - Reply

    And Labour, with its roots in a fairer society should be wholeheartedly in favour of PR.
    First past the post is totally unfair and outdated.

  2. NMac February 8, 2016 at 1:00 pm - Reply

    Personally, I’m all in favour of PR. Overall, it may mean coalitions, but at least the Nasty Party will find it difficult to inflict their poison on the whole country, the majority of whom didn’t vote for them.

  3. Joan Edington February 8, 2016 at 2:04 pm - Reply

    Oh dear, dear. You really have sunk to tabloid levels now, Mike. Any excuse to have a go at the SNP, even in an article that it is totally irrelevant to. Surely they should be more praised than slagged for backing a fairer system, even if it would mean them gaining fewer seats.

    • Mike Sivier February 8, 2016 at 2:08 pm - Reply

      Typical SNP response.
      What you’re saying is it’s okay for the SNP to attack Labour in a completely unreasonable way, but when that is pointed out to the SNP in relation to its own behaviour, you’ll attach a label to it that justifies the SNP’s actions.
      Not good enough.
      Not remotely acceptable.
      Notice also that I make it perfectly clear that the SNP’s hypocrisy is a side-issue and the campaign for a fairer system is more important – but you STILL have to try to drag me back to it.
      Absolutely, utterly pathetic. I really don’t have enough derision to heap on this.

  4. Rupert Mitchell (@rupert_rrl) February 8, 2016 at 4:12 pm - Reply

    With boundaries being moved by the Cons like goalposts the only possible fair way is PR.

  5. Dez February 8, 2016 at 5:05 pm - Reply

    The 2011 referendum on voting reform was barely understood, bit like the Police Commissioners voting debacle, however the injustice of the current situation is now pretty clear to most reasonable folk that something needs to change and those enjoying the benefits of the old system will have to be dragged screaming to any other alternative. Fairness should be at the root of all good voting systems.

  6. Guy Ropes February 8, 2016 at 6:21 pm - Reply

    Labour committed to fairness? Their apparent non-participation in this daring and radical proposal speaks volumes. If they can’t be arsed to get on board they are either too “I’m alright Jack” or too unconcerned to have given it thought……..and they have had a while to do so. Either way it shows them unfit for Government. But then having comrades in Jeremy’s camp who have convictions for electoral fraud might tell us all we need to know; reform of the system is unnecessary as far as they’re concerned.

    • Mike Sivier February 8, 2016 at 6:48 pm - Reply

      “Apparent non-participation”?
      Labour has multiple speakers, as the article should indicate.
      That should render any response to the rest of your comment unnecessary.

      • Guy Ropes February 8, 2016 at 6:53 pm - Reply

        “As the article should indicate …” but doesn’t. If it had indicated that Labour was involved I wouldn’t have bothered to try and indicate otherwise.

        • Mike Sivier February 8, 2016 at 10:07 pm - Reply

          First line: “Knee-jerk reaction on seeing this was: ‘SNP on the same platform as Labour and Conservatives?'”
          That’s a big indicator, right there.
          Also, if you had read the source article, you’d have had the full details (you’re always invited to read the source article if it isn’t one of my own – it’s one of the conditions under which I post material from them).

Leave A Comment