who are you voting in the euro elections?

[Ardiles]

I used to beleive in PR, but have now changed my mind.. The main reason is that it disenfranchises people.

Quite the opposite.  PR would abolish the concept of a 'safe seat'.  I live in a safe Tory seat and do not vote Tory, so my vote is effectively worthless; I might as well not have the right to vote at all.  That is being disenfranchised.

Under PR, I might not be able to point to the exact individual I have voted for - as you say.  That does not concern me in the slightest.  The parliament would be much more representative of the views of the electorate and that, to my mind, is a much greater consideration.

[Phil_S]

But under PR if you live in the South West & voted Labour, you are in the same boat. (No labour MEP returned).
IMHO, democracy is about the majority view. Not about representing the views of all & sundry. Northern Ireland is an example. A minority want to be part of Ireland, but the majority want to be part of GB. With first past the post, it will be very clear when & if the minority becaome the majority. With PR that is not the case as rarely would one group be in the majority due to the numerous fringe parties.
As I said, PR has it's merits, & I did favour it when I was younger & more idealistic, but have now concuded that FPtP is better, albeit as I say some form of PR top up could work.

[Spy]

I'm with Ardiles. Surely the greatest condsideration in considering the merits of a voting system is that if a certain amount of people voted a certain way the the result should reflect that.

Yes you might not have a specific MP assigned to you but so long as issues can still get raised thats the main thing and tbh how many people write to their MP anyway? I mean I know some do but if they can still raise issues somehow...

[Phil_S]

Ok, lets assume that the Euro elections were to be for the Westminster parliament.  Multiply the number elected for each party by 9 to see what would happen.
Cons would have 26 x 9 = 234 MP's, UKIP would have 117 as would labour 117, Liberals would get 99 BNP would be on 18 MP's !, & others would be 63. In reality the figures would be different because people may vote differently & more seats would be available.
The point is though that no one party could govern & a coalition would need to be formed. The most likely in this senario would be Cons & UKIP, (which I personally might like, but a lot wouldn't). The point is though that coalition governments rarely last or achieve anything.

[jonny72]

Yes you might not have a specific MP assigned to you but so long as issues can still get raised thats the main thing and tbh how many people write to their MP anyway? I mean I know some do but if they can still raise issues somehow...

You have to have local MP's so that they will fight for and support their locality. Otherwise who is going to? Whilst they belong to a specific party they are also representatives of the people they represent. Randomly allocating an MP to a locality won't work either, what would happen if a Tory MP was assigned to somewhere that was predominantly Labour?

I quite like the Alternative Vote system as it should result in the most suitable candidate being elected, a lot better than First Past The Post. I really don't like Proportional Representation as it generally leads to weak governments and a lot of minority parties getting elected. A mixture of the two could work, to a degree.

[Spy]

So you would sacrifice the result truly reflecting the votes in order to get the kind of government you consider desireable?

[Phil_S]

At the moment my constituency has a Tory MP. Regardless of how I vote he is there to represent me & every body else in the constituency. The needs of the constituency should come first too (I concede it doesn't always but that's not the fault of the voting system). In my area for example our MP is doing his best to stop or make the best of the closure of RAF lyneham.
If he does something wrong come the election we can kick him or her out. We can also if we wish elect an independent candidate who has campaigned on a local issue (martin Bell for example).

The problem with PR is that the candidates first loyalty is definitely to the party. If you aren't on the party list you have no chance (eg Katie bloody Hopkins, the Jury team etc). If you fiddle the expenses it only matters that the party keep faith in you as an individual, not so much the electorate.
As by definition it needs doing on a regional basis local issues will count for a lot less. With Fpp there is accountability. The Buck stops with the MP. If I want an issue raising with PR what do I do ? Write to all 7 regional MEP's & hope that one can be arsed to do something.  What happens if one MP does sod all, but another MP (of the same party) really does his best, but is lower down the party list. How do I reward the helpful MP with my vote whilst voting against the one who does F all ?

[jonny72]

So you would sacrifice the result truly reflecting the votes in order to get the kind of government you consider desireable?

Well I'm a Tory, but I'd prefer a strong Labour government to a weak Tory coalition government any day of the week. Besides an Alternative Vote system would be representative, you might not get your first choice but you'd probably get your second or third plus your vote would still count. It would be a massive improvement on the current system - under 22% of all the eligible voters in the UK voted for Labour in the last general election.

[Spy]

But the Alternative Vote system is shit if you only want to give your support to one party.

[Phil_S]

Well I'm a Tory, but I'd prefer a strong Labour government to a weak Tory coalition government any day of the week. Besides an Alternative Vote system would be representative, you might not get your first choice but you'd probably get your second or third plus your vote would still count. It would be a massive improvement on the current system - under 22% of all the eligible voters in the UK voted for Labour in the last general election.

I too would prefer a strong Labour Government to a weak Tory coalition. (But please no Brown in charge)
Under that system would there be empty seats representing those who don't vote ?

[jonny72]

But the Alternative Vote system is shit if you only want to give your support to one party.

I guess it really comes down to how you want parliament made up; representative of the national vote (ie full proportional representation), or representative of the local vote (first past the post or alternative vote). I'd always go for the latter, with a move towards true representation - ie your MP represents you and isn't forced how to vote through their party whip. Politics has become far too geared towards parties and their leaders, MP's should have a far greater role in local politics.

[Spy]

But how many local decisions are made on a national level though? Surely it's councils who have most of the power on a local level?

[herthab]

Fucking hell and it's only June!!!

Roll on August 8th, when we can talk about something that's important and actually means something.

[Rich Pullen]

Herthab's missing his football bless 'im

I am too.

[Samdy Gray]

I think Phil, Jonny and Spy need to get a room. And you three do realise the elections were over a week ago, right? Just let it go.