| Submit your comments on this article | |
| Britain | |
| UK protesters slam electoral system | |
| 2010-05-09 | |
[Iran Press TV Latest] Hundreds of British protesters take to the streets of London to demand electoral reform after the country's general elections closed with no outright winner.
Protesters called on Liberal Democrat party leader Nick Clegg to honor his promise and push for democratic and proportional representation of the British public. Clegg, who had said on Friday that the results of the General Elections showed the British political system is broken and needs major reform, addressed the crowd and vowed to make their voices heard. Protesters believe the electoral system is very unrepresentative and undemocratic where millions of votes are effectively wasted and millions of people are disenfranchised. Thousands of Britons were denied the right to vote on Thursday due to polling stations closing or running out of ballot paper. Britons want the Liberal Democrats who have entered into coalition talks with the Conservative party, which won most seats in Thursday's elections, to put voting reforms on top of their agenda and use it as their bargaining chip to reform the voting system. | |
| Posted by:Fred |
| #12 The chances of PR being neutral in that regard would be very small, IMHO. Indeed. Neither Labour nor the Tories have, up till now, been open to the option of replacing first past the post with PR (although Labour have been busy screwing up the UK's historically tried-and-tested system of government in other areas since 1997) for the reason that it would make single party success - their success - almost impossible. It would mean that, instead of having relatively sensible, if ideological, big tent parties which represent the interests of the whole of the UK forming stable and predictable governments, they would find themselves having to scrabble together coalitions with the Lib Dems and/or a host of regional and special interest parties. 'Hello' disproportionate influence from the extremes, and 'hello' pork barrel pay-offs to the likes of the Scottish Nationalists, rival Northern Ireland factions etc., at the expense of the majority. It ain't broke; it don't need 'fixing'. |
| Posted by: Bulldog 2010-05-09 16:51 |
| #11 The chances of PR being neutral in that regard would be very small, IMHO. Which leaves two possibilities: it would make things better or worse. Until I see an actual case that it would make things better, I think it's safe to assume it would make things worse. |
| Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain 2010-05-09 15:27 |
| #10 And the advantages of PR... Italy? "We are becoming Mexico: a thin veneer of oligarchs protected by a compliant media and dominating a weak, incompetent regulatory apparatus and bankrupt state, with a swelling underclass and a shrinking middle class paying the inflated salaries and bloated pensions of a huge and growing public sector union base that ensures the oligarchs' continued hold on power." |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2010-05-09 14:15 |
| #9 Must have been some other Ranburg where, couple of years ago, everybody were complaining that both Donks & Pubs ignore the popular views on illegals. |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2010-05-09 14:11 |
| #8 PR would magnify, greatly, the voice of Britain's anti-American left. Britain's foreign policy would start to resemble that of a continental European nation. |
| Posted by: lex 2010-05-09 13:00 |
| #7 I belive that disadvantages of "winner take all" are amply demonstrated by Britain & USA. And the advantages of PR... Italy? phil_b, in the UK PR would result in coalitions almost all of the4 time, if previous election results were repeated. And what's more, we'd have various forms of left wing progressiveness bullsh*t, as the celtic fringes ensured that profitable England never again managed to swing a Conservative majority. We'd have the tyranny of the regions in perpetuity. I'd settle for PR, in return for English self-rule. |
| Posted by: Bulldog 2010-05-09 12:55 |
| #6 I belive that disadvantages of "winner take all" are amply demonstrated by Britain & USA. |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2010-05-09 12:23 |
| #5 The question is: do you want to be forced into proportional results and forced a majority, or do you want a results to actually mirror what the people want? |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2010-05-09 11:42 |
| #4 It's a myth that PR always results in coalition governments. Australia has PR (Single Transferable vote) and we have never had a federal election in which one of the 2 major parties didn't achieve an absolute majority in the House of Commons. The Senate elections use a different form of PR (party list) which occasionally results in the main parties failing to get an absolute majority, but in 4 out of 5 elections they do. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2010-05-09 09:56 |
| #3 shoddy back-room dealings Is what separates men from boys. Just imagine Bambi in coalition negotiations. |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2010-05-09 04:27 |
| #2 Britons want the Liberal Democrats who have entered into coalition talks with the Conservative party, which won most seats in Thursday's elections, to put voting reforms on top of their agenda and use it as their bargaining chip to reform the voting system. Uh, thanks for speaking for us, Iran Press TV. abu's right. The Lib Dems got 22% of the popular vote with a manifesto including a call for PR, and they're interpreting this as a mandate for PR? Get real! What we're seeing at the moment is the kind of shoddy back-room dealings you get with PR, in which deals are done in a most undemocratic fashion, and the electorate end up with a set of policies that no one got to vote for or against. Clegg's dimwitted pro-PR demonstrators were seemingly placated by him appearing to them, regally, from amidst a typically PR-style backroom meeting, telling them that he wasn't in fact going to tell them anything - that he was busy advancing transparent politics. For a shocking, if blackly humorous, example of left-wing nonsense, watch this. |
| Posted by: Bulldog 2010-05-09 04:08 |
| #1 notice the electoral system is only 'broken' and in need of reform when the socialists fail to win. |
| Posted by: abu do you love 2010-05-09 00:48 |