andrewducker: (Default)
andrewducker ([personal profile] andrewducker) wrote2011-01-18 12:35 pm

Political Question

At the moment the House of Lords are debating the Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill.

I've heard numerous claims that this bill is incredibly unfair, and blatant gerrymandering by the Conservative Party.

Looking at the details, I'm feeling baffled. I can see a claim that the exemption for the three Scottish constituencies (Two Liberal Democrat, on Scottish National Party) are biased in their favour. But I can't see how a system whereby people are grouped together in what's going to be a massively arbitrary manner (each area must be within 5% of the national average, and are set up by independent bodies - the Boundary Commissions).

I don't really have a stake in this one - I'd just like someone to explain how this system would give an advantage to any one party. I can see that it could _remove_ advantage from a party if the old system with much less equal constituency sizes gave that party an advantage, but I'm totally failing to see how it's anything like gerrymandering.

Am I missing something obvious?

[identity profile] skington.livejournal.com 2011-01-18 02:45 pm (UTC)(link)
AV is basically the way the French do it: a majoritarian system, but if nobody gets 50% of the vote at first you eliminate candidates until someone does. The French do it by having a first ballot one weekend, and then another the week (or is it fortnight?) after with only 2 (or in some cases 3 or 4) candidates; AV does it by having people rank candidates in order.

The advantage of moving to AV is that in a few elections' time, once people have got used to voting for candidates 1, 2, 3 rather than putting a cross in a box, you can then move to a more efficient form of voting (e.g. STV in multi-member constituencies). And, of course, once the LibDems have got over the drubbing expected for any junior coalition partner, they'll be in a stronger position to have significant numbers of MPs elected.

Meanwhile the Tories don't have to worry about UKIP costing them seats by splitting the right-wing vote. Assuming they can't convert the LibDems into a long-term junior coalition partner, that is.

[identity profile] pete stevens (from livejournal.com) 2011-01-18 03:03 pm (UTC)(link)
AV is basically the way the French do it:

there goes any hope of anyone in the Conservative party, UKIP or the BNP voting in favour of it then...

[identity profile] andrewhickey.livejournal.com 2011-01-18 04:29 pm (UTC)(link)
Actually, amazingly enough, Racist UKIP are supporters of the Yes campaign. The BNP and Tories are, though, the only two parties that have actually come out against it, though Labour are doing everything they can to stop us ever getting to have a vote...

[identity profile] gonzo21.livejournal.com 2011-01-18 07:34 pm (UTC)(link)
Oh, I should think if the tories are deadset on this potentially catastrophic NHS reform, then they'll have difficulty holding into the LIbDems as even short-term junior coalition partners...