Is It Time For Proportional Representation in the UK

00:00:00: Hello, we're Sandalwood.

00:00:01: And Sage!

00:00:02: We

00:00:02: are AI-generated characters who work with our creator Gareth to generate short serious punchy debates.

00:00:09: Debates that don't just help you figure out what you think but why YOU THINK IT?

00:00:15: So...what do we argue about this week?

00:00:28: In Britain today Sage…we face two unprecedented electoral phenomena.

00:00:34: In twenty-twenty five, we have a government in power with huge parliamentary majority that had the support of less than thirty percent of the electorate in the two thousand and twenty four general election.

00:00:50: And We Have Held Elections In Two Thousand Twenty Six With Five Or Six Parties In Genuine Contention For Local or National Office or whales.

00:01:05: In these circumstances, first pass the post generates random results and then gives a minority party that finds itself in government a supposed mandate to make changes to the way we live that are opposed by the majority of the electorate.

00:01:25: Do those two factors undermine the legitimacy to warrant a change in the electoral system.

00:01:36: I believe they

00:01:37: do.".

00:01:37: Realistically, Sandalwood any change-in-the order of things comes with unforeseen and unintended consequences.

00:01:44: we should be cautious about adopting fundamental far reaching change during passing fits of multi party enthusiasm.

00:01:52: nowhere is the need for caution greater than in constitutional arrangements which if changed duties and daily lives of everyone in the country.

00:02:03: The case should be overwhelming, so much so that it would stand even under a broad range of unintended undesirable scenarios before we adopt constitutional

00:02:14: change.".

00:02:15: Is the case for proportional representation sufficiently strong to justify a change?

00:02:28: New Labour won sixty-three percent of seats after securing just thirty one per cent of the electorate.

00:02:37: In two thousand and one, they won the same sixty three percent of seeds with only twenty four percent.

00:02:46: Governments that devolved power to Scotland and Wales reformed the benefits system and took us into Iraq had the active support of less than a quarter of adult citizens.

00:03:00: As Nationalist Reform and Green Parties grew, unfairness was compounded by sheer randomness.

00:03:09: In twenty nineteen Boris Johnson's Twenty-nine percent of the electorate delivered a commanding fifty six percent seats.

00:03:20: Theresa May is identical.

00:03:23: Twenty-nine percent in twenty seventeen had produced only a minority government with forty nine per cent.

00:03:32: By twenty twenty four, Labour's twenty percent of the electorate delivered the same sixty three percent seats as Blair's landslide The difference being that twenty one percent votes cast for reform and greens yielded just nine seats between them.

00:03:55: We could save the bother of an election and draw The Governing Party's name from a hat.

00:04:02: Martin Wolf wrote in the FT after the two thousand twenty-six local elections that, Proportional representation systems share one defining virtue.

00:04:27: They produce a legislature that fairly reflects the electorate's preferences, ensuring that laws and taxis command majority

00:04:38: support.".

00:04:39: It was The Conservative Lord Chancellor Lord Halsham who first questioned whether parties supported by less than a third of citizens should be able to force through major social change.

00:04:54: Fairness has practical benefits as well.

00:04:57: being right in principle PR also drives political engagement.

00:05:04: Under first pass the post, votes for losing candidates are wasted nowhere more so than safe seats.

00:05:13: Over three million more people voted in the two thousand sixteen referendum than in this surrounding general elections, almost certainly because every vote counted.

00:05:27: Under PR minority opinions everywhere matter so national politicians must appeal across the geographic and political spectrum and cannot simply ignore smaller parties.

00:05:44: Ireland offers a working model, its multi-member constituencies transferable votes and redistributed surplices produce close match between vote share and seat share while retaining personal link between voters and representatives.

00:06:06: you'd have to agree sage that Ireland's political system has served its public since the financial crisis, at least as effectively as Britain's and considerably more fairly.

00:06:21: The proliferation of parties in Britain have made first past the post indefensible on grounds of fairness engagement and effectiveness.

00:06:33: to return to Martin Wolf

00:06:39: In any electoral system, Sandalwood there is a trade-off between individual accountability and proportional representation.

00:06:46: It's true that where single representative wins the constituency The majority who voted otherwise go unrepresented But Where representatives are elected to reflect full spread of opinion?

00:06:58: The personal bond between voter & MP is weakened And in some forms of PR eliminated altogether.

00:07:05: Britain has a long history of constituency representation, and we must ask whether MPs without that direct tie would carry the same legitimacy.

00:07:14: Under party list systems representatives focus on securing high-list position rather than serving constituents.

00:07:21: PR supporters worry.

00:07:23: first pass the post.

00:07:24: governments drift from public opinion but voting system out of tune with our history and instincts does not strengthen democracy either.

00:07:32: Britain's electoral system serves two purposes.

00:07:35: Ensuring that laws and taxes are ultimately supported by a majority of elected representatives, AND delivering an executive capable of governing.

00:07:45: Representativeness is not the only goal – and perhaps not the primary one!

00:07:49: We may simply value effective government constrained by roughly representative body of individually accountable MPs who we can fire if don't like what they've been doing.

00:08:00: Two entirely foreseeable consequences of PR should give us pause.

00:08:04: First, coalition governments produce administrations.

00:08:07: nobody voted for The two thousand ten.

00:08:10: conservative liberal coalition being a cautionary example few would wish to revisit.

00:08:15: Second small single-issue parties can gain disproportionate power holding larger coalition partners to ransom.

00:08:23: PR might be the ideal system For a blank slate society of reasonable people but no such society exists.

00:08:31: Britain has a deep history of slowly evolving constitutional arrangements, strong attachment to accountable constituency MPs and no great appetite for radical reform.

00:08:42: A change in the voting system would bring foreseeable consequences – also unpredictable ones.

00:08:48: A massive disruption surely on par with Brexit.

00:08:51: I am unpersuaded that among Britain's many pressing challenges, the voting system ranks amongst them most urgent.

00:08:59: Or PR would be either a necessary or sufficient cure.

00:09:03: Sage The current system is fundamentally broken.

00:09:08: Five-or six party politics in England has produced government with commanding majority supported by less than thirty percent of electorate.

00:09:18: The first past-the-post system is indefensible on grounds of fairness and effectiveness.

00:09:25: Sandalwood Enthusiasm for change must be tempered by caution.

00:09:29: Far reaching constitutional change affects everyone's rights in daily lives.

00:09:34: the case for PR must be overwhelming And I am unpersuaded that among Britain many challenges, the voting systems are most pressing.

00:09:44: But we have a profound randomness problem.

00:09:47: In twenty nineteen, Johnson's twenty-nine percent delivered fifty six percent of seats.

00:09:54: Mays' identical twenty nine percent in twenty seventeen produced only a minority government.

00:10:01: PR ensures the legislature actually reflects the electorate preferences.

00:10:07: Fairness is one goal but not the only one.

00:10:10: Britain has long history of constituency representatives whom voters can hold accountable.

00:10:16: Under PR, that individual accountability is weakened or eliminated.

00:10:35: But Britain has a deep history of slowly evolving constitutional arrangements and no appetite for radical reform – coalition governments—of which we have no happy experience.

00:10:46: the two thousand ten conservative liberal coalition being won, blur accountability and allow small parties to gain disproportionate power even holding larger partners to ransom.

00:10:57: New Zealand shows you can have both.

00:10:59: each voter gets two votes one for a local MP ,one for a party And The Party Vote tops up constituency seats To deliver a proportional result while retaining personal accountability.

00:11:16: New Zealand actually makes my point.

00:11:18: Every election since nineteen ninety six has produced a coalition.

00:11:22: Tony Ben captured the essence of democracy.

00:11:25: if you don't like those in power, You can boot them out.

00:11:28: In nineteen ninety seven twenty ten and twenty twenty four British voters did exactly that.

00:11:35: under PR The same party can reappear in government weeks later after back room negotiations.

00:11:41: But the current system wastes millions of votes, especially in safe seats.

00:11:48: Three million more people voted in the two thousand sixteen referendum than in the surrounding general elections precisely because every vote counted.

00:12:00: under PR national politicians must appeal across the geographic and political spectrum.

00:12:08: that argument cuts both ways A system out of tune with our history and instincts does not strengthen democracy.

00:12:15: The disruption of changing our voting system would rival the Brexit referendum.

00:12:19: On balance, I see no compelling case for PR in Britain.

00:12:26: The time for change

00:12:40: is now.