Tag Archives: fair votes

Britain deserves better than a two-party trap

Every election, millions of people in Britain vote knowing their ballot probably will not matter.

If you live in a “safe seat”, your vote can feel irrelevant before you even enter the polling station. If you support a smaller party, you are constantly told you are “wasting” your vote. And if you back the winning party nationally, there is a good chance they will gain enormous power without anything close to majority public support.

This is not healthy democracy. It is managed frustration.

Britain’s First Past the Post voting system was designed for a different era — an era before modern political diversity, before devolved government, and before millions of voters stopped identifying with the old two-party tribes. Yet we still force 21st-century politics through an electoral system that rewards tactical voting over honest voting.

The result is a political culture built around fear instead of representation.

People are told not to vote for what they believe in, but against the outcome they fear most. Labour supporters are told to hold their nose to stop the Conservatives. Conservatives warn voters about Labour chaos. Smaller parties are squeezed out of debates despite representing millions of people nationwide.

And then Westminster wonders why public trust continues to collapse.

Proportional representation would not magically solve every problem in British politics. But it would create something we desperately need: a Parliament that actually reflects the country.

Under proportional systems used across much of Europe, parties win seats roughly in line with the votes they receive. That means cooperation becomes necessary. Consensus matters more. Politicians must persuade rather than dominate.

Critics claim coalition politics creates instability. But what is truly unstable about parties being forced to work together? What is stable about Prime Ministers changing repeatedly without public votes, or landslide majorities won on barely a third of the national vote?

The truth is that First Past the Post does not deliver strong government. It delivers unchecked government.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged | 14 Comments

Lib Dem PR Bill wins surprise Commons vote

The margin of two votes has been significant several times in Lib Dem history – winning Winchester in May 1997, heartbreakingly not taking back North East Fife by two votes in 2017. Yesterday, we won a surprise vote in Parliament on the first stage of a Ten Minute Rule Bill on changing the electoral system for Westminster and English local government elections to Proportional Representation which was introduced by our Sarah Olney. Normally what happens with these Bills is that MPs hear the speech. The MP proposing the measure then does a carefully choreographed approach to the Speaker and hands it over to be buried with loads of other Bills on some sitting Friday months in the future. But the Tories forced a vote to try to kill it without, it seems, doing their sums first.

Interestingly more Labour MPs voted for it than voted against.

This Bill doesn’t have a hope in hell of becoming law as Keir Starmer has said repeatedly that Labour opposes PR, despite the wishes of many of its members. However, between now and its second reading on 24th January, we can talk up the benefits of PR. For me, it’s about giving people the Parliament they ask for.

From the Guardian:

As well as 62 Lib Dem MPs, 59 Labour backbenchers voted for Tuesday’s bill, including a number of those first elected in 2024. Last month it emerged that dozens of Labour MPs from the 2024 intake had signed up to a parliamentary group calling for the UK to move to a PR system.

Labour’s 2022 annual conference voted overwhelmingly for the party to back a proportional system, after trade unions that had blocked previous motions swung behind the idea. However, while Keir Starmer has previously expressed at least some support for electoral reform, his leadership team has ruled out any immediate change, at least in the first term of a Labour government.

In Tuesday’s vote, 50 Labour MPs opposed the motion, indicating the continued lack of agreement on the issue. None of the government frontbench took part in the vote. All of the Conservatives who voted, 78 of them, opposed the idea, including some frontbenchers.

After the vote, Sarah Olney said:

This is a historic day in the fight for fairer votes and I am grateful to all the MPs who backed it.

Trust in our political system is broken following years of the Conservative Party riding roughshod over standards in public life.

Fixing our broken electoral system, introducing fair votes, and making sure everyones’ voice matters is the best way to rebuild this trust.

Today, as we have done for a century, Liberal Democrats are leading the fight for fair votes and making sure that no one can be ignored in our democracy.

The government must now listen to the will of the House, make time for the legislation and make fairer a votes a reality and we will be holding their feet to the fire to make this happen.

Her speech in favour of her bill is below:

Posted in News | Also tagged and | 7 Comments

Paul Tyler writes…..Listening is just the start…

Once we have honed our listening skills we should surely seek to improve ways in which people are themselves empowered.  How can they make their voices and their votes more effective ?

Here are a few immediate and urgent opportunities:

Fair Votes 

Despite the Conservative manifesto promise to make sure “every vote counts the same – a cornerstone of democracy” the current inequality is outrageous.  It takes 33 times as many votes for Green Party supporters to elect an MP as for SNP supporters, with big differences for Conservatives, Labour and Liberal Democrats in between. Voters are cheated by the First-Past-The-Post system.

Ed Davey has committed himself to the cross-party campaign.    But what should be the first priority?   Persuading the Labour leadership to wake up, and accept the strong support of their membership for reform of elections to the Commons?   Or concentrate on extending the STV success in local authority elections in Scotland – now to be repeated in Wales – to ensure voters in England do not miss out?  

If the electoral system is the bedrock of our democracy, then surely some consistency throughout the UK is essential ?

Who Votes?

Liberal Democrats have long campaigned for votes for all citizens when they reach 16.  We led national efforts to extend the franchise for the 2014 Scottish Independence Referendum and were only thwarted by combined Conservative and Labour Peers when we pressed then for 16-year-olds to be able to vote in the 2016 EU Referendum.   Again, Scotland and Wales are leading the way, and the case for UK consistency is now overwhelming.

UK citizens working or living abroad are often affected by political decisions taken here – most notoriously on Brexit – but their representation is inadequate.  We want them to vote in separate constituencies so that they have MPs who are committed to looking after their particular interests.

Similarly, EU residents working and resident in the UK make a substantial contribution, not least with various local taxes, and should continue to be allowed to vote in local elections.

Subsidiarity

The imminent Devolution White Paper, we are told, will force through the amalgamation of two-tier councils to create more unitary authorities, all with the compulsory addition of elected mayors.   This looks suspiciously like centralisation rather than decentralisation, and is certainly not devolution. Whitehall retains the financial stranglehold, treating elected local representatives as simply a delivery mechanism for national policy priorities.

We have long championed subsidiarity = bringing decisions as close as possible to those who will be affected by them.  The present Government is moving in the opposite direction. 

The example of the SNP Government is also salutary.  Concentrating power at that level, with little devolution to lower tiers of governance at community levels, is no way to spread empowerment.

Transparency

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , and | 31 Comments
Advert

Recent Comments

  • David Le Grice
    Nigel Jones I think the issue is more that even lib dem seats aren't immune to voters behaving like we're in a two party system, Labour took Inverness and Roch...
  • Simon Banks
    There is certainly a place for Social Democracy within the Liberal Democrats, but it is not Social Liberalism. At the base of Liberalism is empowerment. Origina...
  • Cassie
    'Around 750,000 54-64-year-olds are job hunting/willing to work but economically inactive, and; 2m over-50s are claiming benefits. (Guardian Nov. 2025). They w...
  • Nigel Jones
    David le Grice "We only started to lose ground in subsequent elections when voters started wanting to get rid of labour and put the Tories back in power, someth...
  • Cassie
    The backlash over the winter fuel payment axe wasn’t that it was ‘pitched poorly. It was that the cut-off point was too harsh and it impacted a lot of pensi...