Fact: The First Past the Post system used in most parts of most elections in the UK is completely rubbish. It is unrepresentative and unfair.
Brits seem functionally unable to understand this. I don’t know why. The argument is always about its simplicity: “whoever gets the most votes wins, so it must be right”. No electoral system is perfect, but there are some very good ones. Unfortunately the pundits always start by bemusing people with the obscure maths rather than the simple operation and effect. The result is: when we ask for a ‘Proportional Representation’ system we take the FPP donkey and tie some bizarre cart with square wheels on the back. This is how I voted today.
To show what’s wrong lets work through a simplified though not weird example of First Past the Post idiocy:
Say we have a country of three constituencies, each with exactly 1501 eligible voters. We have two parties, the A Party and the C Party. Constituency 1 are dyed in the wool A-ers, the A Party gets all 1501 votes. A gets the seat. Constituencies 2 and 3 are more balanced, so much so that it’s a near draw. A gets 750 votes in both, the C Party however pips them with 751. C wins the two seats. So…
- the A Party won 3001 votes and one seat,
- the C Party won 1502 votes, two seats, and the government.
Doesn’t sound right, does it?
Lets complicate it a bit in the next election with another party, the B Party. These guys are in-between on policy, but not as hated as C in some places. Constituency 1 splits down the middle, B gets 750, but A gets 751 votes and keeps the seat. Constituencies 2 and 3 are still balanced, 500 to A, 500 to B and 501 to C in each. Ladies and gentlemen, the results are…
- the A Party won 1751 votes and one seat
- the B Party won 1750 votes, but alas no seats this time round. Better luck next time guys.
- the C Party won 1002 votes, two seats, and once again forms a government
Sounds ridiculous doesn’t it? Yes. Welcome to the United Kingdom.