One of the problems with PR is that it encourages the type of situation that can be seen in the European parliament where there are too many small groupings for Government to actually get things done in a timely fashion.
I think that's a good thing - overall, I'd rather it be hard to pass new laws, than easy to pass new laws. If a new law doesn't have the support of MPs elected by 50% of the population, I'm not convinced it's a law that should be rushed through quickly.
I don't really mind too much if the voting system is non-linear, with the biggest party getting a disproportionately bigger share. The problem with the current system is that the number of MPs doesn't have to relate to the number of votes at all - a party could get more seats even with fewer votes than another party, and it depends a lot on how votes are distributed between constituencies.
Something that does appeal, at least at first sight, is a multi-vote per person system, not unlike that described by Nevil Shute in In the Wet, where different people had different numbers of votes (up to seven, in Shute's world) depending on what they had done, or not done, with their life.
Yes, even if we stick with the current non-PR system, I do wish we would ditch the FPTP voting system that has many flaws when trying to pick a winner out of more than two options. The most well known example being Instant Runoff Voting, but there are many other better methods (e.g., Approval Voting, or the Condorcet Method).
no subject
I think that's a good thing - overall, I'd rather it be hard to pass new laws, than easy to pass new laws. If a new law doesn't have the support of MPs elected by 50% of the population, I'm not convinced it's a law that should be rushed through quickly.
I don't really mind too much if the voting system is non-linear, with the biggest party getting a disproportionately bigger share. The problem with the current system is that the number of MPs doesn't have to relate to the number of votes at all - a party could get more seats even with fewer votes than another party, and it depends a lot on how votes are distributed between constituencies.
Something that does appeal, at least at first sight, is a multi-vote per person system, not unlike that described by Nevil Shute in In the Wet, where different people had different numbers of votes (up to seven, in Shute's world) depending on what they had done, or not done, with their life.
Yes, even if we stick with the current non-PR system, I do wish we would ditch the FPTP voting system that has many flaws when trying to pick a winner out of more than two options. The most well known example being Instant Runoff Voting, but there are many other better methods (e.g., Approval Voting, or the Condorcet Method).