UK Politics

2829 readers

587 users here now

General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both [email protected] and [email protected] .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

[email protected] appears to have vanished! We can still see cached content from this link, but goodbye I guess! :'(

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Would Private Members' Bills be more viable with a landslide majority? (lemmy.ml)

submitted 6 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

1 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I'm just thinking about ways that PR could be passed. If Labour get a massive majority, and the party (ie. MPs) want PR but the government does not, would having a ton of MPs beyond a majority make it easier to pass as a private member's bill in defiance of the government, as even a substantial amount of Labour MPs sticking with the govt would not bring aye votes below the 50% mark? (Plus if the newly strengthened Lib Dems voted in favour)

top 1 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

I mean the big problem is how the labour party will whip.

PR is a significant issue, that changes how much power a party will have in the future. If PR goes through, it's quite likely that no party will ever have enough MPs to rule without support of another party. It's also likely to lead to the larger parties splitting into different factions. Because of this, the labour leadership are going to have strong opinions about it, and if they don't support it, they will probably force their MPs to oppose it by using the party whips.

There's one thing it will do, and that's decrease legitimacy of the current system. If Labour get a supermajority and end up with 70% of the seats on 45% of the vote, it makes it very obvious that first past the post isn't working. With that and what's likely to be every other party calling for voting reform, it does make a cross party consensus on voting reform more likely.