NOTES ONLY.
A little flesh to be added. But no more than to provide an index to a range of subordinate ages.
If not PV now, i.e. before the next election, then what? And if PV now then what next?
- Without urgent action we shall have FPTP at the next election. We might even decide to keep FPTP forever. As one Civil Servant told us, when faced with a question you either say Yes or you appoint a sub-committee to consider the matter.
- We could decide to introduce PV after the next election. But why wait if we don’t have to? Because we must wait for the prospective finding of the prospective Commission.
- Most options entail having multi-seat constituencies {b3}. We need to decide whether the advantages outweigh the disadvantages.
- The Single Transferrable Vote (STV)[1] is the option favoured by many. {*a7}
- Many countries[2] use the simple PR (Proportional Representation) of the D’Hondt system {*a8}
- There is strong support in the UK for the hybrid Additional Member System (AMS)[3], in which half the MPs are elected in single-member constituencies and the other half by a D’Hondt-based form of PR {a6}
- But pure AMS has major deficiencies, and AMS, with PV for constituencies and PV for surplus parties, would be very greatly preferable. And PV Now is both feasible and a very good preparation for that.
- In any case, although PV is currently the best feasible basis for our future electoral system, it has some significant deficiencies which should be corrected as soon as we are no longer constrained to having a purely manual count {*a9}
————————————————————————————
[1] As used in …
[2] Including …
[3] As used in …