…and there’s multiple ways of achieving it. It’s a valid criticism of a number of PR systems, so I don’t see why you wouldn’t choose a PR system that doesn’t have the issue.
I like STV with multi-member constituencies. You merge a number of existing neighbouring constituencies together (Say 5) and vote to elect 5 representatives for that new large constituency based on people’s ranked preferences. There’s a few things I like about it:
It avoids the “Party List” concept, which is just the ultimate safe seat.
It still allows for independent candidates, as party affiliation is not a material concern in any aspect of the election.
It gives people a choice of representatives. Ever lived in a constituency where your MP doesn’t share your values? Well, now you have a much better chance of at least one of them being on your side of an argument.
People can vote for candidates who have “no chance” of winning, safe in the knowledge that their 2nd/3rd/4th preference will still get their support if their first preference is eliminated.
I don’t but it is the argument that people always make against introducing PR
…and there’s multiple ways of achieving it. It’s a valid criticism of a number of PR systems, so I don’t see why you wouldn’t choose a PR system that doesn’t have the issue.
I like STV with multi-member constituencies. You merge a number of existing neighbouring constituencies together (Say 5) and vote to elect 5 representatives for that new large constituency based on people’s ranked preferences. There’s a few things I like about it: