Hold your nose and vote tactically to secure reform

Liberal Democrat leader Ed Davey and new Liberal Democrat MP for Chesham and Amersham, Sarah Green, during a victory rally at Chesham Youth Centre - Credit: PA

Peter Kellner’s article warning Labour on voting reform reveals an inherent weakness. The first past the post system favours the Conservative Party which is why Tories like it.

Since 1950 the Conservatives have been in power for 48 out of 71 years. The system of Proportional Representation used in Scotland has not prevented the SNP from dominating the Scottish parliament. Were the Westminster parliament to be elected on the same basis, there would be more Labour MPs from Scotland.

A new Upper Chamber to replace the House of Lords would need regional representation and professional expertise to ensure effectiveness. Were Labour to form a coalition with Liberal Democrat’s, this would ensure a left of centre government similar in some ways to Tony Blair’s New Labour.

The stunning victory of Sarah Green for the Liberal Democrats in the Chesham and Amersham by-election demonstrates what can be achieved by tactical voting. Were this to be repeated in the next General Election we would have the reform government that this country so desperately needs.

David Hogg, Bristol

Peter Kellner’s informed voting reform caution against PR needs a thoughtful response. First past the Post (FPTP) was arguably fit for the 19th century, as the UK was mostly a two-party system (until the Irish parties emerged). But in the last century, Britain, or at least England, has been a two-and-a-half-party system, so FPTP always distorts badly. One distortion is that Tory or Tory-dominated governments have led for exactly two-thirds of that time. 100 years is a long-enough experiment! Worse, since 1951, politicians have increasingly only sought to convince swing voters in marginal seats. Large numbers never vote for someone who actually gets elected to Westminster; even larger numbers feel their vote never makes a difference – unless core voters switch, as in recent by-elections. Further, FPTP quite often results in unstable, hung parliaments or fragile majorities. A PR system with a high threshold, or the Single Transferable Vote, enables responsive, secure, stable coalition governments as Ireland and Germany have long illustrated, where most voters know their votes count most of the time.

Anthony Thacker, Hinckley

Peter Kellner’s view of PR agrees that there is no perfect system, although we could do a lot better than First Past the Post (FPTP). He prefers the Alternative Vote (which was rejected in the 2011 referendum) as the best trade-off, but doesn’t mention the Additional Member System (AMS) which is used successfully for elections to the Scottish Parliament and the Welsh Senedd.

The Electoral Reform Society suggests a 50-50 ratio of constituency to party list seats. This would mean half the MPs elected by FPTP for twinned constituencies, and half the MPs elected on the basis of electors’ preferences for political parties. These list seats would be allocated proportionately on a regional basis, and would produce a much more balanced parliament than we have at the moment.

We need an electoral system that also equalises representation based on the number of votes cast. Nothing is perfect, but AMS would be a start!

David Murray, Wolverhampton

If I were designing the UK’s future political system, I wouldn’t start from here.

The arcane structures, procedures and objectives of the two main political parties, including their names, are anachronistic.

The sooner that Labour, my life-long and permanent political home, realises and accepts that fact, the better.

David Hibbert

• Have your say by emailing letters@theneweuropean.co.uk. Our deadline for letters is Monday at 9am for inclusion in Thursday’s edition. Please be concise – letters over five paragraphs long may be edited before printing.