Some parties are calling for a review of the UK voting system. #GeneralElection #BBCNews

is there an issue with how the voting system in the UK works for smaller parties well some people have complained that there’s a big gap between the number of votes some parties have got and the number of seats they’ll get in Parliament for example reform’s roughly 4 million votes translates into a 14% share of the total vote but only 1% of all the seats the UK’s first past the post voting system has always tended to give disproportionate results first pass the post means the person with the largest number of votes in each constituency gets elected and candidates from other other parties get nothing for their votes in that area the green party is among the parties calling for a fairer system they won 7% of total votes cast but like reform only about 1% of total seats in fact this election has produced the biggest gap on record between votes won by the winning party and its share of parliamentary seats the UK had a national referendum in 2011 on whether to refresh the voting system to make it more proportional the idea was overwhelmingly rejected by the public at that time

39 comments

  6. Search PROPORTIONAL PAST THE POST! A method that gives proportional seats while retaining local constituencies, plus benefits of preventing gerrymandering and others bonuses.

  9. So many people voted tactically the vote share doesn’t reflect true voting allegiance. Many Labour voters voted LibDem in order to dislodge a big Cons majority in various areas. It worked! Many voted Reform as a protest vote.

  10. Its the same all around the world, the two party system is so far out of date it isnt funny. There are way toooooooooo many of minority parties too. Why not have 5 big partys and whoever wins, that the winner. All i know is the 2 big partys is done

  13. Has the way that votes to seats has been tuned to favour the labour, libdems and tories parties, to keep new parties out of power like Reform UK?

    It does seem strange that the libdems got a lot more seats than Reform UK, but got fewer votes?

  14. more people would go out and vote if introduced, feeling their vote would mean more. Think there was a lot of tactical voting this election as many wanted the tories out so voted for the party who had the most chance (in their area) of achieving this. It’s hard to really know which party had the most votes with tactical voting.

  15. The 2011 change was rejected because it STILL DOESN'T address the first past the post issue.
    The proposed idea was beyond stupid because, one, the vast majority of people voting already vote based on the party leader, not their local MP, meaning they don't even know the policies of their local MP and the alternative basically required people to be more knowledgeable about other parties (which is not going to happen) and will actually result in more tactical voting in fear that voting anyone else will lead to their votes going to a party they don't want.
    Two, as mentioned, the proposed idea does NOT remove first past the post, meaning that issue will still persist.
    The proposed idea of a more fair distribution based on the number of votes seems better, but actually not. Constituencies with a higher populace will have more influence on the outcome, therefore the local MP, the parties involved, and most importantly, the party leader, will simply tailor their policies in favour of these places to get more votes. Guess which areas have the highest populace? Yeah, the London area. As bad as the current situation is with the difference between affluent areas and not-so-affluent areas, the proposed system will only make it worse.
    The first and most important step is removing this dog turd first past the post system, that was adopted because the UK needed quick leadership during World War II. We're almost 80 years past the end of World War II, this anachronistic system should've been thrown out a long time ago.

  19. It's worked in our favour though, for reform uk it just means 14% of the population are "like that" and perhaps thankfully they're spread across the UK rather than being confined to one area

  20. 1. Green Party Suck ass
    2. It wouldnt work because people dont just elect a party but also an MP. And the MP is more important to those people as they represent that area/constuency.
    3. The only way to fix this would have a similar system to the US with 2 (elected) houses one for % of votes and one for representation. While I am a monarchist, the biggest issue with the house of lords is the fact ANYONE can be put in there by a government which is essentially corruption. Would be better if we just had King Charles in charge but oh well.

  21. Stop kidding yourself the biggest divide is between Tory areas and Labour areas, it takes far more labour votes to win a seat then it does a Tory because labour seats are typically in denser populated areas and safe Tory seats are in rural areas.

  24. Maybe mention that AV – the system proposed in 2011 – is also so unrepresentative that it wouldn't have changed a single result in any election since then. We want and need a proper PR system, not some useless whitewash with no impact.

  25. As sad as it'd be for reform to win more seats, i was shocked at the disproportion between votes and seats for both them and the other parties

  30. We cant use a proportional system until we raise the voting numbers. At 60% or less the regional representation will be the same as now. i.e. nothing unless you voted for the winner. When we get to a minimum of 70% it would make more sense. Until the apathy for voting is destroyed, the voting system will be best to remain the way it is now.

  31. Smaller parties 4m votes is not small …..snp and libdems didn't get that combined …tories 3m mote botes and labour 7 m more yet 100s

    It's a f king joke

  36. Brilliant, typical BBC Bias pish. Mentioned Reform and they're vote share, did not mention the SNP got 556,779 more votes and lost most of they're seats. Free Scotland 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

  37. The system put forward when we had the 2011 referendum was complicated and not easily explained so it was rejected. There are a few different options for PR and we could choose sn option that suits us. In any event something needs to be done because more and more people will stop voting if they think their vote is worth nothing

  39. We should have vote off elections, you tick the boxes of what you want to change or happen in the UK or particularly policy's party's aim or strive for then once the first round is done (eliminating the lowest parties) it happens again giving a clear goal and understanding of who is wanted by the nation not stuck with two choices

Leave a Reply