Comments on: Suggested Labour response to PM’s request for more information about Elections http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2007/10/05/suggested-labour-response-to-pms-request-for-more-information-about-elections/ Conservative Party Member of Parliament for Wokingham Wed, 19 Nov 2008 13:43:12 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2 By: Cliff http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2007/10/05/suggested-labour-response-to-pms-request-for-more-information-about-elections/#comment-7366 Cliff Fri, 05 Oct 2007 12:04:24 +0000 http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2007/10/05/suggested-labour-response-to-pms-request-for-more-information-about-elections/#comment-7366 I was shocked to read a report by Prof. Michael Thrasher that indicated the level of support for each party required to have a majority in the house of commons. He stated that even with a 1% Conservative lead over Labour, Labour would still be the largest party in the house. If the Labour had a 1% lead, then they would have an overall majority of 22. In order for the Conservative Party to have an overall majority in the house, we would need an 11% lead. John is this down to manipulation of boundaries by the government or something else? I know that Mr Blair only had 23% of the electorate vote for him and that still gave him a huge working majority in the house which allowed him to put unpopular and knee jerk legislation through. This also means that 77% of the electorate did not vote for him and his party. Hardly a mandate in my view. What are your thoughts? Do we need electoral reform? Should we implement proportional representation as the Liberals advocate? Should we stick with first past the post or some sort of hybrid system? Reply: There is no evidence that proportional representation encourages more to vote, as the Welsh and Scottish elections illustrate. There are two main problems. The first is that in recent elections too many people have disliked all parties and have abstained. Each of the main parties has to try to tackle this disillusion with national party politics. That was the topic of my last book, "I want to make a difference", which contaiend an agenda for change. The second is the boundaries, which have given Labour a lot of help. In 2005 Conservatives polled more votes than Labour in England but got 93 fewer MPs. This boundary review we are told will give the Conservatives 18 more seats overall for the same vote, so it helps a bit. I was shocked to read a report by Prof. Michael Thrasher that indicated the level of support for each party required to have a majority in the house of commons.
He stated that even with a 1% Conservative lead over Labour, Labour would still be the largest party in the house. If the Labour had a 1% lead, then they would have an overall majority of 22. In order for the Conservative Party to have an overall majority in the house, we would need an 11% lead.
John is this down to manipulation of boundaries by the government or something else?
I know that Mr Blair only had 23% of the electorate vote for him and that still gave him a huge working majority in the house which allowed him to put unpopular and knee jerk legislation through. This also means that 77% of the electorate did not vote for him and his party. Hardly a mandate in my view. What are your thoughts? Do we need electoral reform? Should we implement proportional representation as the Liberals advocate?
Should we stick with first past the post or some sort of hybrid system?

Reply: There is no evidence that proportional representation encourages more to vote, as the Welsh and Scottish elections illustrate.
There are two main problems. The first is that in recent elections too many people have disliked all parties and have abstained. Each of the main parties has to try to tackle this disillusion with national party politics. That was the topic of my last book, “I want to make a difference”, which contaiend an agenda for change.
The second is the boundaries, which have given Labour a lot of help. In 2005 Conservatives polled more votes than Labour in England but got 93 fewer MPs. This boundary review we are told will give the Conservatives 18 more seats overall for the same vote, so it helps a bit.

]]>