To the noble Lord, Lord Campbell-Savours, I am in complete disagreement that we need to change the method of election to the House of Commons. He is right that the single-member constituency and the constituency link is fundamental. I remember when I went to Brussels all too often as a negotiating Minister, and met Ministers there chosen or elected by other means, that one of the big gaps between us was that I was constantly saying that a new law could not make any sense for my constituents I was meeting tomorrow in my surgery. Their response was, “Well, why do you bother?” They did not have to, because they did not have that single constituency link.
It is also easiest and fairest to say that the person with the most votes wins. As soon as you become the Member of Parliament, you have to represent everybody to the best of your ability, and you need support from your constituents. So, it makes sense to give the job to the person who already commands the most votes of the group who came forward in election, and it is obviously much easier if you win more than half the votes, as I often had the good fortune to do when I was a Member of Parliament. You need to build support and represent people, so the single-member constituency is the least bad way of electing the House of Commons.
The Liberal Democrats would be wise to remember that when they were in the coalition Government, one of the things they insisted on—and Conservatives agreed to—was, on their choice of system, to have a referendum on whether we should change the voting system. From memory, the public voted 68% against, in favour of keeping the current system—more than two-thirds. I was and am still with the public on that. They were right. I have always found the “democracy” bit in the Lib Dem name a bit odd, because whenever we have a public vote, they always seem to disagree with it, then they want to overturn it, not listening to the views of the people. They do not like the verdict that was given on their preferred system of changing the voting system, and they do not like the outcome of the Brexit vote, when millions came out to say we needed to restore our sovereignty, so that we could have a debate like this to discuss how the powers of self-government should be administered and distributed.
The Liberal Democrats wish that to be taken away from us to a much higher level of government by agreement between parties around a council table, with only the Commission allowed to write the laws and make most of the suggestions. The Lib Dems need to think very carefully about how they see democracy, compared with the way the rest of us see democracy—because we think democracy is about the voice of the people. There is only one thing above the elected House of Commons: the voice of the people in a referendum. The House of Commons would be wise to accept the verdict of a referendum, because otherwise, the people in the House of Commons can be changed at a subsequent general election.
As a former local government Minister, and, as a young man, a county councillor who chaired a committee and was therefore responsible for the conduct of various departments in the county council, I have a great affection for local government. Over my years as a Member of Parliament, I worked very closely with leading councillors in my area, and quite often, the issues that most concerned my constituents were wholly or partially decided by the local council.
What that taught me was that it is very disappointing that turnouts in local government elections are so low and that we do not get a good public debate through local media, and even social media, about the powers, duties and money that the council dispenses . If people knew more about what could be done by local government, I think there would be more interest in voting.
However, I am afraid that a lot of Labour and Liberal Democrat councils, as well as councils under no control, put people off. Instead of being proud of their powers and telling people how they will spend their money, all we ever hear from these councils is that they do not have enough money and they do not have any power because everything is already decided by the national Government. People therefore naturally conclude that there is no point in wasting their time with these councillors and councils, because the councillors themselves say, “Well don’t blame me, we can’t do anything; it’s already sorted out by the national Government”.
That of course is not true, but one of the further reasons why people are confused or put off is that we have far too many layers of government and council. It is a huge mistake to introduce regional strategic government in a small, very unified country such as England, and to have that in conflict with what should be truly local government through the local councils. My area moved over from county and district to unitary; I broadly welcomed that, because it removed some of the confusion. It means that, for local matters, we can say, “O unitary authority, it is your problem”, instead of being told that some row is going on between the county and the district and that nobody was really to blame.
That still leaves us with quite a lot of government, although I am very pleased that we have knocked out the European level, because that was a mighty imposition of taxes and laws that we often did not want. I am also glad that we have gone to unitaries, but we still have parish government, and now this Government are trying to intrude regional government on us. It is muddle, confusion and extra cost.
Let us deal with the question about the money. We always hear that most councils do not have enough money, and yet every year the council tax goes up, usually by more than inflation. That is what the public see. Every year government grants go up—yes, under Conservative Governments, as well as Labour Governments, grants usually go up—and councils still say that they are poor. Then when you look at how they are misspending, you can see why: councils that went on a binge buying up commercial property because the debt was cheap, or, as in my local area, a Lib Dem council wasting money on road projects and destroying our road systems for something that people do not want. The answer rests with local government using its powers and spending its money more wisely. ( Time limit kicked in )
October 16, 2026
“The answer rests with local government using its powers and spending its money more wisely.” Indeed and central government too but how on earth do we get politician and the blob to ever even try to deliver this? The money is spent so unwisely it is surely criminal or certainly should be.
Direct democracy is what is needed random lottery choice with perhaps an IQ test would deliver better government.
I used to live in Bloomsbury a few yards away from the Holborn MP Frank Dobson and there was no real point in my voting then as it was a strong Labour seat (though I did waste my time voting Tory). Had lived there for the recent by-election I would have had the choice of voting Labour or Green or wasting my vote. I cannot stand either of those parties or their policies but obviously Labour with their Somalian woman were obviously slightly less obnoxious than the mad anti-Semitic Greens. But democracy this is not.
What make the people of Holborn who voted nearly all vote Labour or Green 80% or so I think? It is surely partly that with FPTP voting any other vote would have no effect. A waste of shoe leather and pencil lead.
When the vote should make a difference like the EU referendum the people will vote.
Direct democracy or lottery selection with some IQ tests is far better – as the types of people who aspire to become MPs are very often so totally unsuitable. I think only about 10% of MPs are remotely honest, well meaning and sensible like JR – so we get generally dire socialist policies pushed by vested interests in the interests of MP and the blob and invariably against the interests of the voters.
October 16, 2026
Dobson absurdly lived in a hugely tax payer subsidies council flat and had another house up North somewhere I understand.
October 16, 2026
Bob Crow used to live in social housing I understand, despite being on a healthy salary as the head of a union.
Even funnier is Rob Halford, the singer, continued to live in his social housing long after he had “made it” as a multi-millionaire rock star. Eventually he was persuaded to move into the more usual rock star style house.
It is a funny old world.
October 16, 2026
October 16, 2026
@Mark B – Representative Democracy is failing because those in Parliament have perverted it. you have some one parachuted in that is said to represent you simply due to their loyalty to a Gang Boss. They do not represent a contingency, a constituent, they support the Gang Boss and the committee that funds their campaigns, in essence they have been bought
Reply You can stand as an independent as many do. Voters prefer party candidates as they want someone who can work with others to deliver a government programme.
October 16, 2026
it is also how candidates are selected by parties for entry onto ballot papers, by the time the names are on the ballot papers it is too late.
October 16, 2026
Changing the voting system is a blatant attempt to rig the results. With the advent of the Internet people have instant access to news worldwide. It is now possible to see that politicians are consumate liars and work against the well being of the voters.
Consequently the 2 party system has failed and now they want to ensure a left-wing government is always dominant. This will result in a coalition of chaos with minor players exerting undo influence.
This is why the legacy parties want to import millions of new voters to bolster their client state.
With the likes of Mertz saying the EU is a basket case, he exposes the lies of the establishment and makes it even more puzzling why the blob are so enchanted with the failed project.
Gerrymandering the voting system is the only way they can keep control.
October 16, 2026
Always difficult to know which layer of local government to complain to about any particular matter.
October 16, 2026
The electorate needs to come to the realisation that voting is registering an opinion. Your vote does not necessarily have to be for the winner or for a party that stands a chance of winning. If those who don’t turn up voted for a local single issue candidate often that candidate would win and would be encouraged to stand if it was likely that voters would notice them
UKIP did not win any seat in 2010 or 2015 but the fact that people were prepared to vote for them got us a referendum on leaving the EU.
Register an opinion. Spoil the paper, vote!
That said I would not oppose a singe transferable vote with the requirement to reach50% to win.
October 16, 2026
reform are running Sunderland council, it was good to see someone, anyone, oust the Labour party who had become too comfortable and incestuous.
they have saved money by refusing to repair local landmarks, will be interesting to see how the reactions to that pan out.
one problem is the sheer amount of local spending decisions in the hands of the University, which is beyond any democratic control. and the similar decision making in the hands of NHS management. the sheer volume of money spent by such bodies which are not really under any democratic control make far bigger impact than anything the council can do.
October 16, 2026
I see a serious problem if our FPTP system continues in its present format. Millions more immigrants have arrived in the country over the past decade, and they tend to cluster in smaller constituencies, creating a quorum for one of their own to become their MP. Setting aside the likes of Corbyn and friends, how else can the HoC have Members of Parliament representing Gaza and Palestine, et al.? Given the recently published higher birth rates compared with the indigenous population, we do not need a degree in Maths to see where this can lead. Do we really want a GB governed and run by such persons in the future?
Interestingly, Fiji suffered similarly in 1987, 2000 and 2006, and we should never want to go there.
October 16, 2026
The issue is whether giving votes like confetti is acceptable at all.
October 16, 2026
@LL – Holborn by election 38% turnout with just 1 in 5 voting for the candidate that assumed they had authority to represent the whole constituency. That Candidate has already tore up the condition of the position attained and has decided not to represent all the electorate but follow their own agenda of destruction.
October 16, 2026
Jyst a look at National Grid. Wind has dropped so to conserve gas we are Importing 19% of our electricity at £199 per mwh. Then we wonder why our bills are through the roof. We could generate using gas if we had it for £55 per mwh.
Insane
October 16, 2026
Meanwhile Israeli terrorists now invade Palestinian areas in The West Bank and attack residents and destroy olive trees.
USA & UK never make much of this. So it continues and escalates.
Israeli government mostly pretends it is against this – apart from Gvir and Smotrich who are complete loons.
October 16, 2026
And how is this particular rubbish associated with the issue being discussed?
October 16, 2026
If you are voting mostly for duff politicians I am not sure the electoral system makes that much difference. The Monster Raving Looney Party might get an MP at last though.
October 16, 2026
Politicians (and police forces etc) often says they want parliament etc. to be gender, racially, disability, sexuality… balanced to reflect the population what might be rather better is if they had far fewer lawyers, PPE graduate types and far more people who had aspired to do and had done real and productive jobs. Reflecting the population in this way.
Polls suggest that only women aged 18-24 could vote, the Greens would have 504 MPs, Reform would have 1 and the Conservatives none at all! If only men in the same age group could vote, we’d have 354 Green MPs
What is wrong with young people and our school climate and anti-Semitic too now propaganda machines?
October 16, 2026
The system that works is that the people select their candidates and then all adult citizens have a vote.
The best argument for denying immigrants a vote for 5 generations, at least!
October 16, 2026
See the Kathryn Porter tweet just now:-
“Here’s a snapshot of grid frequency over the past week – the operational limits have been breached in both directions over the week.”
Alas we have the deluded Miatta Nema Fahnbulleh as Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero (a contradiction just in the title) yet another PPE Oxon person so probably no science after age 16.
October 16, 2026
LL,
You maybe favour a sort of ‘Government of Heroes’ as described by Thomas Carlyle.
However, Carlyle’s heroes were :-
Divinities
Prophets
Priests
Men of Letters
Poets
Kings
Carlyle’s ‘Great Man’ theory of history did not include scientists. He was ambivalent about them.
He did not dismiss them as nerds though. That is a particularly 20th century notion.
October 16, 2026
You see peculiarly ignorant of this country’s constitutional arrangements. It is perfectly possible to have PR and also MPs for individual constituencies who have to answer to their voters. We have had it for years in Scotland and Wales.
Reply You are predictably against the democratic result of the voting system referendum.
October 16, 2026
Dear John in Kent you are impertinent and it reveals what you are.
October 16, 2026
And in Northern Ireland.
We the public have never been offered a referendum on adopting PR. Neither system on the 2011 ballot paper is a form of PR.
Reply It was the Lib Dem preferred system and they have been the nain consistent advocates of change.
October 17, 2026
Peter
If a very mild form of PR which the Lib Dems chose as their best chance of altering first past the post was firmly rejected by voters, what chance would your version have of being successful in a referendum?
October 16, 2026
Good morning.
If is not broken, then why try to fix it ?
The current system has worked well. Which begs the question, why change now ?
I believe that Labour or the Conservative parties will not win an overall majority come the next election. So to ensure that they are at the table when forming the next government, they will rig the system to suit them. And they have form on this as they thought they created such a system whereby they would be in power all the time, but in Scotland.
I do not want endless coalition governments, because the voter never gets what they voted for no matter who gets to form the next government.
October 16, 2026
There is nothing better than experience,although it can sometimes be unpleasant.The town hall is the centre of what citizens experience.
In my locality you have to wait or search for staff to help you or they don’t know. The attitudes of these people are that they couldn’t care less.
Contacting by phone you are pushed from department to department and still don’t get satisfactory help.
In my professional life ‘Safeguarding ‘is an important aspect of my role.This has been devolved from an efficient venture by a Nursing team to the council where advice is given to professionals by staff who haven’t a clue.Phone numbers go out of date quickly,staff change,the newish addage of ,,you can contact by E mail never gets results.Police can be contacted for immediate concerns ,but not the continuous problems many are experiencing.
Departments are strung out all over the place so referrals can be triplicated and information is never collected.It is a nightmare.
For some reason people always think they can better organise than Nurses,this is what happened in hospitals and more recently for safeguarding locally. No way!
October 16, 2026
The argument used by councilors when they fail to meet the local needs of their constituents is, we have our hands tied by national government mandates. They use the simple excuse every time coupled with the perennial we have no money just to ram home the point they are unable to act. This is the same excuse our national government used when we were in the EU. They would say we would like to do what you ask but the treaty obliges us to remain wedded to the rules handed to us by Brussels.
We need proper accountability not excuses. The annual council tax increase as John says rises every year above inflation simply evaporates and is never discussed or answers given as to where the new funds are being spent.
Last year our council tax rose by 9% this year it is scheduled to rise another 9%. The area is also under huge population increase with thousands of new houses built and being built. Despite that revenue uplift and the increase ion households paying it still the council claim they are underfunded.
We simply can not carry on like this we need better managers and more capable councilors to hold those permanent staff at councils to account. Note that word, ‘account’.
October 16, 2026
It is odd the LibDems are so keen on electoral reform because true PR in a general election would result in the collapse of the LibDem vote as their position as a tactical voting “least-worst” alternative to Conservatives or Labour in a current constituency would be removed – all tactical voting would stop. The beneficiaries would be extremist parties like Restore and a new Islamist party who would gain significant numbers of MPs.
October 16, 2026
Well indeed, Libdem Wokingham BC whinging about the loss of money from local government while using their taxpayers’ collateral for spending millions on a solar farm with no customers, buying up housing at the top of the market, road schemes..
Same with Libdem Oxford, millions of taxpayers’ cash on a useless park and ride without access, now building housing on a well used car park in central Witney because they can’t find a spare plot of land in a sensible place at a sensible cost.
They get voted in because people think they’re friendly and kind, but truly they’re wastrels.
October 16, 2026
I am a great believer if its not broken don’t fix it. I like having someone to contact when required. Two changes I would like to see are required to vote but with a tick box saying obstain. The other is a referendum on certain subjects on local and general elections like the right to die p
October 16, 2026
Good morning Lord Redwood.
+1
I wonder if you have a view on the media chatter about raising bank taxes. Will this just push banking services abroad, or are the banks awash with cash they can be relieved of?
October 16, 2026
Retail banks are closing, up and down the country ….soon there’ll be none left
October 16, 2026
Lord JR. I have to say the present form of voting for a government is less than perfect, in fact it’s unfair.
At the last General election:
Labour 33.7% of the votes = 412 seats
Cons 23.7% of the votes =121 seats
Reform 14.3% of the vote = 5seats !!!!
Lib Dems 12.2% of the vote = 72 seats !!!!!!!!!!!
That is a travesty of democracy.
So what system should we use? I wish I knew the answer …………..
October 16, 2026
STV.
It’s already in use in Scotland and Northern Ireland and maintains the principles of both voting for individuals and electing constituency MPs.
October 17, 2026
Clearly unfair in seat allocation relative to votes but also it hugely distorts the votes even before that secondary discrimination. Had I been voting in Holborn I would have voted Labour as they were the only chance of stopping the even more vile anti-Semitic Greens – yet I cannot stand Labour and have never voted for them. So not the votes are hugely distorted even before the seat allocation.
At the next election I will vote Reform or Conservative depending on which party is best places to keep Labour, Libdims, Greens… out. Not depending on which of the two parties I prefer.
October 16, 2026
My criticism of Unitary Authorities is that it has taken power further from the community and our Unitary Authority is dominated by the City and Urban councillors who form an almost unbreakable Labour majority. Whereas our rural District Council had different priorities and was more conservative.
I think more varied sizes of Unitary Authorities would be more appropriate rather than one size fits all. In urban communities 300,000plus size may be appropriate but in rural areas 100,000minus is more suited to community.
As for introducing another tier of Elected Mayors – why? A total waste of money. Regional coordination can work perfectly well through the unitary Authorities and maintain local accountability.
October 16, 2026
Bloomsbury is one of the best places to live in London!
Great and interesting architecture, book shops, cafes and far more.
Politics is important but wouldn’t let it get to you!
(If you look at politics throughout history and every part of the world, there are alway daft and corrupt people involved. Put it down to original sin – whether literally or metaphorically. A great politician is fairly rare).
If I lived in Bloomsbury, I’d go for a good walk everyday followed by a visit to a book shop and enjoying that in one of Bloomsbury’s excellent cafes! Life’s too short otherwise.
October 16, 2026
Bloomsbury also has some great pubs (and places to eat).
No way are daft and/or corrupt politicians going to ruin my pints of London Pride, with fish and chips, and chatting with friends and family.
October 16, 2026
First past the post is the only recognisable real democratic way of choosing who represents you. All the other concoctions lead to in reality minority rule.
The only flaw is the so-called party system as it is run in the UK. In a very EU way a hidden committee with a Gang Boss choosing who will be your candidate is also undemocratic.
In there purist sense choosing a candidate is where it all starts. It should be the electorate in a community that chooses who the would like to see stand in ‘their’ election of a representative. A political group/party may identify the candidates political religion, but we don’t and don’t want to vote for a party. We want, need to vote for the person that will best represent the constituency, its people and the country. Having some one ruled by and outside committee a gang-boss that is chosen for loyalty to an ideology is NOT democracy.
As suggested the people least qualified to change the system are those sitting in Parliament as we see even today they are all about ‘self’ and as such they would desire even shielded by well meaning words to gerrymander the system to suit personal benefit and need.
October 16, 2026
The current government got just 33.7% of the votes. If that isn’t minority rule (and under FPTP), I don’t know what is.
October 17, 2026
The only way to really get a government with more than 50% would be to have only two parties run off in a final vote.
Under PR with lots of parties the governing party often has a much lower percentage vote than even the current Labour government.
October 16, 2026
I completely agree with you, Lord John, that we should continue to have a single-member constituency and that the constituency link is fundamental for the reasons you give. But the problem with the current FPTP system, where the winner is the candidate with the most votes in a single and only count, is not necessarily the candidate who represents more than half of the votes because a split vote can enable a constituency to elect the very candidate they least want. This is why I am in favour of some sort of AV or STV system as this ensures that the winning candidate always has more than 50% of the votes cast. I am also in favour of referendums to limit the powers of Parliament, the Civil Service and the Judiciary to make policies for which there is no popular mandate.
October 16, 2026
@Original Richard – it will be more democratic when the constituency chooses their candidates and not a Gang Boss with a Committee. It will also be more democratic when the funds for campaigns only come from within a constituency.
Reply There is nothing stopping people or parties organising new ways to choose candidates. When Conservatives tried giving more people votes to choose our candidates we got some chosen who were not conservative.
October 17, 2026
Ian B :
You bring up additional issues which are not relevant to my point. In the case of the selection of a party’s candidate, in my constituency the Conservative Party candidate was selected by all the constituency members from a group of 3 who each gave a presentation before voting took place. Interestingly the voting was an AV type process not simply FPTP. With regard to funding I think your suggestion is not democratic as it favours existing parties and disadvantages newcomers. A limit on spending and how it is spent is more important.
October 16, 2026
Apologies for the length of this, but the comparison for then and now is staggering.
I look at local government from a slightly different but old fashioned view, as certainly from my memory, local governments in far more control of local things that mattered.
Roads had planned maintenance, drains were cleared on a regular basis, roads and paths were swept, ditches were cleared, trees were lopped, parks were maintained with grass cut and flowers tended, sports fields were clean and tidy, street lights were maintained, council houses had regular maintenance and rules for their tenants were enforced about tidy gardens and hedges, libraries and schools were maintained, as were swimming pools.
The Council had its own direct labour force which was flexible and able to clear snow and grit roads, thus people had some pride in the community.
Contrast with now. Thousands of miles of fading road markings, all sorts of faded coloured tarmac, millions of pot holes, high car parking charges, variable speed limits with camera’s and fines, speed humps, chicanes, grass verges overgrown, dilapidated signage, ditches and drains clogged up, trees overgrown with some actually falling down, sports fields a dogs mess paradise, unkept parks, littered roads and broken pavements, street lights that no longer light up the street, and more importantly a huge revenue collection and benefit redistribution of money service for the Government.
Add to all this failing local heath care and social services, and graffiti which is never cleaned off, and is it any wonder many people have no pride in local areas any more, and think the system is broken.
October 16, 2026
@LL – even 80% of 39% – still leaves 2/3rds disenfranchised. It was outside money, money from outside the community that bought and paid for the result. Is that Democracy?
October 16, 2026
I would support any party that promotes first past the post, mandatory voting, restricted to UK born, voter ID and without changing historic constitutional boundaries
October 16, 2026
Our first past the post voting system is fine. The vote in response to Nick Clegg’s coalition agreement with David Cameron to consider Proportional Representation smashed that out of the way. People don’t want a mish mash in government like those in the EU, nor its muddled ways.
Regional Government is another often-wasteful layer of unwanted bureaucracy, contradicting and clogging up actions at added expense. Dumping it is probably a better option.
October 16, 2026
Yes, a super majority rejected by people who propose direct democracy or worse…
October 16, 2026
Agree 100%, all we hear is how the last administration starved the council of money, when in fact it was a very well run council compared to now, they don’t seem to know how to use money wisely.
October 16, 2026
An interesting article. Why is it that the government and local councils never have enough money? Could it be due to their spending? My council tax rises more than inflation most years, but I don’t see any real improvements. I suggest senior staff at most councils are overpaid. In the past, a town clerk ran local government, and they seemed to get on with the job without giving themselves airs and graces. Ours is a Labour majority council and has been for years. The handful of Conservatives tried to propose a reduction in the number of councillors, currently 59, but were voted down.
One thing I must compliment our local council on is the Tip. The staff there keep it immaculate and are all helpful.
I agree that there are too many levels of government in the UK and they need reducing.
October 16, 2026
I’m surprised that the media aren’t talking about the ECHRs vote yesterday
October 16, 2026
‘War is Peace’ ‘Freedom is Slavery’ ‘Ignorance is Strength’ the sign on the building in ‘1984’ …..it could be Brussels or even Parliament today
October 16, 2026
You can add “diversity is meritocracy” and “men are women”.
October 16, 2026
This is a good statement of all that I aspire to for Britain.
Perhaps we should remove the political parties from local government and have Tax Payers Candidates etc as we did before.
That would remove some of the friction between councils and Government, and between voters and councils.
October 16, 2026
kind host:your extensive and considered reply to another member of the ermined chamber was heard in
appreciative silence by how many attendees?I am older than D.C-S and was involved in the LibParty.
Fortunately unravelling events involving the,then,leader of the Liberal Party removed my blinkers.
They have not moved on since.MrGladstone must be turning in his grave
October 16, 2026
huge apologies.He was not what had sparked my input .Regardless,my opinion of him and the
party to which I had tagged him remains unchanged
October 16, 2026
Why are politicians pushing local devolution …..I have faith in the traditional council system of democracy, and not mayors or regional authorities nor the differing devolution of the three countries of the UK
October 16, 2026
Every time anyone here lauds Putin, they undermine Brexit!
So many Remainers who might change to Brexit and so many Brexiters don’t like Putin. And they associate Putin now more and more with Trump and Trump with populism. And populism with Brexit.
So if we want Brexit to work, short to long-term, then Brexiters have to get behind challenging both Trump and Putin. Not forgetting, Ukraine is fighting for their sovereignty!
And only about 1% of the population here in the UK support Putin. And probably only about 5% to 10% of the population here in the UK support Trump. For everyone else, they are on their enemy lists. So whatever people here think about Putin and Trump in a positive way – and whether they are right or wrong – what matters is that their support for these undermines Brexit.
October 16, 2026
EM,
‘Every time anyone here lauds Putin, they undermine Brexit!’
Nonsense. Most people do not spend much time thinking about Putin in the first place.
Putin is a distraction and a useful bogeyman for those who think war is a good idea.
October 17, 2026
Peter, you’re wrong.
Big problem for Brexit is the animosity between Brexiters and Remainers. Where both see the other as toxic in some way. And the debate spills into animosity of the other than actually wanting our great country to be sovereign or not. When people bang on about how great Putin is, they’re just adding to this animosity. Instead of actually trying to persuade the other in a positive way why being pro sovereign or pro EU is a great thing.
So I’m right. There is so much toxicity now in this whole thing. Following a similar pattern where we see this political division in the USA. Where people are INDULGING in just being hostile to the other instead of actually just focusing purely on the politics and achieving what they want through sensible means.
So every time you laud Putin or Trump, you’re adding to the toxic image of how Remainers see Brexit. Many Brexiters, of course, don’t and are naturally opposed to Putin and Trump.
October 16, 2026
No ,the big boys would rather see us floundering on our own , however the support doesn’t always mean the figureheads/leaders are supported,but rather the countries and a potential to change from idiotic wars ,which don’t really have much meaning,to adult collaboration
October 16, 2026
Local government definitely is popular now in Europe and Canada. In Europe there is an movement on the right of politics to serious talk about “brexit” for their own countries. More and more political parties have had it with Brussels. In Canada 2 provinces are planning a referendum about secession from Canada.
October 16, 2026
Really interesting discussion topic.
I was until recently very much a FPTP believer, for much the same reasons set out here.
However when labour got their massive majority that allows them to do what they always do, spend, without challenge largely thanks to the public dissatisfaction with the path the tories were on I questioned my own views.
With PR the majority would be more properly represented. However, we would not know who we were electing locally and would have no one to question, challenge and reject next time if appropriate. A positive with PR is that the current change in direction every time there is a new government would be unlikely as massive majorities are unlikely. Another downside is the opposite, changes laws, taxes, services, work procedures would be more restricted.
One other option is a combination of FPTP and PR, similar to the Scottish system.
One change that would help is for the second house, the lords, to be based on general election results from a PR voting arrangement. The current system is not democratic and does not guarantee an independent second house.
October 16, 2026
@Robert Mcdonald – that could only then give the answer you are suggesting with compulsory voting. Other wise if you are disenfranchised you are still disenfranchised and choosing the least worst is still the worst. I would love to see ‘none of the above’ on the ballot paper. The recent Holborn and St Pancras election had in effect 61% of the electors saying we don’t wont any of them. So Labour got in with less than 20% of the vote
Reply You do not need that on ballot paper. You can write on the ballot paper you do not like any candidate. An election must end up with someone elected so if you do tgat your protest is recorded as a spoilt paper. Democratic politics requires compromise. It is often about going for the least bad choice .
October 16, 2026
If we used STV you would know who you were voting for and electing locally.
October 16, 2026
In Fox News Poll, voters put corruption in government as no. 1 concern.
Another reason why Brexit needs to be distanced from Trump as the two are closely connected through the word ‘populism.’
If people here in the UK get a whiff of Brexit being associated with populism and Trump and corruption, this could a create a new huge challenge for Brexit. Having Brexit connected in some way with toxic brand Trump (as well as toxic brand Putin now seen so connected to Trump and corruption with Trump and the family).
October 17, 2026
The question is: “do people vote for an individual MP or for a party?” The answer is mixed. Some issues that people have may be amenable to the intervention of an individual MP, but many issues, particularly national issues, are decided at party level and one’s MP is only one voice, a voice not always listened to by the Party leadership or a voice may be over-ruled by it. Backbench revolts are not uncommon. Cameron’s alliance with the awful Lib Dems essentially tore up the Conservative manifesto on which he and his party were elected: all decided by the few in the leadership of the two parties behind closed doors, and only openly debated afterwards.
The fact is that the electorate is not homogenous, not by geography, not by religious belief, not by circumstances, not by history, not by loyalty, not by knowledge, not by political belief, not by inclination. Opinions and beliefs on fundamental issues have become more diverse and more extreme in recent years.
The efficacy of central government relies on consensus. How is that to be achieved? Is it even possible or desirable? There cannot be consensus on such basic issues as marriage or the age of consent or equality between sexes, when views are decided by religions that are utterly opposed to each other. One or more must remain dissastisfied with or excluded from policy decisions in central government. Even tolerance cannot be stretched to embrace such opposing views and beliefs.
Neither FPTP nor PR can achieve consensus when the electorate is itself so extremely diverse. That is why the world is divided into nation states so that their people and their parliaments can form a national consensus. If you are open to the whole world, as Britain now is, consensus is not possible even on the most fundamental questions.
October 17, 2026
PG: “If you are open to the whole world, as Britain now is, consensus is not possible even on the most fundamental questions.”
A very good point.