Harry Hayfield
Green
Cavalier Gentleman (as in 17th century Cavalier)
Posts: 2,922 
|
Post by Harry Hayfield on Nov 5, 2019 9:02:30 GMT
As the issue seems to have been firmly parked (I have not heard it once so far), how about we show these "experts" how to do it properly, therefore with permission:
Stage One: Just how big should Parliament be?
According to the estimates published by the ONS and World Bank, the UK population at the moment is 66.44 million, so the first stage is to find out how big Parliaments are in countries with a similar population. The country with a population closest to the United Kingdom is our nearest continental partner France (estimated 2019 population: 65.12 million) and according to Wikipedia, their Parliament (L' Asssemble Nationale) contains 577 seats, therefore the UK's Parliament should have no more than 577 seats (11% fewer than at the moment).
Stage Two: Method of election
France uses a two round method of election (one a week after the other) where unless the leading candidate is elected with an absolute majority (50%) or if no candidate reaches that amount no less than 25% of the vote, a second round is held. Now clearly, two elections a week apart would raise cost concerns, however the UK currently has a two round system for elections that are held on the same day, therefore the electoral system to be used is the Supplementary Vote system
Stage Three: Size of constituencies
In 2017, the UK's electorate was 46.8 million, therefore making the average constituency 81,109 electors in size. Now, clearly people are going to say "Hang on, one constituency has some 81,000 electors. That would give the Scottish Highlands just two MP's who would have to travel from Glencoe to Inverness and from the Kyle of Lochalsh to John O'Groats" which is where I say "common sense comes into play" by making sure that travel considerations are taken into account, so for instance there would be more MP's in the Highlands of Scotland and the rural areas of Wales, and fewer MP's in areas with motorways
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Nov 5, 2019 9:04:38 GMT
Supplementary vote lol
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,840
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Nov 5, 2019 10:01:51 GMT
Sorry, I can't edit on this thing. Comparing solely on national Parliament is s red herring as it ignores that Jrr countries also have lower level assemblies. The usual comparison is with the us Congress ignoring the state assemblies. So to compare with France you have determine how the size of the national assembly compared with the whole system from top to bottom . with our over central is red system our psrsrlismrnt might not actually be too big. As the issue seems to have been firmly parked (I have not heard it once so far), how about we show these "experts" how to do it properly, therefore with permission: Stage One: Just how big should Parliament be? According to the estimates published by the ONS and World Bank, the UK population at the moment is 66.44 million, so the first stage is to find out how big Parliaments are in countries with a similar population. The country with a population closest to the United Kingdom is our nearest continental partner France (estimated 2019 population: 65.12 million) and according to Wikipedia, their Parliament (L' Asssemble Nationale) contains 577 seats, therefore the UK's Parliament should have no more than 577 seats (11% fewer than at the moment). Stage Two: Method of election France uses a two round method of election (one a week after the other) where unless the leading candidate is elected with an absolute majority (50%) or if no candidate reaches that amount no less than 25% of the vote, a second round is held. Now clearly, two elections a week apart would raise cost concerns, however the UK currently has a two round system for elections that are held on the same day, therefore the electoral system to be used is the Supplementary Vote system Stage Three: Size of constituencies In 2017, the UK's electorate was 46.8 million, therefore making the average constituency 81,109 electors in size. Now, clearly people are going to say "Hang on, one constituency has some 81,000 electors. That would give the Scottish Highlands just two MP's who would have to travel from Glencoe to Inverness and from the Kyle of Lochalsh to John O'Groats" which is where I say "common sense comes into play" by making sure that travel considerations are taken into account, so for instance there would be more MP's in the Highlands of Scotland and the rural areas of Wales, and fewer MP's in areas with motorways |
|
Harry Hayfield
Green
Cavalier Gentleman (as in 17th century Cavalier)
Posts: 2,922
|
Post by Harry Hayfield on Nov 5, 2019 13:48:43 GMT
Sorry, I can't edit on this thing. Comparing solely on national Parliament is s red herring as it ignores that Jrr countries also have lower level assemblies. The usual comparison is with the us Congress ignoring the state assemblies. So to compare with France you have determine how the size of the national assembly compared with the whole system from top to bottom . with our over central is red system our psrsrlismrnt might not actually be too big. As the issue seems to have been firmly parked (I have not heard it once so far), how about we show these "experts" how to do it properly, therefore with permission: Stage One: Just how big should Parliament be? According to the estimates published by the ONS and World Bank, the UK population at the moment is 66.44 million, so the first stage is to find out how big Parliaments are in countries with a similar population. The country with a population closest to the United Kingdom is our nearest continental partner France (estimated 2019 population: 65.12 million) and according to Wikipedia, their Parliament (L' Asssemble Nationale) contains 577 seats, therefore the UK's Parliament should have no more than 577 seats (11% fewer than at the moment). Stage Two: Method of election France uses a two round method of election (one a week after the other) where unless the leading candidate is elected with an absolute majority (50%) or if no candidate reaches that amount no less than 25% of the vote, a second round is held. Now clearly, two elections a week apart would raise cost concerns, however the UK currently has a two round system for elections that are held on the same day, therefore the electoral system to be used is the Supplementary Vote system Stage Three: Size of constituencies In 2017, the UK's electorate was 46.8 million, therefore making the average constituency 81,109 electors in size. Now, clearly people are going to say "Hang on, one constituency has some 81,000 electors. That would give the Scottish Highlands just two MP's who would have to travel from Glencoe to Inverness and from the Kyle of Lochalsh to John O'Groats" which is where I say "common sense comes into play" by making sure that travel considerations are taken into account, so for instance there would be more MP's in the Highlands of Scotland and the rural areas of Wales, and fewer MP's in areas with motorways Precisely my point. I suggested a Parliament the same size as France, and you have raised the point that France has more lower levels of government than Westminster, therefore we are having a discussion on the issue of how to shrink Parliament, a discussion that others can join in with until we reach that rarer thing a consensus. |
|
|
|
Post by IceAgeComing on Nov 5, 2019 17:15:46 GMT
imagine actually advocating for Supplementary Vote system, the stupidest voting system ever designed
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,840
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Nov 5, 2019 17:38:04 GMT
One thing I would agree with is that the revising chamber should be sustantially smaller than the main chamber. A quick goggle suggests that in most places the second chambers is four to six times smaller than the first chamber.
|
|
|
|
Post by 🏴☠️ Neath West 🏴☠️ on Nov 5, 2019 18:33:00 GMT
One thing I would agree with is that the revising chamber should be sustantially smaller than the main chamber. A quick goggle suggests that in most places the second chambers is four to six times smaller than the first chamber. Perhaps we could have 90 representative life peers as a start. Use a 50-year moving average in General Elections to determine the numbers. |
|
|
|
Post by No Offence Alan on Nov 5, 2019 18:46:57 GMT
One thing I would agree with is that the revising chamber should be sustantially smaller than the main chamber. A quick goggle suggests that in most places the second chambers is four to six times smaller than the first chamber. I would do away with the revising chamber altogether and have an English Parliament with similar powers to Scotland. |
|
Harry Hayfield
Green
Cavalier Gentleman (as in 17th century Cavalier)
Posts: 2,922
|
Post by Harry Hayfield on Nov 6, 2019 11:48:35 GMT
One thing I would agree with is that the revising chamber should be sustantially smaller than the main chamber. A quick goggle suggests that in most places the second chambers is four to six times smaller than the first chamber. Taking the example of France, Commons Chamber has 577 members, Upper Chamber has 348 members (60% of the lower chamber) |
|
|
|
Post by 🏴☠️ Neath West 🏴☠️ on Nov 6, 2019 12:32:25 GMT
I would do away with the revising chamber altogether and have an English Parliament with similar powers to Scotland. Another parliament based in London, no thanks. 👽 Perhaps we could move the existing one to Birmingham. |
|
cibwr
Plaid Cymru
Posts: 3,599
|
Post by cibwr on Nov 7, 2019 10:14:33 GMT
The UK already has the fourth largest national parliament after China (2,980), Germany (709) and North Korea (687). Given that two of them are Communist and the third is inflated by 111 overhanging mandates, I'd say that HoC is large enough as it is already. The UK has a very centralised structure aside from Scotland and Wales, with local government very weak and regional government not really existing. Almost all other countries have significant internal devolution so their national parliaments do not have the same level of duties. A consistent thread in devolution debates in the early years of the 20th century was the need for devolved legislatures to enable the "imperial parliament" to concentrate on holding the government to account and to ease the burden of every day legislation. |
|
cibwr
Plaid Cymru
Posts: 3,599
|
Post by cibwr on Nov 7, 2019 10:18:00 GMT
One thing I would agree with is that the revising chamber should be sustantially smaller than the main chamber. A quick goggle suggests that in most places the second chambers is four to six times smaller than the first chamber. Although in the USA most state upperhouses tend to be half the size of the lower house. |
|
Chris from Brum
Lib Dem
What I need is a strong drink and a peer group.
Posts: 9,771
|
Post by Chris from Brum on Nov 7, 2019 10:47:55 GMT
Perhaps we could move the existing one to Birmingham. Put the politicians in the Bull Ring. Too many gougings and your policy is rejected. I like your thinking. 👽 Ah, you've been shopping there too, I see ... |
|
|
|
Post by tiberius on Nov 9, 2019 21:36:11 GMT
One thing I would agree with is that the revising chamber should be sustantially smaller than the main chamber. A quick goggle suggests that in most places the second chambers is four to six times smaller than the first chamber. Although in the USA most state upperhouses tend to be half the size of the lower house. For what it's worth, there are two cases of states with less upper house members than congressional representatives - California and Texas. |
|
Chris from Brum
Lib Dem
What I need is a strong drink and a peer group.
Posts: 9,771
|
Post by Chris from Brum on Nov 9, 2019 22:21:05 GMT
Although in the USA most state upperhouses tend to be half the size of the lower house. For what it's worth, there are two cases of states with less upper house members than congressional representatives - California and Texas. At least one state is unicameral - Nebraska - are there others? |
|
cibwr
Plaid Cymru
Posts: 3,599
|
Post by cibwr on Nov 10, 2019 11:14:42 GMT
For what it's worth, there are two cases of states with less upper house members than congressional representatives - California and Texas. At least one state is unicameral - Nebraska - are there others? No just the one, and I understand it was the lower house that was abolished - so all members are referred to as Senetor... Interestingly I think all USA upperhouses are elected on the same basis as the lower house from equal electoral districts, just less of them. |
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Nov 10, 2019 12:20:26 GMT
At least one state is unicameral - Nebraska - are there others? No just the one, and I understand it was the lower house that was abolished - so all members are referred to as Senetor... Interestingly I think all USA upperhouses are elected on the same basis as the lower house from equal electoral districts, just less of them. Not quite - there are states where that is only the case for the Upper House and the Lower House is elected by 2-member or even 3-member block vote (surely that and not AV is the worst electoral system used in Britain.) In these cases the constituencies in use are the same for both houses.
Also a common but not universal thing are "nested" districts, where a State Senate district consists of two House districts.
|
|
|
|
Post by therealriga on Nov 11, 2019 18:56:59 GMT
No just the one, and I understand it was the lower house that was abolished - so all members are referred to as Senetor... Interestingly I think all USA upperhouses are elected on the same basis as the lower house from equal electoral districts, just less of them. Not quite - there are states where that is only the case for the Upper House and the Lower House is elected by 2-member or even 3-member block vote (surely that and not AV is the worst electoral system used in Britain.) In these cases the constituencies in use are the same for both houses.
Also a common but not universal thing are "nested" districts, where a State Senate district consists of two House districts.
Apart from Scottish local by-elections and a rare Northern Irish local by-election, AV isn't used in the UK. SV isn't the same, it's more like a bastard child of both FPTP and AV and worse than both. Apart from that, you're right, I'd prefer to have single member wards by FPTP than the 3-member block vote. |
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Nov 11, 2019 19:49:53 GMT
Meant SV, sorry. (What you call AV I'd always refer to as STV, so...) IRV. Down with Acronyms.  |
|
|
|
Post by Richard Cromwell on Nov 12, 2019 16:22:27 GMT
Although in the USA most state upperhouses tend to be half the size of the lower house. For what it's worth, there are two cases of states with less upper house members than congressional representatives - California and Texas. Fewer. |
|
