|
|
Post by andrew111 on Jan 22, 2022 19:30:25 GMT
It translates fine. The party with the most overall support gets an extra Councillor for a year or two. Not a big deal. The problem, though, is that most people who support STV (or think they do) believe it to be a proportional system. You know it isn't. I know it isn't. But... A system where by-elections standardly return the candidate of the plurality party in the area, no matter what the party of the deceased or resigning representative, doesn't (at least at first sight) look either proportional or fair. Not sure what you are getting at here. The purpose of STV is to elect candidates from a range of Parties, according to how people vote. In small 3 member seats as typical in Scottish Local govt, it is not very proportional. Of course the party with a plurality of votes is always going to get a seat, but so will at least one other party in almost all cases. On this thread we are talking about a by election with one candidate. There is no PR system available for electing one candidate, but AV allows some preference. The only option to "replace" the previous candidate woukd be a co-option. That is not very democratic either. Usually the new councillor is of a different party to the old one only where the previous councillor would not have been there but for the relative proportionality of STV. The thing you are complaining about often happens in by-elections anyway, just because circumstances have changed. And the voting patterns in 3 up at once FPTP elections often show split voting suggesting that voters everywhere would like more choice, as delivered more effectively by STV |
|
|
|
Post by La Fontaine on Jan 23, 2022 0:25:43 GMT
I think there is a general problem with Scottish by-elections in that only first preferences seem generally to receive any publicity at all. The final counts rarely receive any media publicity and they are usually well buried on council websites.
|
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Jan 23, 2022 0:34:23 GMT
I think there is a general problem with Scottish by-elections in that only first preferences seem generally to receive any publicity at all. The final counts rarely receive any media publicity and they are usually well buried on council websites. I got into a Twitter spat with a bunch of cybernats (easily done) over a council byelection in which the council concerned had reported "the result" as the first preference votes, in which the SNP was top but on less than 50%. On tweeting back at the council to confirm that the SNP candidate had actually been elected, the cybernat response was "that was THE RESULT" and suchlike, coupled with a heavy implication that this was a typical English attempt to undermine the SNP. |
|
|
|
Post by michaelarden on Jan 23, 2022 18:43:14 GMT
Stage 2 (Ind eliminated) Lab 1815 (+22) SNP 1242 (+25) Con 1173 (+19) Grn 241 (+10) LD 154 (+18) Stage 3: Lab 1861 (+46) SNP 1258 (+16) Con 1204 (+31) Grn 266 (+25) Stage 4: Lab 1927 (+66) SNP 1391 (+133) Con 1212 (+8) Stage 5; Lab 2390 (+463) SNP 1458 (+67) The transfers make interesting reading. |
|
pl
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,665 
Member is Online
|
Post by pl on Jan 23, 2022 19:58:38 GMT
Stage 2 (Ind eliminated) Lab 1815 (+22) SNP 1242 (+25) Con 1173 (+19) Grn 241 (+10) LD 154 (+18) Stage 3: Lab 1861 (+46) SNP 1258 (+16) Con 1204 (+31) Grn 266 (+25) Stage 4: Lab 1927 (+66) SNP 1391 (+133) Con 1212 (+8) Stage 5; Lab 2390 (+463) SNP 1458 (+67) The transfers make interesting reading. Indeed... for Conservatives it is "business before pleasure". |
|
|
|
Post by sjorford on Jan 24, 2022 17:14:38 GMT
I got into a Twitter spat well there's your problem |
|
sirbenjamin
IFP
True fame is reading your name written in graffiti, but without the words 'is a wanker' after it.
Posts: 4,979
|
Post by sirbenjamin on Jan 25, 2022 7:51:17 GMT
It translates fine. The party with the most overall support gets an extra Councillor for a year or two. Not a big deal. The problem, though, is that most people who support STV (or think they do) believe it to be a proportional system. You know it isn't. I know it isn't. But... A system where by-elections standardly return the candidate of the plurality party in the area, no matter what the party of the deceased or resigning representative, doesn't (at least at first sight) look either proportional or fair.
There is no 'proportional' system possible when electing a single candidate for a single seat. Where the winning candidate represents a party, that party is going to take 100% of the seats available when the number of seats available is one.
This won't stop clueless twats on twitter complaining that a local by-election result isn't proportional, mind, just as it won't stop them thinking that it's a Westminster by-election or that a swing of eleven voters is Nationally significant in some way, or that all Independents are the same, or that every Conservative victory ever is 'proof' that 'a progressive alliance is needed' or any of the other gormless gobshite wank that these fuckwits come up with...
|
|
|
|
Post by timrollpickering on Jan 25, 2022 11:18:03 GMT
There is no 'proportional' system possible when electing a single candidate for a single seat. Leaving aside the decades of usage of "proportional representation" for AV I think the problem is how the casual vacancy election distorts the overall proportionality. There are methods to fill it that maintain proportionality but without returning to the voters - co-option, lists of substitutes, recounts and so forth (although recounts would require parties to stand more candidates). |
|
sirbenjamin
IFP
True fame is reading your name written in graffiti, but without the words 'is a wanker' after it.
Posts: 4,979
|
Post by sirbenjamin on Jan 25, 2022 11:25:39 GMT
There is no 'proportional' system possible when electing a single candidate for a single seat. Leaving aside the decades of usage of "proportional representation" for AV I think the problem is how the casual vacancy election distorts the overall proportionality. There are methods to fill it that maintain proportionality but without returning to the voters - co-option, lists of substitutes, recounts and so forth (although recounts would require parties to stand more candidates).
I'm not sure any of these methods are altogether satisfactory, particularly when the outgoing/dead member was some flavour of Independent, which isn't uncommon in local government where vacancies most commonly arise.
Indeed, as a more general point, the problem of 'what to do about Independent candidates?' is one rarely tackled by advocates of PR. It's a paradox in that a more proportional parliament/council should, by definition, include independents because many people like the idea of voting for them. However in practice, PR systems are less likely to result in Indie candidates being elected.
|
|
Chris from Brum
Lib Dem
What I need is a strong drink and a peer group.
Posts: 9,732
|
Post by Chris from Brum on Jan 25, 2022 11:45:46 GMT
There is no 'proportional' system possible when electing a single candidate for a single seat. Leaving aside the decades of usage of "proportional representation" for AV I think the problem is how the casual vacancy election distorts the overall proportionality. There are methods to fill it that maintain proportionality but without returning to the voters - co-option, lists of substitutes, recounts and so forth (although recounts would require parties to stand more candidates). Norn Iron goes for replacement from a list of subs, either nominated by party, or personally by any independent MLA. By-elections are therefore extremely rare, and occur only if all nominated persons are unavailable or unwilling to accept office. andrewteale explained this, I think the last time there was a council by-election over the water. |
|
Chris from Brum
Lib Dem
What I need is a strong drink and a peer group.
Posts: 9,732
|
Post by Chris from Brum on Jan 25, 2022 11:49:49 GMT
Leaving aside the decades of usage of "proportional representation" for AV I think the problem is how the casual vacancy election distorts the overall proportionality. There are methods to fill it that maintain proportionality but without returning to the voters - co-option, lists of substitutes, recounts and so forth (although recounts would require parties to stand more candidates).
I'm not sure any of these methods are altogether satisfactory, particularly when the outgoing/dead member was some flavour of Independent, which isn't uncommon in local government where vacancies most commonly arise.
Indeed, as a more general point, the problem of 'what to do about Independent candidates?' is one rarely tackled by advocates of PR. It's a paradox in that a more proportional parliament/council should, by definition, include independents because many people like the idea of voting for them. However in practice, PR systems are less likely to result in Indie candidates being elected.
The purer forms of PR do indeed make it harder for independents to be elected. STV, however, while delivering broadly proportional outcomes, does allow independents through, as seen in both parts of Ireland and in Scottish council elections. But you need electoral areas electing a minimum of 4 representatives, and preferably 5 or 6, rather than the 3-member Scottish wards that deliver little if any improvement on FPTP. |
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Jan 25, 2022 11:56:27 GMT
There is no 'proportional' system possible when electing a single candidate for a single seat. Leaving aside the decades of usage of "proportional representation" for AV I think the problem is how the casual vacancy election distorts the overall proportionality. There are methods to fill it that maintain proportionality but without returning to the voters - co-option, lists of substitutes, recounts and so forth (although recounts would require parties to stand more candidates). the word you're looking for is "countback". Anything to entice parties to stand more candidates in STV elections is good in my book.  |
|
|
|
Post by jamesdoyle on Jan 25, 2022 20:15:30 GMT
GWBWI:
SNP +11
Lab +7
Con -12
LDm -33
Grn -59
Regarding the discussion upthread about whether Selby was good/bad for the Cons/Lab (delete as preferred): Con was +68, Lab +36. The positive result for Con there was outweighed by poorer results everywhere except East Lindsey.
|
|
