In 1988, I joined an organisation called Charter 88. It demanded reform to the UK political system, and in particular supported proportional representation as the basis for electing governments, local authorities and all other forms of administration in the UK.
My belief in the need for a single transferable vote electoral system in this country, based upon multi-member constituencies returning up to 10 MPs each, has never wavered ever since. I have always believed that the Parliament that we now have mocks the idea of democracy because it fails to represent the interests of the people of this country.
Insult was added to injury when the Parliaments in Scotland, and now in Wales, were elected on a proportional representation basis, and when the same system came into use for other elections, such as those for mayors and local authorities in Scotland. The idea that people in the UK could not understand proportional representation became a mockery as a result, because the claim could only have been made of England at best, and I am reluctant to suggest that people in England are any less politically able when it comes to making a choice at the ballot box than the people of Wales, Scotland and, of course, Northern Ireland.
As a result, I was pleased to note Andy Burnham's suggestion that a commitment to proportional representation would be included in the next Labour Party manifesto, but at the same time deeply disappointed at his, as ever, inability to get on and deal with a problem.
The basis of electoral reform in this country could be agreed in no more than a year. If the Labour Party is committed to this process, then it can be sure that the Liberal Democrats, the Greens, the SNP, Plaid Cymru and parties in Northern Ireland will be as well. Reform has said they are in the past. The Tories may not be, but although they are the supposed official opposition in Parliament at present, no one thinks that they hold any significant clout in politics at present, and if a multiparty agreement for reform amongst all the other major parties represented in Westminster could be reached, and quickly, then there is no reason whatsoever why the next general election could not be held on a proportional representation basis, and no referendum is required. Law is made in this country by Westminster, and not through referenda.
Burnham has, then, failed us and, in the process, except for the indications that have been provided in polling data which I refer to in a separate post this morning, we could as a result be given a significant far-right, neo-fascist presence in Parliament.
I do, then, celebrate a move which is long overdue, and which I do sincerely hope will come to fruition for Westminster elections. I do, however, regret and condemn Labour's dithering, which has been during this Parliament, and during too many of its previous administrations, its defining characteristic, and which, on the basis of his announcements yesterday, Burnham appears determined to take with it into oblivion.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
There is a lot at stake here.
I look at how decisively the Cameron government just went about its business (wrecking just about everything) in 2010 and STILL Labour decides to tip-toe on matters that would actually improve anything.
I think its about time the Labour shared with us who is talking to them about what – why are they so cautious, what are they being told? We need to know what the lobbyists are saying and includes what is discussed at Charlies’ ‘Privy Council’ as well which should not exist in my view.
There is too much back seat driving in politics these days – these back seat drivers need dragging into the open. Maybe then we’d begin to understand why we are where we are.
I’m a little more optimistic. He has promised to set up a National Commission on Electoral Reform’, as proposed by the cross-party group of MPs (APPG) on electoral reform, which has about 150 members. Because of differences over systems (many in the Labour party in England are still wedded to the ‘Additional Member System’ despite its recent grossly disproportional result in Scotland’s 2026 election), it is necessary to have such a first stage to come up with a specific proposal. Electoral reformers and the public will hopefully engage with such a Commission. I will – through Liberal Democrats for Electoral Reform (lder.org) – be arguing strongly for STV. That stage at quickest is going to take a year or so.
In setting up such a commission, Burnham has postponed the decision on implementing it. We need to get as much public discussion of what electoral reform could mean – LDER are running a campaign on ‘Let’s Fix Politics’ based on how electoral reform is necessary if we are to fix major social problems. The key aim of such a campaign for public support is to persuade Burnham to act on the Commission’s report, if possible before the next election. Provided that this first stage comes up with an implementable solution (not requiring years of Boundary Commission detail), there is time for it to be done before an election in 2029, but the timing is tight.
Thank you
I actually think it is a good tactical move. The wildcard in all this is to put Reform and Farage on the spot. Forget the Tories, who live and breath FPTP.
For years, UKIP, Brexit Party and Reform, Farage supported PR. He was totally in favour of it. After the last election, he said that he would sit on any platform with any opponent in support of PR. Several months later, and a lead in the polls, Farage was saying FPTP is now his “friend.”
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/nov/03/nigel-farage-chameleon-xenophobia-reform
This shows what a chancer, opportunist and dangerous man Farage is. The fact that he dropped a policy simply because the polls went in his favour, shows he doesn’t care about democracy. Will he now argue for the retention of FPTP at the next election? Because the only reason he is doing so is that he thinks it now benefits him. I’d hope that would be an election loser for him. That people would finally wake up and smell the coffee on what Farage is all about.
And absolutely NO to a referendum. I would rather that PR be decided at a general election as a manifesto commitment of all parties in favour. Labour has never had PR as a commitment before. If they did it via the backdoor of putting a key constitutional change through Parliament — which they could, they would be slaughtered by the right wing media.
The key question is what Labour do after the next election if in power – hopefully needing support from Lib Dems and Greens.
I’ve waited long enough for PR and this is probably the best and only chance of it happening.