« Some quick news from around the world | Main | Myth 4: Proportional representation means policy is hidden in smoky backroom deals, not out in the open in a single party's manifesto »
October 09, 2006
Myth 3: Proportional representation, especially in multi-member constituencies, severs the sacred link between representatives and their electorates
The biggest argument against STV is its use of multi-member constituencies. From some angles, such as the one the Arbuthnott Commission identified, about the possibility that some wards (such as the Highlands in Scotland) would become geographically unmanageable, it is a valid argument.
Other angles, such as the commonly voiced concern that multi-member constituencies harm the link between a representative and their electorate, are much harder to defend, especially as some STV-detractors complain that where STV is used in Ireland, representatives are forced to pay too much attention to constituency issues.
That STV incentivises representatives to serve local interests is not hard to fathom. In multi-member constituencies, there is a healthy competition between the members (and because all members are elected on the same basis, the competition is distinctly less acrimonious than that between constituency and list members in Additional Member Systems). Also, as voters have a choice at elections between candidates of the same party, developing a personal profile is an advantage when it comes to getting re-elected.
And for those that think that multi-member constituencies would rob us of our 'Portillo' moments, when a high-profile candidate loses their seat: how do you think some of the more famous politicians in the country would fare if they had to stand against other candidates from their own party, in an area where that party can only be confident of winning, say, two of the three seats on offer? By dramatically reducing the number of safe seats, such moments are arguably much more likely under STV.
The link between constituents and their MP is at its worst under closed lists (which no one is recommending for Westminster elections) and in the two-thirds to three-quarters of seats under FPTP that are so safe that the winner is as good as pre-determined. It is at its best under STV.
Posted by pauldavies on October 09, 2006
