There cannot be fair governance without fair votes
A government elected using an unequal voting system will treat people unequally — proportional representation is not an optional democratic extra
Is your government shit? Ever wondered why? Well, try building a glitzy skyscraper with dodgy foundations and see what happens.
Maybe for a few years you’ll get away with it. But sooner or later there’ll come a storm, an earthquake, or an epic house party, and those walls are going to crack. What then? Patch it up and keep your fingers crossed? Or acknowledge that the whole structure is flawed?
An electoral system is the foundation upon which we build a government. It needs to be fair. That means, put simply, that everyone’s vote should carry an equal weight. It seems an obvious thing to say, but sadly for me I live in a nation that continues to deny this basic democratic right.
Often when I talk about this issue, people tell me it’s something they broadly agree with, but that there are many other problems in the country they’d like to fix first, or that they care about more. They want a fairer tax system. They want equal access to a decent education. They want to see fast and reliable public transport not just in some places but all over the country. They want to eradicate poverty and guarantee a minimum standard of living. Which is great, I say. I want all those things too. But what incentive is there for a government to provide those things when said government has not been elected fairly? How likely is it that a government will choose to treat all voters equally, when those voters do not have an equal say in electing said government?
Under the United Kingdom’s existing electoral system, which has remained basically unchanged for more than a hundred years, voters are divided up into constituencies and told to vote for a local representative. Most constituencies, because of their homogeneity, elect a representative from the same party at nearly every election, with some having never changed in their entire history. This means the thoughts and feelings of the people living there can be safely ignored by said representative, who can be confident in knowing they will never face a challenge to their power.
The result of this unfairness is that the government will be making decisions on a daily basis not with consideration given to the thoughts and feelings of the entire nation, but to the thoughts and feelings of the small handful of people living in the marginal constituencies it needs to win to retain power. Similarly, the opposition party will not mould its policies and its manifesto for governance in a way it thinks will appeal to the whole nation, but in a way it hopes will appeal to the people living in the seats it needs to win the election.
This is not democracy.
I cannot emphasise this enough; a government elected using an unequal voting system will not treat people equally. Of course, there are other factors at play here, and electoral reform is by itself a guarantor neither of a healthy democracy nor a good government. The influence of money in politics, and the influence of those who own mass media, are also massively corrupting. Then there’s the small matter of the UK’s upper house being full of government appointees, religious leaders, and people who earned their power through the skill of escaping their mother’s womb.
The entire story of democracy is one of a ruling, powerful elite, gradually and grudgingly choosing to cede little portions of power only when it felt that not doing so would lead to a mass uprising or revolution. Votes were given to people with property before they were given to people without property. Votes were given to people with penises before they were given to people without penises. And while it’s nice that people can now vote regardless of either their wealth or their reproductive organs, it would be even nicer if all those votes were given equal status. This next portion of power that we must demand is a big one.
Most countries in Europe conceded the democratic right of equal votes decades ago. They have better governments as a result. Sadly, in the UK, which for some baffling reason claims to be one of the world’s beacons of democracy, we are still being ruled by a government elected by a minority of the voting population. This government is making catastrophically bad decisions every single day and has by far the worst record in Europe of protecting its citizens from the Covid-19 pandemic.
Most people in the UK want a progressive government, one that at the very least looks forward and makes decisions based on sound evidence and judgement, aiming to create a fairer and more equal society. Instead, we continuously get regressive governments, wanting to fight old battles, re-open old wounds, and destroy many of the good things for which people have fought in the past. Why? Because progress can be complicated, and people disagree over the best way to pursue it, an unfair electoral system allows the regressive minority to win more often than not.
With proportional representation, the descriptor of any voting system that apportions equal weight to every vote, a population that wants a progressive government will get a progressive government. That government will be composed of one or more progressive parties that will need to come together to discuss the best way forward. Progress of one kind or another will be made, because that’s what the people have demanded.
A voting system that gives every vote equal power creates a government that makes decisions with consideration of every voter. It doesn’t mean flawless governance, but it does at least mean that we all get to have a say in choosing it, shaping it, and ejecting it when we want something better.
