The House Article | Scrap FPTP in favour of this straightforward alternative

Save Our Democracy rally in Parliament Square | Image by: Mark Kerrison/Alamy Live News

4 min read33 min

As both Houses are preparing to discuss election issues at national level, a fairer system for election to the House of Commons should be a priority.

I left behind my support for pure first-past-the-post (FPTP) in 1988 – and am seeking to obtain party representation broadly in line with votes cast. It can be done with minimal change to the current electoral system.

In principle we should make use of one vote for individual party candidates for two purposes: once for the election of a candidate on a constituency basis and again for the political party on a regional basis. A Mixed-Member Proportional System created from one vote with two values.

The ballot paper would be exactly the same as at present. The voter would mark an ‘X’ against a single candidate for a constituency Member. The votes for parties would be aggregated on a regional basis so that regional Members would be designated from the highest runners up. Direct constituency Members would dominate the parliament in the order of about five to one compared to regional Members.

Such a process requires every Member of the Commons to stand for election in a constituency. No need for party lists. By-elections can easily be accommodated.

It allows maximum voter control. All Members would carry out constituency duties no different to the variety of work as at present.

It removes the temptation for tactical voting and the use of quotas or thresholds.

Tiny parties or splinter groups from main parties do not get a look in.

Maintaining devolution, the UK would be divided into single seat parliamentary constituencies as at present. If, say, the Commons remains around 650 Members then a split of 500 for constituency seats and 150 for regional seats could allow for a broad connection between votes cast for political parties.

Using the one ballot obviates the need for long essays explaining changes to voting.

Such a process requires every Member of the Commons to stand for election in a constituency. No need for party lists

Yes, the 500 constituencies would be a bit larger than at present. The remaining 150 would be the highest runners-up candidates on a regional basis.

Assuming the UK would be split into (say) 10 regions to contain 50 constituencies, there would then be an additional 15 regional Members.

Obtaining the regional Member from the same ballot paper has many advantages. All Members have to be on a ballot paper. The highest runners-up would form the regional Members. If one party won all the constituencies in a region then the highest runners-up would all come from other parties.

All Commons Members will have faced the electorate. Some of the regional runners-up could well have higher votes than constituency Members elsewhere. Today there are many existing Commons Members sitting in Parliament with less votes than runner-up candidates in other constituencies.

While no threshold is needed it would be a requirement that no runner up candidate would qualify unless their registered party had won at least one direct constituency. This elevates the role of representation of communities.

Tactical voting as of today would deny a party the chance of regional Members. So the electorate are for the first time encouraged to vote for what they want as a first priority.

One vote with two values dilutes pure FPTP.

A practical diluted FPTP is far better than an impractical pure proportional representation (PR) system.

Some years ago I put such a plan to Labour’s Plant Commission into electoral reform. After some discussion and ironing out of detailed issues it almost obtained a majority.

I do believe it can accommodate the world we live in today with different numbers of registered parties and a different number of candidates.

It puts the electorate in charge.

Lord Rooker is a Labour peer