PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE
Elections (Proportional Representation) - 3 December 2024 (Commons/Commons Chamber)

I beg to move,

That leave be given to bring in a Bill to introduce a system of proportional representation for parliamentary elections and for local government elections in England; and for connected purposes.

We are experiencing an unprecedented political moment in this country. Our most recent general election, in July this year, returned a Government with the second biggest majority of seats of any Government since the second world war, but on the lowest share of the vote ever recorded for a winning party. The first-past-the-post voting system used in UK parliamentary elections has delivered two thirds of the seats in the House of Commons to the Labour party, which attracted just one third of the votes cast. Thanks to first past the post, nearly 60% of people who voted in the general election in July are not represented in Parliament by the candidate that they voted for. This is the most disproportionate election result that this country has ever seen.

We are also seeing record levels of disillusionment with the political process, with citizens becoming increasingly disengaged. This is reflected in the fact that turnout in the 2024 general election was the second lowest since 1918, at just under 60%. Over 40% of registered voters in the UK thought so little of the political process that they did not think it worth expressing a preference for one candidate over another.

There are many urgent and pressing challenges facing the UK today, but it is essential that the vast majority of its citizens actively support the mechanisms by which the decisions are made to address them. Increasing levels of disengagement threaten our ability to respond both to immediate challenges and to longer-term issues.

The Liberal Democrats believe—and have always believed—that a fair voting system is an essential bedrock of a functioning democracy. Democracy has proved to be the most effective and enduring governing system because it relies on a broad base of support across the population. A faulty voting system delivering a majority Government on a minority vote undermines democracy and its ability to deliver effective government. That is why I am presenting this ten-minute rule Bill. In the face of growing worldwide threats to democratic Governments and institutions, the UK needs to urgently reassert the value of participative democracy as an essential component in peaceful and prosperous societies. To do that, we need to respond to the democratic challenges that have emerged in our own country by adopting the provisions in the Bill.

Will the hon. Member give way?

With pleasure.

Order. I remind hon. Members that interventions are not taken during the ten-minute rule speech.

Apologies, Madam Deputy Speaker.

The Bill would introduce a system of proportional representation for parliamentary elections and local government elections in England. Liberal Democrats have been calling for the introduction of a single transferable vote system whereby candidates on a ballot paper are ranked according to the voter’s preference. That system would protect the critical local link between MPs and their constituencies, which is valuable in connecting individual voters with the Parliament that makes decisions on their behalf. Constituency MPs understand the specific issues that voters in their seat are experiencing and can connect them to the broader issues facing the country. A system of STV would preserve that aspect of our current system, but would also ensure that MPs enjoyed the broad support of the majority of their electors.

In the most recent general election, the number of MPs elected to this Chamber with more than 50% of the votes cast in their constituency was just 96—a decrease from 421 in the 2019 election and 476 in the general election before that. Ten of our colleagues in this Parliament were elected with fewer than 30% of the vote of their constituents who turned out. Far fewer MPs today can say they have the support of the majority of their constituents, or even a broad base of support, than ever before.

Proportional electoral systems have been used successfully for elections in the UK’s devolved Parliaments and Assemblies since the turn of the century. One of the advantages of adopting STV for all local elections in England, as well as general elections, is that it is already in use in two of the four nations that make up the UK. Now Welsh councils also have the power to adopt STV if they wish, it may soon be three out of the four nations. Proportional representation through an STV system is not alien to the UK; millions of people across the country are already familiar with voting in that way. The use of proportional systems that retain a close constituency link across the UK makes Westminster’s use of first past the post the outlier rather than the norm.

Changing the voting system for UK parliamentary elections is not the only thing that needs to be done to restore democratic engagement in this country. The shambles of the last Conservative Government created a crisis for democracy. Thanks to their cronyism, rule breaking, and sleaze scandals, public trust in Government is worryingly low. Successive Conservative Prime Ministers acted without integrity and treated Parliament and the people with disdain. In the previous Parliament, the Conservatives weakened the independence of the Electoral Commission and introduced disproportionate voting systems for mayoral elections in England and the undemocratic voter identification scheme.

The Liberal Democrats believe that public confidence in democracy is vital for effective and functioning Governments and that, consequently, we must take all possible steps to rebuild public trust in politics. We will continue to call on the Government to scrap the voter ID scheme and will hold them to account for their conduct in office. But the most effective change we can make to clear up the mess the Conservatives left is to change the voting system and ensure that the voices of voters across the British Isles can properly be heard.

I am glad to know that support for electoral reform comes from not only the Liberal Democrat Benches but across the House. I am pleased that Labour Members in particular agree that we need proportional representation after voting overwhelmingly in favour of PR at their conference two years ago. More importantly, recent polling shows that a majority of the British public are in favour of scrapping first past the post and moving to proportional representation. The all-party parliamentary group for fair elections was launched last week with the support of over 100 MPs. Its report “Free But Not Fair” highlights many of the structural issues that have led to the decline of public trust in politics and engagement with elections.

We must take urgent action to protect democratic processes and institutions in the UK from threats here and abroad. We need to listen to the warning bells sounded by the general election that the citizens we seek to serve, and who must abide by the laws we pass, are becoming disenchanted with the political process. If we want to continue to be a beacon of democracy across the world, we must ensure that it serves its purpose in giving a voice to the people and delivering prosperity and stability. We cannot do the latter if we fail to do the former.

First past the post is a broken and unfair system. This summer, the Labour party won a landslide election victory, securing 63% of seats in the House of Commons in return for just 34% of the vote. The system leaves millions of voices unheard and creates a divisive, adversarial political climate where collaboration is discouraged and accountability is often sidestepped. The Liberal Democrats have long championed proportional representation, advocating for a voting system where every vote truly counts. We must modernise our electoral system, create a fairer process to engage voters, listen to the needs of our constituents and rebuild trust in politics.

I support continuing with the first-past-the-post system. When our constituents arrived at their polling station on 4 July, they knew what to expect: if their chosen candidate received more votes than any other, that is who would be elected as their MP. There is elegance to this simplicity. In our democracy, the person who wins the most votes in each of our 650 constituencies wins the seat. It cannot be denied that voters would be confronted with a far more complicated system if any type of proportional representation were to be introduced.

Crucially, after the election, every one of our constituents knew who to turn to if they wished to contact their Member of Parliament. For me, that is the most important feature of our democratic system. In a more proportional system, such as the single transferable vote system advocated by some across the House, constituencies would be represented by multiple Members of Parliament from various parties. Clearly, that would polarise our communities, and voters might contact only the MP they had voted for, which would absolve us of our duty to represent all our constituents. It would be far too difficult for voters to get to know the several politicians representing their area, and to hold them to account at the next general election. Constituents struggling with complex issues may already have exhausted other options. We do not want to make them ask which MP they should contact as well.

First past the post creates a strong connection, for good or bad, between residents and their representatives. Under our current system, I can represent my home of Broxbourne. Every one of my neighbours—whether they have an issue with their housing, their pension or anything else—knows who to turn to. There is a clear link that would simply be lost under a more proportional system. Having a sole representative for a small constituency allows each of us in this place to remain grounded, and ensures that every corner of our United Kingdom is properly represented.

There is also a simplicity and stability in the results that emerge from our first-past-the-post general elections. For the most part, first past the post produces Governments with clear workable majorities that can last the full length of their term. Voters want strong Governments who can deliver the policies in their manifestos, not the chaos of constant disagreement and repeated elections. Under proportional representation, the party that receives the most votes does not automatically or quickly form the next Government. Instead, as we are seeing now in Ireland, political parties go behind locked doors to do deals among themselves. Discussions last for months after the general election has taken place—that is plainly undemocratic—and voters are given no further say. When a coalition agreement eventually comes, it satisfies no one.

Under the first-past-the-post system, each party presents its policies to the British people at the general election. That is the basis on which votes are cast in our general elections. In first-past-the-post elections, it is clear who will be in power and who will be in opposition. As we saw in the recent general election, it is possible for voters to change who governs them if that is the choice they wish to make.

Finally, I remind the House that the British people have made clear their opposition to proportional representation. In 2011, 13 million people voted to remain—sorry, to retain. [Interruption.] It was less people than voted for that. In 2011, 13 million people voted to retain the first-past-the-post system, and at the last general election neither of the largest two parties proposed a change in the electoral system. For those reasons, I think it would plainly be wrong to make any changes to elections in the United Kingdom.

Question put (Standing Order No. 23).