> Jobst Heitzig said: > > It is of no help for a minority to be represented proportionally when > > still a mere 51% majority can make all decisions!
> raphfrk replied > I disagree. The advantage is that it allows 'on the fly' > coalition re-organisation. I also disagree, but for a different reason and even when there is no chance at all of on-the-fly coalition re-organisation. A minority of 49% can be very effective in holding the majority to account and ensuring that the majority's proposals and decisions are subject to public scrutiny. Here in Scotland, our 32 local authority councils were all elected from single-member wards (small electoral districts) by FPTP. We had become used to one-party states, like Glasgow City Council where one party could hold 74 out of 79 seats for just 49.6% of the votes city-wide, or Midlothian Council where one party held 17 of the 18 seats with just 46% of the votes. When such distorted one-party rule persists for several decades the political effects are very serious. But we put an end to that in May 2007 when we elected all our councillors by STV-PR. Now there is effective opposition and scrutiny in every council and the minority voices are heard. James Gilmour No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.526 / Virus Database: 270.6.3/1610 - Release Date: 13/08/2008 16:14 ---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
