Nearly 100 Labour MPs to push for Andy Burnham to scrap ‘unfair’ voting system
Nearly 100 Labour MPs are supporting an amendment calling for a national commission on replacing first past the post with a different electoral system. The proposal would require the commission to report before the next general election, potentially allowing Labour to include reform in a future manifesto; supporters argue the current system does not reflect overall vote shares.
The amendment to the Representation of the People Bill has backing from more than 180 MPs, including 98 Labour MPs, and is due to return to Parliament on 2 September. Andy Burnham has previously endorsed proportional representation, but a Labour source said the government is currently focused on manifesto commitments such as votes at 16 and tighter donation rules, while electoral reform would require a future mandate. Opponents cited the 2011 referendum, in which voters rejected the alternative vote system, and argued the government should prioritise other issues.
- Labour backbenchers seek a commission on electoral reform.
- Over 180 MPs support the proposed amendment.
- Government says reform needs a future electoral mandate.
New here? Start with this
First past the post is the voting system used in UK general elections. In each constituency, the candidate with the most votes wins, even if they receive less than half the votes cast; the number of seats a party wins can therefore differ from its share of the national vote.
Proportional systems aim to make parties’ seats more closely reflect their share of votes, though different systems work in different ways. Andy Burnham, the Labour mayor of Greater Manchester, has previously supported proportional representation, while Labour MPs and other supporters have called for a commission to examine changing the system.
Changing how MPs are elected would affect how votes translate into seats and could influence the balance of power in Parliament. Voters rejected the alternative vote system in a 2011 referendum, but that was a different proposal from proportional representation.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Supporters argue that first past the post can give a party a large parliamentary majority without a comparable share of the vote, leaving many voters feeling unrepresented. A commission reporting before the next election would allow evidence-led consideration of alternatives and give voters a clear choice if reform were later put to them.
The case against
Opponents argue that changing the voting system is a major constitutional decision and should not be advanced without a clear mandate, particularly after voters rejected the alternative vote in the 2011 referendum. They also contend that the government should focus on its existing commitments and other priorities rather than devote time to electoral reform now.