At-Large Districting

[Adam D]

good idea or bad idea?

[Krash]

What is it?

[Adam D]

For legislative districts there are single-member and at-large districts.

Single-member is what the US uses for the house of representatives, where you elect a representative for the specific district.

At-large districts is what you Brits use to elect a number of representatives for a larger district based on proportional representation.

[Krash]

Originally posted by Adam D
For legislative districts there are single-member and at-large districts.

Single-member is what the US uses for the house of representatives, where you elect a representative for the specific district.

At-large districts is what you Brits use to elect a number of representatives for a larger district based on proportional representation.

Actually I think that last bit has changed - we ended up splitting the larger districts in to smaller ones.

So instead of having "Nottingham City", we now have the seats of "Nottingham East / West / Central" etc.

But no, i prefer the single member option (which is how I think ours are now worked out).

[Adam D]

Originally posted by Krash
Actually I think that last bit has changed - we ended up splitting the larger districts in to smaller ones.

So instead of having "Nottingham City", we now have the seats of "Nottingham East / West / Central" etc.

But no, i prefer the single member option (which is how I think ours are now worked out).

So there's only 1 representative for each district? When did this happen?

How has it affected the number of political parties and the viability of the smaller parties?

[Dionysos]

Depending on how they drew up the districts, it could be a very interesting option.

If there's one thing I wish we would take from British politics, it's the sessions where Blair meets with the House of Commons(Krash, correct me if I got that wrong). I would like to see Bush(or any sitting president) having to spend a session every week with Congress, especially if it's televised. Those HoC sessions are greatness.

[Adam D]

Originally posted by Dionysos
Depending on how they drew up the districts, it could be a very interesting option.

If there's one thing I wish we would take from British politics, it's the sessions where Blair meets with the House of Commons(Krash, correct me if I got that wrong). I would like to see Bush(or any sitting president) having to spend a session every week with Congress, especially if it's televised. Those HoC sessions are greatness.

Isn't Blair a member of the house of commons? Or is his seat in the house of lords?

For some reason I always ignored some of the finer points of the British system in comparative politics.

[Krash]

Originally posted by Adam D
Isn't Blair a member of the house of commons? Or is his seat in the house of lords?

For some reason I always ignored some of the finer points of the British system in comparative politics.

Blair is an MP, HoC - he has to win his constituency just the same as any other MP and is elected leader by his party, not by the people in a seperate vote (as it is in the US if I'm not mistaken).

With regards your first question, Adam, the number of seats remained about the same but it reduced, overall, the power that the party which would win a multi-seat district could exercise. The current system, though better than the previous for smaller parties and interest groups, still does not represent the interests of any group on a national scale.

To give you an example, I think the Labour party actually won the election, based on proportional representation, just before Tony Blair came in to power, yet because of our "first past the post" system they didn't get enough seats. The Liberal Democrats, too, often get far more votes proportionally than the number of seats they win at an election.

The House of Lords is not elected in ANY way, shape or form - they are all appointed by the government and they used to be hereditary, Tony Blair got rid of that in his constitutional reform.

Personally, I would like to see our HoC system remain the same, but have 75% of the HoL elected every 10 years, with 25% being appointed by the elected government at the time of elections. I personally like the fact that the HoL isn't (that) accountable to the electorate because it prevents knee-jerk, mass media induced, voting trends.