1 / 10

The rocky progress of electoral reform in the UK 2010-11

The rocky progress of electoral reform in the UK 2010-11. Iain McLean Workshop on Electoral Methods KTH, May 2011. Outline of paper. Don’t let the lawyers do the math Districting and apportionment in the UK The historic situation The 1944 districting regime

alodie
Download Presentation

The rocky progress of electoral reform in the UK 2010-11

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The rocky progress of electoral reform in the UK2010-11 Iain McLean Workshop on Electoral Methods KTH, May 2011

  2. Outline of paper • Don’t let the lawyers do the math • Districting and apportionment in the UK • The historic situation • The 1944 districting regime • Apportionment in districting and in EP/other elections • The academics’ coup of 2003 • Ste-Laguë for districts, d’Hondt for parties • Academic wins and losses 2010-11

  3. Don’t let the lawyers do the math • UK tradition is non-numerate • Apportionment/districting until recently a game for politicians/lawyers only • Neither US (Jefferson/Hamilton/Webster)... • ...nor European (d’Hondt, Ste-Laguë) algorithms known • Non-lawyer academics have got involved recently, with mixed results

  4. Districting and apportionment in UK • House of Commons: single-member districts • Non-partisan but slow districting • Implicit apportionment issue: assign integer n to each county • Northern Ireland: use STV to protect minorities • Scotland, Wales, EP: mixed-member or list systems, implies dual apportionment (to districts, and to parties)

  5. The 1944 districting regime for the H of C • Politically bargained • Guarantees minima for Scotland, Wales, but England “not to suffer” • Equal-districts rule: • Low priority • Expressed as V/S: implies harmonic mean apportionment • Rules formally contradictory • From a contradiction anything follows

  6. New electoral systems; new (or newly understood) problems • EP elected 1979: from 1999 must use list PR • Scotland, Wales: parliaments since 1999; use MMP (i.e., Germany/NZ system) • Elected Lords???

  7. Apportionment and the EP • 1998: “dH fairer than S-L” • Forced politicians to admit error • But dH used for party apportionment • No explicit method for district apportionment • They probably used Hamilton but did not know it • Same for Scotland, Wales, since 1999

  8. The academics’ coup • Regulator (Electoral Commission) needed to change n of EP seats • Would have stumbled on non-monotonicity if had continued to use Hamilton • Consults on 4 methods, none valid • Academic consortium: only S-L (Webster) meets criteria • EC discarded all methods and adopts S-L.

  9. Academic wins and losses 2010-11 • Won on: • Equal districts • Non-contradictory rules • S-L recognised as unique unbiased system • Lost on: • Isle of Wight • Lords reform (perfect electoral system that will never be used)

More Related