Proportional representation for dummies . . . by John Cleese
An SDP/Liberal alliance broadcast from 1987.
By Jon Bernstein Published 05 May 2010 14:29
So it took the New Yorker to remind us of a party political broadcast, shown 23 years ago, that may prove helpful today. Here's the ex-Python John Cleese explaining the inequity of first-past-the-post and the benefits of proportional representation in a 1987 election broadcast.
In the previous election, the SDP/Liberal alliance had gained a 26 per cent share of the vote, which in turn translated into just 23 seats. Or, as he notes:
It took 40,000 voters to elect a Labour MP, only 33,000 to elect a Conservative and it took ten times that number -- 340,000 voters -- to elect one Social Democrat or Liberal MP.
UPDATE: In the interests of balance, and in case anyone is thinking of voting for a party that might insist on electoral reform, here's the front page of today's Daily Mail. If you don't get the symbolism of a blind Britannia walking dangerously close to the edge of a cliff marked "Hung Parliament", the headline is there to help you out.
Latest tweets
More from New Statesman
- Tools and services:
- Polls
- Predictions
- Jobs
- Archive
- Magazine
- PDF edition
- RSS feeds
- Subscribe
- Special supplements
- Stockists

















1 comment
Advocates of PR and FPTP will have to compromise. For an Additional Member system which maintains the constituency link and provides as much proportion as you like, while avoiding party lists, contact me at hughlegge@uwclub.net. Document (7 pages) is too large to post on website.
Post new comment