@normankyle7831 Some politicians cannot help having high expense bills - those representing constituencies in the far reaches of the UK (Cornwall, northern Scotland, Northern Ireland) have to divide their time between those constituencies and Westminster on a weekly basis. They are inevitably going to have to do a lot more travelling at greater expense, as well as paying large bills for accommodation (or even maintaining two homes) simply to carry out their duties effectively.
Weneed *Mid-Terms* as they do in the US. Not arbitrary bye-elections to replace retiring, sacked or dead MPs. Mid -Terms are meant, at least try, to keep Congress, in the US, honest and accountable (though even they can be, um, manipulated). We in the UK just *cannot* have to wait 5 years between GEs, and even then have to wait for the sitting PM to call a date, like F1 cars idling behind a race leader waiting for him to decide to take off, trying to surprise the pack, to gain an advantage, after a safety car incident. SMH...
@MS-19 but that is reasonable. I think OP refers to instances where expenses are not justified to the work. Like if I claimed a night out with my friends for dinner and drinks my company would straight reject that expense. Or if I needed to fly abroad but chose first class and the most expensive hotel there was, that would seem excessive and unjustified. Claiming for multiple homes etc. The public need more transparency.
This is only the beginning. There will now have to be a white paper, then a first and second reading and then the House of Lords. We can only cross our fingers and hope that this is a way past these corrupt and self satisfying main party’s .
Much as I support the idea, I highly doubt that a party that has won an election under FPTP would bring forward any measures to replace it. Indeed, under that system, far from having a 150 seat majority, they would find themselves having to form a coalition. So I have no great hopes that they will do anything about it - even if they did vote in favour of it at their conference. But as a beginning, it is a good step.
@@ChrisAndCats and do you think the Tories wouldn't ? ReformUK wouldn't? they are all in the same pockets of the minority rich above us all. First past the post is what ensures the largest minority of voters can always be pushed to voting only ever for a centrist to a right winger no matter the party, which ensures nothing can nor will ever change for the fortunes of the top 1000 richest British people whose fortunes doubled from 700 billion combined to 1.5 trillion combined, just in the last 5 years while the majority workforce below was dying and going bankrupt from Covid and inflation spikes caused by their proxy wars in service of NATO for profit expansions at any externalised cost to the lot of us.
This appears on the surface a simple idea. Until you examine Europe with its decades off PR. There its down to a fine art in how too dissipate your opponents. Plus it ensures that the populist hideous vote can be blocked. Thats why France is stagnating & going bust. Germany is kaput as an economy. Denmark is trampled by the EU like Poland. Plus they use tarrif wars as the last protectionist barriers. In principle it looks a no brainer. But theory & reality do clash. Can you vote for none off the above. I don't think so. She nearly said the import the vote , but caught herself in time. Politicians are really are good at crashing economies and destroying credibility. The democratic Deficit is on them. Just like GDP to Debt ratio off 98%. Nice pitch . avoided all the pitfalls. Unity is in very short supply.
An MP doing the job there paid to do and saying in parliament what the whole country are thinking and saying but photo ID must stay as that would stop fraudulent voting
No... It was not. It was created so that local areas had a person who they elect to represent them inside the parliament. You're just arguing for a party to put a random person in power then you have to hope that they care about whatever backwater you're from.
@@johnbraithwaite863 There are lots of ways of dealing with that. Multi-member constituencies with single transferable vote or the D'hondt top-up system used in Scotland or, preferably, a combination of these would give both robust local representation and national proportionality. The current system gives neither. It is possible for someone to win a constituency with less than 50% of the local vote and for a government to be elected by a minority.
NO...we will hardly ever have a majority and nothing will ever get done....Your mind has a short memory...you have forgotten Brexit already....look how long that debate went on until finally Boris got a majority
@christophertaylor1708 Actually, the Liberal Party had 6375 votes and won no seats. The Liberal Democrats had 3,519,143 votes and took 72 seats. Still, it's a valid point and thank goodness Sarah Olney has raised it so well in Parliament. This is what we need petitions about, not calls for a snap election so soon after the last one!
@@kevincarbb2819 Germany has been very well run for decades, most of it under coalition governments. The fact is that under First Past the Post, we have a government elected on a minority of the vote. That was caused in no small part by voter apathy, and it has led to further voter apathy in this country. Voter apathy is ultimately the worst enemy of democracy.
@@craigs71 Yes, the 2015 election was the best example of its deficiency. UKIP had over 4 million votes, the third-highest share of the vote, and gained 'ONE' seat. Under a PR voting system, they would have had over 80 seats, but turkeys don't vote for Christmas!
What of voter ID? This is the Lefts attempt to sneak in foreign votes via students and their families and by illegal immigrants along with PR, which is wanted and needed.
Be careful what you wish for. We have PR in Scottish Elections. It is a nightmare. We have endured the fit up of SNP and The Greens working the system. If the SNP are maybe lying second in a constituency and can’t win it.Because it’s marginal with the Greens and another party they get their SNP supporters to vote for the Greens. Because of that we have been hit with diabolical socialists parties being in charge for 17 years who are mad hatters and want nothing but independence that the Scottish people don’t want. You could end up in England with Labour and Liberals with the Greens ruling for years because they will oust other parties from ever being in power.
Absolutely awesome speech beautifully and articulately delivered with actual facts and figures that make sense. Thank you, this is what politics should be delivered as not the bickering school playground antics we have had to endure over recent years. It was an absolute pleasure to watch and listen to that speech. Thank you.
Facts? Did you miss the part where she called to scrap voter id and said that it is "undemocratic"? They want FPP scrapped (which I agree with, who wouldnt?) but they also want voter ID scrapped so that anyone who anybody from anywhere can vote. That should tell you what her true motive is. Never trust the lib dems, they are worse than Labour and Tories put together. They are the UKs version of the corrupt US democrat party.
It's not perfect but it's a damn sight better than what we have at present. We also need a Swiss style referendum system for a better democratic census. Nice to see SOME MPs bothered to turn up!
I agree,i have always been in favour even when the party i voted for won the election.You cannot have a system where a party win 18% of votes and end up with 4 M.Ps (later upped to 5) It will encourage more people to vote as they won't feel their vote won't matter and it will also stop the stupid tactical voting fiasco.
@@kevincarbb2819 On the other hand, we could be like Germany where the constitution requires a four-year gap between the assembly of the Bundestag and the next election.
Wrong, wrong, wrong. Look at France: the most popular party by far - Le Pen’s - was squeezed out of the possibility of governing because the other parties colluded to ensure that outcome. Proportional Representation is NOT flawless and is no panacea.
Absolutely not. The minor parties made a corrupt bargain, but PR means that NO MPs need to care about their constituents. Fraud in London will rule all
I'm not justifying what they are spending it on, but surely you can recognize that you can gain a massive a amount of international leverage by doing that. The classic example is the USA's spending in the military, which seems stupid, but it's that same military that allows the USA to take in multiples more in global leverage. Big picture or something
The amount of support and money spent in running spy planes and fighter jets over Gaza is way too much and has no benefit for us. If that money was put in the NHS we would have no issues with the health department. If America gave the 5billion they give israel to their citizens, each person would be entitled to 15k. America is lobbied to spend for a foreign country and im sure the majority of tge citizens are not for it
The party currently I will not allow this to happen. Don't be suprised if they don't manipulate a way around this. Also do what they need to do to try and fix it for a 2nd term. Usually changing voting boundaries. Dividing strong Labour areas into 2 seperate areas . Usually,,inner city areas with a strong Muslim community. Whilst expanding Tory Voting areas. The amount of times boundaries have changed always seems to happen when it's ztories or labour that have got into no 10.
New Zealand currently has a three party government as a result of the Proportional Representative voting system we have. It works very well to get more people's views heard and holds parties in check who if they were governing alone would do all kinds of things the voters never asked for. Definitely less corruption with PR.
This is a fantastic speech by this lady she is showing all other MPs how they should do there jobs MPs are paid to be there for there constituency and not one is doing the job there paid for all there INTERESTED in is CLAIMING as many freebies as possible and claiming big exspences while the nation gets treated like 💩 this wonderful lady is speaking up for the nation at least one MP is making sure we are heard in parliament thank you
Agree with much of what this MP is proposing. (why you twice mentioned this MP's gender I do not know, as it is totally irrelevant) The MP lost me when declaring that ensuring fair and transparent elections ie voter ID, to be non democratic. Ensuring one British citizen one vote, is the bare minimum of a democratic system.
So this squeaked through by 2 votes, with half of the Commons not present. But it passed! Ever since I could vote more than 40 years ago I have looked forward to PR becoming a reality in this country.
@@GerryT.we didn’t vote for what was not in the manifesto but what was in it, labour have misled the general,public as per normal I think you need to recognise that fact.
@rokketron I'm perfectly aware, I disagree with Labours decision re winter fuel payments, but that's it. I totally agree with Farmers paying inheritance tax, top many rich people have bought land to evade inheritance tax. And they get treated a bloody sight better than the rest of us. Any Government taking over the shitshow the Tories left after 14 years is going to take time to put things right, it 6 months, nit even 4 years. You people have very short memories.
The overwhelming majority go to work in a top down anti democratic capitalist enterprise that prevents democracy from entering into 70% of life spent at work and incentivises employers to use the wealth they extracted from their workers against those workers when they leave work where a sliver of democracy exits, so as to ensure democracy can never be used to undo profit making for the few at any externalised cost to society and nation, and you think the symptom of corrupted government by this economic system is the problem, rather than the economic system itself that incentivised the rich minority to corrupt democracy buy buying the majority of centrist to right wing politicians parties and media simultaneously, I mean, it is AN issue, but it is far from THE issue as if all we do is tinker with how we vote rather than significantly alter the economic system to end the ability of the capitalist minority to corrupt government/democracy, I can promise you PR wont make a lick of difference to the overall outcome. I am not against electoral reform, but it is not the primary problem, the incentives and rewards of capitalism unto the capitalist minority to corrupt governance via bribery and intimidation, IS the problem and that minority is rewarded lavishly for their efforts in that.
Completely agree with everything except I wouldn't call Voter ID undemocratic. It's hardly undemocratic to ask for people to prove they're actual citizens of the country they're voting in.
It does stop a lot of legal voters from voting though, unless you allow cheaper forms of ID to be used, then I’m totally for it. That or bring down the cost of replacing passports.
@TheTwinn in other countries you can get state ID for free and its mandatory to vote or pay a fine. Mandatory voting would stop apathy and maybe restore democracy but I bet a lot of people would just put x in a donkey and not realise it.
You can't just turn up at a polling station and demand a vote. You have to be on the Electoral Roll, or your name isn't on the list. Voting fraud is very rare in the UK, and voter ID requirements are discriminatory against younger voters. The old system worked fine. Why change it? Answer: The tories thought it would help them. They thought wrong...
We need PR but this bint is also asking to scrap voter id meaning that anyone who is anybody from anywhere can vote, meaning she wants PR so that they can hoard votes from illegal immigrants.
Where are they all , surely can't all be in the bar , to me this shows totally disrespect to such an important issue, What are they afraid of ,us becoming a democracy ???
It's well worth looking up what it is that MPs do apart from being in the Commons chamber for debates and asking questions of ministers. For one thing, there's another chamber (Westminster Hall) where business takes place simultaneously. There are the MPs offices, in which they liaise with their constituency offices and work on matters that they will subsequently deal with when they return to the constituencies they represent. There are meeting rooms, committee sessions... No person can be in more than one place at a time, and while we may not like it if our MP is absent for an issue that we would have liked them to attend to, chances are that they had other things to do which were no less important, especially for people in constituencies. Everything is recorded in Hansard, so MPs can always see what has been said and voted on even if they weren't in the Commons at the time.
That’s because the majority of MPs are labour and torys, and neither of them want PR, because it means they can’t get their established majorities as easy
@@dannynufer1296many Labour mp voted in favour of this. Many tory mp did not though. Cannot remember seeing any involvement from reform though, make that as you want.
@@BoyeeSmudger Make this as you want too, she asked for PR and to scrap voter ID in the same speach. No voter id means anyone can vote and under a PR system that would be the end of us. Lib dems with their ulterior motives again...
As it should be. If you're not familiar with Maslow's Hierarchy of needs, it might be worth considering why it is important for MPs, our lawmakers, to have certain needs met if we're to have laws we're happy to abide by.
Well said lady! How disgusting to see Labor members squirreling away....they did not even hide the fact that they are leaving because this issue is being introduced.....seen from here USA and noticing that the members of that party will not even hide the fact that they do not care about the UK people....... PRETTY DISGUSTING!!!
It may be interesting for you to look at the policies of the Liberal Democrats here in the UK. Then let us know if they come across as for the people of the UK.
Would more people vote if we had PR. At the moment we seem to be stuck with the uni party. How many people are fed up with the Conservative and Labour Parties. Time for a change.
The last time all our votes counted was when we voted for Brexit. Regardless of how you feel about that particular outcome, one thing that was very clear was that MPs did not like it, and they fought to prevent it from happening. Call me cynical, but on that basis alone, I don't think there is much appetite among MPs for a system where our votes count.
@@stephenlee5929 That wasn't for proportional representation but AV. The only indication we have for how many people support PR is through opinion polls, which as stated in the video routinely return a majority in favour for ditching FPTP and introducing PR.
@@decs0r No not 109%, Only 42% bothered to vote. Of that 42% , 67% voted against and 33% voted for, there were some spoilt papers but I can't be bothered with decimals of percentages here.
@@stephenlee5929 That's a complete lie, the referendum was on AV which is not a proportional voting system and anyone can tell that by doing the most basic research. People who want to oppose proportional representation always repeat this lie.
I am not opposed to a PR system but I do NOT agree with the Transferable Vote system because that means some people’s vote count twice and that is inherently UNFAIR. We had a referendum on this when the Lib Dem’s were in coalition with Cameron’s Tories and we rejected it. This is a decision that MUST NOT be taken by Parliament alone. It needs to be put to the people via a referendum.
So many lies, or maybe you're just uninformed. The Lib Dem coalition vote was for ALTERNATIVE VOTE, not STV. Totally different system. Totally different design, totally different impact. You also claim it would let someone's vote be counted twice. How? You need to explain how, because no, it actually doesn't. The STV system merely moves votes from A to B when the first option count does not result in a majority. There's no double-count involved. More than a dozen nations already use STV with excellent results. So you also have to explain why it's so bad, when all the evidence from those who have tried it shows it is actually really well received. Or, maybe, just stop making things up?
@@tonymarkey6525,. She lasted one and a bit terms. First time she was in coalition with the populist party. She only went full dictator in her second term but was easily forced out. (Three- year terms in NZ). Under FPP she'd have been there for another two terms..PR gives power to the people.
@peterrat100 They are involved in other debates (there's a second chamber, Westminster Hall) and in committees, and in meetings with ministers, and in meetings with constituents, and in their offices working on constituency matters which they will also deal with in person when they return to their constituencies. If you think that the role of the MP is just to sit in the Commons, listen, think and question ministers or contribute to debates, you really need to learn more about what MPs do and realise that there's much, much more to it than just that.
@@chrismaguire3667 On their way to other business, just as important as this debate which they can refer to later via the official transcript in Hansard.
Let's hope that this gets the ball rolling. After all the noise that Reform UK Ltd have been making about the system being unfair, it seems strange that their MPs couldn't be bothered to turn up.
@@Formula1J Farage has one of the worst attendance records in Parliament (the same as when he was an MEP) and I was targeting a party/limited company which is always banging on about the voting system being unfair. This was their chance to speak and they were hiding in the bar.
@fanfeck2844 Well Nige was in a posh hotel having a meltdown about there being no full fat milk (although there was a suspicious gap in the labels) and it being a woke, leftie plot.
It's called the electoral register and only British citizens are on it. Not on the list? Can't vote. It works fine as it is. Stop with the Americanisation of British politics.
Because theres more to it than you think. The largest cities in the UK have a minority of British people living in them, particularly London that as a whole makes up ~12.5% of the entire UK population. All in all the people living in cities across the UK make up almost 85% of the population. She not only called for PR but also to end voter id which would allow anyone and their uncle to vote. Cities tend to have the largest percentage of voters likely a herd mentality thing and since the largest cities harbour a lot of migrants, (both legal and illegal(which doesn't seem to mean much nowadays)) PR could have devastating consequences for native Brits, especially if if comes with the abolishment of voter ID.
@@DustinHoward-xh9sl you’re assuming they all do that? Every single one? Or should we look into the statistics and see which parties do what before being able to make that sort of sweeping statement?
I'm ambivalent on scrapping it if the forms of ID acceptable were broadened. For example why is a TfL Pensioner travelcard accepted but not the TfL young person card?
Single Transferable Vote [STV] is what London used to elect its Mayor, until very recently. You get a first choice and second choice on the ballot paper. If your first choice doesn't win your vote gets transferred to your second choice. That isn't a proportional system for the votes cast. What we found in London was that the second choices were nearly always for main parties. The system didn't allow the smaller parties in with their new ideas but tended to boost the main parties voter share for their own credibility. I think its a bit of a swizz to call it proportional.
Voter fraud is so low that ID requirements stop more legal voters from voting then it stops fraudulent votes from happening. I couldn’t vote in our last election because my passport was lost. Being under 65 I had to either fork out for a new one or not vote. Not having 100 quid to spare I just didn’t vote.
Totally agree. They've sneaked that into the bill in order to have thousands of votes from recent arrivals and foreign students and their families. This will keep the left in power despite PR.
Disagree, they do not need my id to take tax, they do not need my id to throw me in prison or force me to perform military service in a war, so why the hell should I need id to vote?
@alexanderd8740 - Your comparisons are ridiculouse! What then do you suggest is used to stop fraudulent voting, ie., those voting for someone else? If you are too stupid to get a FREE ID then you should not vote anyway. The elderly will likely have a required ID so that ain't an excuse. Only the most useless Liberal Democrats and the socialists are against this because they want to cheat! Why on earth would you object otherwise?
@@alexanderd8740why is it such an issue to flash a form of ID to ensure voter fraud is reduced? We don’t live in a high-trust society anymore, times have changed. This is nothing more than an attempt to protect our democratic voting system,at least as far as I can work out. It’s not like it empowered the government in any way.
@@f104G so anyone can vote right? Just like the US, allow millions of people into the country yet no voter ID to cast a vote. Seems logical 🤔 how else do you ensure each vote cast is legitimate? Cast by someone who has the right of a British national to vote.
I must say I found the idea that voter ID is undemocratic to be odd. It seems to me to be a common sense introduction to increase the validity of a democratic vote. I've always found it strange when I would turn up at a polling station and they would just ask my name and cross me off the list. Literally anyone could turn up, claiming to be me, and cast a vote in my name. And then I don't get to vote. So anything that removes the possibility of that happening has to be a welcome improvement. I'd be interested to hear any explanations as to why it is "undemocratic" as the lady says.
@@WelshEnZo you can't get on the electoral register if you aren't a legitimate citizen. Postal votes don't need ID. Voter ID wasn't brought in to address voter fraud, it was gerrymandering, pure and simple.
National PR yes. STV, almost certainly not. STV has been proven to pull votes away from the extremes and towards the least objectionable candidate. Political analysis indicates that with STV, the last election would have resulted with the Liberal Democrats winning a landslide election, with Labour in second. Reform would have been unlikely to achieve any seats at all. They would have been the first choice for a LOT of people, but they would not have been the _second_ choice for many at all, so the runoff would have forced them aside.
Exactly why she wants both an abolishment of voter id and PR. PR with the abolishment of voter ID would be the absolute worst thing for this country, it would have devastating consequences.
Excellent speech talking of the need to preserve democracy etc but remember, it was the majority of MPs and Parties on all sides of the house, who sought to stifle the process of leaving the EU and who attempted to go against the will of the people back in 2016 over Brexit.
A vote of 51.5% vs 48.5% does not indicate that a population has decided on a path forwards. It indicates that a population is as thoroughly unsure and undecided as it is possible to be. The closer to 50%, the weaker the mandate. **No** major constitutional decision should be made by **any** democratic society on the basis of such mixed feelings.
The biggest democratic and PR vote in UK history. This MP and party wanted to overturn that epitome of PR. Strange how these poloticians can believe one thing today but tomorrow it will be bad.
I have lived in the Labour-controlled city of Coventry all my life. Since reaching voting age I have ALWAYS voted Tory or lately Reform. I am now 80. My votes have NEVER counted. So, YES to PR or STV or any system where voters KNOW their votes will finally count.
They may agree with changing to a proportional representative system but disagree with the particular proportional voting system selected for the bill.
What you are missing is that you believe having ID is the only way to check eligibility. It is not. There was never an issue with illegal votes in the UK, it's not a thing that ever happened in meaningful numbers. The tabloids drummed up a whole bunch of invented, simplistic "logic" and false claims of illegal migrants voting because ID was not required. It was fake. Total invention. Reality was that in order to vote your name had to be registered, and when you register the government perform all sorts of eligibility checks against you in the background - Your national insurance, birth certificate, residency info, criminal status, etc. Illegal migrants do not get on that list, period. On the other side, there are millions of eligible voters who have no ID for various perfectly OK reasons. For example, someone who can't afford to go abroad on holiday won't have a passport, and might also not be able to afford a car, so won't have a driving licence. ID requirements disproportionately affect the poor, the elderly, and the disabled, and they only exist because lies were invented to make people afraid. THAT is why they are undemocratic: They trade a tiny, tiny gain, mostly invented, for the very real disenfranchisement of millions of people, excluding them from voting for no real reason. It only makes sense if the government provides ID to every single eligible voter for free.
The irony here is that if we had PR then Reform (the party for the people of the UK) then they would have more seats than the literal undemocrats. Thanks Lib Dem’s.
They wont if she gets her way though. She didn't just call for PR she also called for the abolishment of voter ID. Think about that for a sec, why would they want to abolish voter id and bring in PR at the same time? These people are crooks.
Why the single transferable vote? there are other forms of P.R. Local MP's for local constituency is also outdated, any elected M.P could familiarise themselves with local issues, with local guidance, in a very short time.
Had PR been in effect when we had the recent GE, then reform would have gotten a sizeable share of the vote, more than the lib dems got Reform could very well have gotten enough seats to be a legitimate opposition to government even if they weren't sizeable enough to become the main opposition, although given the sheer defeat of the tories that is debatable
@@vallarfaxgaming @darynsax Even under PR, Labour would still have had the most seats in July 2024. Sarah Olney, in her contribution to the debate recorded in this video, referred to the Additional Member System which is used in the Scottish Parliament and the Welsh Senedd elections. If that system had been used for the Westminster election, the result would have been: LAB 236 CON 157 REF 94 LIB DEM 77 GREEN 42 SNP 18 PC 4 Northern Irish Parties 18 Others (incl. Speaker) 6. My question to you is: if you were Labour's leader, how would you build a coalition government around those figures? With 236 seats, you would be 90 short of an overall majority. Ideologically, you would not be in favour of working with the Conservatives or Reform UK; the Liberal Democrats would bring you up to being just 13 seats short, but they would be very cagey about going into a coalition after their experience of 2010-2015.... You would probably work best with the Greens, but you'd still need 48 seats just to get over the winning line. Bringing in the SNP would take you to within 30 seats of the majority; Plaid Cymru could take you to within 26, and perhaps you might get the Northern Irish SDLP and Alliance on your side, but would still be some way short. The 6 "others" wouldn't be much use to you - one would be the Speaker who has to be politically neutral, and the others would be independents who (in this particular election) took their seats from you, e.g. Jeremy Corbyn in Islington, or the various seats with relatively high Muslim populations which voted against Labour as a result of its stance on the situation in Gaza. Tricky one, isn't it?!
@MS-19 Then Labour would have to run a minority government on a supply and confidence basis. Which to my mind would not necessarily be a bad thing. It would dampen their tendency toward idealogical excess by requiring that they would have to rely on at least some opposition support to get any innovative bill through parliament. That would be the case whichever party was running a minority government. I would suggest that those bills that were passed would be more likely to be both necessary and in the public interest, instead of being driven by party ideology or advantage. We might even have meaningful debates in parliament instead of it just being the rubber stamp for the executive that it is now.
We HAVE "proportional representation" in Australia, and yet we have a Federal Government that came to power with only 32% of "first preference" votes, they received sufficient support as a second choice, from minor party voters to make it happen.
We must create a system where MP’s are held accountable for their actions.
They need to remember that we are their master and they aren't ours!
There is a system but it's made up of broken and corrupt met police and judges!
@craigs71 Unfortunately, the Tories have been acting like this in the last 14 years 😢😢😢 Damage is done😢😢😢
@@kevinhui7051 Don't allow you prejudice to cloud your judgement, Labour are equally as bad!
Never
Going
To
Happen
Should be able to vote politicians out of office if they claim excessive amounts in expenses.
Should be able to vote politicians out of office
@@1ForTheShieldz We can. It just requires enough support for one or another of their opponents in the seats they contest at each election.
@normankyle7831 Some politicians cannot help having high expense bills - those representing constituencies in the far reaches of the UK (Cornwall, northern Scotland, Northern Ireland) have to divide their time between those constituencies and Westminster on a weekly basis. They are inevitably going to have to do a lot more travelling at greater expense, as well as paying large bills for accommodation (or even maintaining two homes) simply to carry out their duties effectively.
Weneed *Mid-Terms* as they do in the US. Not arbitrary bye-elections to replace retiring, sacked or dead MPs. Mid -Terms are meant, at least try, to keep Congress, in the US, honest and accountable (though even they can be, um, manipulated). We in the UK just *cannot* have to wait 5 years between GEs, and even then have to wait for the sitting PM to call a date, like F1 cars idling behind a race leader waiting for him to decide to take off, trying to surprise the pack, to gain an advantage, after a safety car incident. SMH...
@MS-19 but that is reasonable. I think OP refers to instances where expenses are not justified to the work. Like if I claimed a night out with my friends for dinner and drinks my company would straight reject that expense. Or if I needed to fly abroad but chose first class and the most expensive hotel there was, that would seem excessive and unjustified. Claiming for multiple homes etc. The public need more transparency.
"Becoming disenchanted"? The understatement of the century.
This is only the beginning. There will now have to be a white paper, then a first and second reading and then the House of Lords. We can only cross our fingers and hope that this is a way past these corrupt and self satisfying main party’s .
Much as I support the idea, I highly doubt that a party that has won an election under FPTP would bring forward any measures to replace it. Indeed, under that system, far from having a 150 seat majority, they would find themselves having to form a coalition.
So I have no great hopes that they will do anything about it - even if they did vote in favour of it at their conference.
But as a beginning, it is a good step.
Labour will likely fight this tooth and nail.
Con- Lab will not give it a chance, unfortunately.
@@ChrisAndCats and do you think the Tories wouldn't ? ReformUK wouldn't? they are all in the same pockets of the minority rich above us all. First past the post is what ensures the largest minority of voters can always be pushed to voting only ever for a centrist to a right winger no matter the party, which ensures nothing can nor will ever change for the fortunes of the top 1000 richest British people whose fortunes doubled from 700 billion combined to 1.5 trillion combined, just in the last 5 years while the majority workforce below was dying and going bankrupt from Covid and inflation spikes caused by their proxy wars in service of NATO for profit expansions at any externalised cost to the lot of us.
This appears on the surface a simple idea. Until you examine Europe with its decades off PR. There its down to a fine art in how too dissipate your opponents. Plus it ensures that the populist hideous vote can be blocked. Thats why France is stagnating & going bust. Germany is kaput as an economy. Denmark is trampled by the EU like Poland. Plus they use tarrif wars as the last protectionist barriers. In principle it looks a no brainer. But theory & reality do clash. Can you vote for none off the above. I don't think so. She nearly said the import the vote , but caught herself in time. Politicians are really are good at crashing economies and destroying credibility. The democratic Deficit is on them. Just like GDP to Debt ratio off 98%. Nice pitch . avoided all the pitfalls. Unity is in very short supply.
The most refreshing common sense I’ve heard in parliament for years!
Apart from the fact, it ends voter ID.
Shariah law another step closer
An MP doing the job there paid to do and saying in parliament what the whole country are thinking and saying but photo ID must stay as that would stop fraudulent voting
@@johnholmes5674not going to happen
@@Buddha2024-w7ywhat's wrong with that? It's the norm now and seems to work fine. What's your excuse against it?
Fully support this, the FPTP process was created for a two party Parliament and doesn’t provide democracy to the voters of the UK.
No... It was not. It was created so that local areas had a person who they elect to represent them inside the parliament. You're just arguing for a party to put a random person in power then you have to hope that they care about whatever backwater you're from.
@@johnbraithwaite863 There are lots of ways of dealing with that. Multi-member constituencies with single transferable vote or the D'hondt top-up system used in Scotland or, preferably, a combination of these would give both robust local representation and national proportionality. The current system gives neither. It is possible for someone to win a constituency with less than 50% of the local vote and for a government to be elected by a minority.
The Liberal party had 500,000 fewer votes that Reform and got 78 seats. The system has to change.
Good to see the Lib Dems fighting to change it
NO...we will hardly ever have a majority and nothing will ever get done....Your mind has a short memory...you have forgotten Brexit already....look how long that debate went on until finally Boris got a majority
@christophertaylor1708 Actually, the Liberal Party had 6375 votes and won no seats. The Liberal Democrats had 3,519,143 votes and took 72 seats. Still, it's a valid point and thank goodness Sarah Olney has raised it so well in Parliament. This is what we need petitions about, not calls for a snap election so soon after the last one!
@@kevincarbb2819 Germany has been very well run for decades, most of it under coalition governments. The fact is that under First Past the Post, we have a government elected on a minority of the vote. That was caused in no small part by voter apathy, and it has led to further voter apathy in this country. Voter apathy is ultimately the worst enemy of democracy.
Fewer votes ‘than’.
Sarah Olnley well done you, very well done. Thank you a voice in the midst of present chaos.
Aye, but will Heir Keir Two Teir Stammer of no Fixed penthouse support this, Heir Keir Two Teir Stammer is a Marxist leninist of the worst order.
Well done for what?
Not asking for PR?
Not practicing what she preaches?
Excellent! Have been calling for this for donkeys’ years!
No chance whatsoever of this happening!!
@@polaris7122 I unfortunately agree, they will never allow PR as it goes against their corrupt current FPTP system.
@@craigs71 Yes, the 2015 election was the best example of its deficiency. UKIP had over 4 million votes, the third-highest share of the vote, and gained 'ONE' seat. Under a PR voting system, they would have had over 80 seats, but turkeys don't vote for Christmas!
What of voter ID? This is the Lefts attempt to sneak in foreign votes via students and their families and by illegal immigrants along with PR, which is wanted and needed.
The Clegg/Cameron referendum wasn't donkey's years ago.
Someone seems to be listening to the people..... Finally
Is she tho? Have you tried to contact her and ever got any reply?
We desperately need 'Proportional Representation' !! Bring it on!
Be careful what you wish for. We have PR in Scottish Elections. It is a nightmare. We have endured the fit up of SNP and The Greens working the system. If the SNP are maybe lying second in a constituency and can’t win it.Because it’s marginal with the Greens and another party they get their SNP supporters to vote for the Greens. Because of that we have been hit with diabolical socialists parties being in charge for 17 years who are mad hatters and want nothing but independence that the Scottish people don’t want. You could end up in England with Labour and Liberals with the Greens ruling for years because they will oust other parties from ever being in power.
Absolutely awesome speech beautifully and articulately delivered with actual facts and figures that make sense. Thank you, this is what politics should be delivered as not the bickering school playground antics we have had to endure over recent years. It was an absolute pleasure to watch and listen to that speech. Thank you.
Apart from the ID part, proof of ID needs to stay
Facts? Did you miss the part where she called to scrap voter id and said that it is "undemocratic"? They want FPP scrapped (which I agree with, who wouldnt?) but they also want voter ID scrapped so that anyone who anybody from anywhere can vote. That should tell you what her true motive is. Never trust the lib dems, they are worse than Labour and Tories put together. They are the UKs version of the corrupt US democrat party.
It's not perfect but it's a damn sight better than what we have at present.
We also need a Swiss style referendum system for a better democratic census.
Nice to see SOME MPs bothered to turn up!
The regime side looks a bit empty.
Agreed
@@susanmills4843An empty taxi pulled up... and Starmer got out.
It is actually not, well, not for the system that this woman is going for. It is a corrupt system and produces Sadiq Khan's on minor votes.
We need more involvement more referendums.
Proportional Representation must happen for our democracy to survive and thrive.
We don't live in a democracy
About time too! PR is essential for democracy to thrive!
I agree,i have always been in favour even when the party i voted for won the election.You cannot have a system
where a party win 18% of votes and end up with 4 M.Ps (later upped to 5)
It will encourage more people to vote as they won't feel their vote won't matter and it
will also stop the stupid tactical voting fiasco.
no overall majority will result....we will be like Italy and others with this system and have general elections every 18 months
@@kevincarbb2819 On the other hand, we could be like Germany where the constitution requires a four-year gap between the assembly of the Bundestag and the next election.
Wrong, wrong, wrong. Look at France: the most popular party by far - Le Pen’s - was squeezed out of the possibility of governing because the other parties colluded to ensure that outcome. Proportional Representation is NOT flawless and is no panacea.
Absolutely not. The minor parties made a corrupt bargain, but PR means that NO MPs need to care about their constituents. Fraud in London will rule all
No politician should be allowed to give biliions away for foreign issue's
I'm not justifying what they are spending it on, but surely you can recognize that you can gain a massive a amount of international leverage by doing that. The classic example is the USA's spending in the military, which seems stupid, but it's that same military that allows the USA to take in multiples more in global leverage. Big picture or something
@@daysofend Yes, it also creates wars and proxy wars, as we are witnessing throughout the word.
@@daysofendEh NO!!
@@daysofendno excuse
The amount of support and money spent in running spy planes and fighter jets over Gaza is way too much and has no benefit for us. If that money was put in the NHS we would have no issues with the health department.
If America gave the 5billion they give israel to their citizens, each person would be entitled to 15k. America is lobbied to spend for a foreign country and im sure the majority of tge citizens are not for it
This is massive ❤
Not really. Only supporters bothered to turn up.
@@cdeford2 It only passed by a majority of two, so that's simply not the case.
The party currently I will not allow this to happen. Don't be suprised if they don't manipulate a way around this. Also do what they need to do to try and fix it for a 2nd term. Usually changing voting boundaries. Dividing strong Labour areas into 2 seperate areas . Usually,,inner city areas with a strong Muslim community. Whilst expanding Tory Voting areas. The amount of times boundaries have changed always seems to happen when it's ztories or labour that have got into no 10.
New Zealand currently has a three party government as a result of the Proportional Representative voting system we have. It works very well to get more people's views heard and holds parties in check who if they were governing alone would do all kinds of things the voters never asked for. Definitely less corruption with PR.
Well said. The basic reason why so many don't bother to vote, probably thinking "what's the point?"
This is a fantastic speech by this lady she is showing all other MPs how they should do there jobs MPs are paid to be there for there constituency and not one is doing the job there paid for all there INTERESTED in is CLAIMING as many freebies as possible and claiming big exspences while the nation gets treated like 💩 this wonderful lady is speaking up for the nation at least one MP is making sure we are heard in parliament thank you
Agree with much of what this MP is proposing.
(why you twice mentioned this MP's gender I do not know, as it is totally irrelevant)
The MP lost me when declaring that ensuring fair and transparent elections ie voter ID, to be non democratic.
Ensuring one British citizen one vote, is the bare minimum of a democratic system.
Maybe because the lady in question in a lady and a she ! 🙏@@georgehughes5703
@georgehughes5703 I had a head injury 12 years ago which has effected some of my brain functions when I repeat myself I can't help it my friend
@@klopp69320
All the best to you
Maybe Because she is a lady hence unconsciously stating she's a female! Your point being???!!! 🙏
So this squeaked through by 2 votes, with half of the Commons not present. But it passed! Ever since I could vote more than 40 years ago I have looked forward to PR becoming a reality in this country.
Labour will stop this during readings because it would massively advance Lib Dem and Reform. It is of course the fairest method.
It needs to be a criminal offence with a custodial sentence to lie to the public if an MP or a news outlet. As the truth will set You free.
I'd welcome this but we know it'll never happen
Time for a proper general election
We had one. You lost, get over it.
@@GerryT.we didn’t vote for what was not in the manifesto but what was in it, labour have misled the general,public as per normal I think you need to recognise that fact.
@@GerryT.We all lost, you just aren't aware of it ... yet
@johnmansell5097 They've misled no more than the Tories have done don't pretend otherwise.
@rokketron I'm perfectly aware, I disagree with Labours decision re winter fuel payments, but that's it. I totally agree with Farmers paying inheritance tax, top many rich people have bought land to evade inheritance tax. And they get treated a bloody sight better than the rest of us. Any Government taking over the shitshow the Tories left after 14 years is going to take time to put things right, it 6 months, nit even 4 years.
You people have very short memories.
This has my support the current system is completely undemocratic.
The overwhelming majority go to work in a top down anti democratic capitalist enterprise that prevents democracy from entering into 70% of life spent at work and incentivises employers to use the wealth they extracted from their workers against those workers when they leave work where a sliver of democracy exits, so as to ensure democracy can never be used to undo profit making for the few at any externalised cost to society and nation, and you think the symptom of corrupted government by this economic system is the problem, rather than the economic system itself that incentivised the rich minority to corrupt democracy buy buying the majority of centrist to right wing politicians parties and media simultaneously, I mean, it is AN issue, but it is far from THE issue as if all we do is tinker with how we vote rather than significantly alter the economic system to end the ability of the capitalist minority to corrupt government/democracy, I can promise you PR wont make a lick of difference to the overall outcome. I am not against electoral reform, but it is not the primary problem, the incentives and rewards of capitalism unto the capitalist minority to corrupt governance via bribery and intimidation, IS the problem and that minority is rewarded lavishly for their efforts in that.
Completely agree with everything except I wouldn't call Voter ID undemocratic. It's hardly undemocratic to ask for people to prove they're actual citizens of the country they're voting in.
It does stop a lot of legal voters from voting though, unless you allow cheaper forms of ID to be used, then I’m totally for it. That or bring down the cost of replacing passports.
Completely agree. 👍🏻
@TheTwinn in other countries you can get state ID for free and its mandatory to vote or pay a fine. Mandatory voting would stop apathy and maybe restore democracy but I bet a lot of people would just put x in a donkey and not realise it.
You can't just turn up at a polling station and demand a vote. You have to be on the Electoral Roll, or your name isn't on the list.
Voting fraud is very rare in the UK, and voter ID requirements are discriminatory against younger voters.
The old system worked fine. Why change it? Answer: The tories thought it would help them.
They thought wrong...
@@sarkybugger5009you should have to prove you are who you say you are to vote
136 scoundrels in a poorly attended house. No wonder Westminster is a beacon of darkness.
But there will be a full house when it comes to discussing the MPs next pay rise!
Many of them couldn't care less generally. Look at the sheer numbers who abstained from the Winter Fuel Allowance Vote.
I'd vote for that.
sign the petition for PR
The Reform Party have called for a UK wide referendum on Proportional Representation. 🇬🇧
We had one. FPTP won.
No major party apposed it think you'll get different result if someone actually put the case for pr@@robertdennis3114
No, the lib dems called it. As they did try to change it back in 2010.
I see no reform mps voting for this latest bill.
We need PR but this bint is also asking to scrap voter id meaning that anyone who is anybody from anywhere can vote, meaning she wants PR so that they can hoard votes from illegal immigrants.
Where are they all , surely can't all be in the bar , to me this shows totally disrespect to such an important issue, What are they afraid of ,us becoming a democracy ???
It's well worth looking up what it is that MPs do apart from being in the Commons chamber for debates and asking questions of ministers. For one thing, there's another chamber (Westminster Hall) where business takes place simultaneously. There are the MPs offices, in which they liaise with their constituency offices and work on matters that they will subsequently deal with when they return to the constituencies they represent. There are meeting rooms, committee sessions... No person can be in more than one place at a time, and while we may not like it if our MP is absent for an issue that we would have liked them to attend to, chances are that they had other things to do which were no less important, especially for people in constituencies. Everything is recorded in Hansard, so MPs can always see what has been said and voted on even if they weren't in the Commons at the time.
@@MS-19quite correct , I also know that my MP can have travel problems , those too in time of bad weather can prevent attendance
Also the labour support she spoke of would not want to tip the party leaders off
I would pretty much guarantee that nearly all ‘us Labours’ were absent.
Those idiots will not stand for it
Quite a few Labour back benchers were present
Many Labour mps supported this Bill.
Awesome 👌
We want proportional representation and an end to lobbying, you work for us not billionaires!
And surprise, surprise, the house is empty.
We will never get change.
That’s because the majority of MPs are labour and torys, and neither of them want PR, because it means they can’t get their established majorities as easy
@@dannynufer1296many Labour mp voted in favour of this. Many tory mp did not though.
Cannot remember seeing any involvement from reform though, make that as you want.
@@BoyeeSmudger Make this as you want too, she asked for PR and to scrap voter ID in the same speach. No voter id means anyone can vote and under a PR system that would be the end of us. Lib dems with their ulterior motives again...
They look nice and cozy warm in the house .😮
As it should be. If you're not familiar with Maslow's Hierarchy of needs, it might be worth considering why it is important for MPs, our lawmakers, to have certain needs met if we're to have laws we're happy to abide by.
Well said lady! How disgusting to see Labor members squirreling away....they did not even hide the fact that they are leaving because this issue is being introduced.....seen from here USA and noticing that the members of that party will not even hide the fact that they do not care about the UK people....... PRETTY DISGUSTING!!!
It may be interesting for you to look at the policies of the Liberal Democrats here in the UK.
Then let us know if they come across as for the people of the UK.
I wonder who on the labour back benches will have the guts to vote for this?
Presumably the ones with more honour
Would more people vote if we had PR. At the moment we seem to be stuck with the uni party. How many people are fed up with the Conservative and Labour Parties. Time for a change.
Good to see the House of Commons so well represented by the people we voted in to actually turn up.
Turkeys will never vote for Xmas though! Gravy train has too many onboard also.
Good luck. One day all our votes will count, no matter which constituency we live in.
The last time all our votes counted was when we voted for Brexit. Regardless of how you feel about that particular outcome, one thing that was very clear was that MPs did not like it, and they fought to prevent it from happening.
Call me cynical, but on that basis alone, I don't think there is much appetite among MPs for a system where our votes count.
If there was a petition for a call for Electorial Voting Reform i would sign it straight away...
Well Spkoen that woman
There was a referendum on this in 2011, there was a turnout of 42% of which 67% voted against.
@@stephenlee5929 That wasn't for proportional representation but AV. The only indication we have for how many people support PR is through opinion polls, which as stated in the video routinely return a majority in favour for ditching FPTP and introducing PR.
Yes, she spoke well.
@@decs0r No not 109%, Only 42% bothered to vote. Of that 42% , 67% voted against and 33% voted for, there were some spoilt papers but I can't be bothered with decimals of percentages here.
@@stephenlee5929 That's a complete lie, the referendum was on AV which is not a proportional voting system and anyone can tell that by doing the most basic research. People who want to oppose proportional representation always repeat this lie.
Well done 👍🏻 lady good work
fairest system,so i doubt it will go through
Brilliant.
138 to 136? so not even Half of Parliament voted? yeah this bill won't survive all the horse trading
Oooooh now they want PR at last. YIPPEE!!!
Excellent. Good sense at last
I am not opposed to a PR system but I do NOT agree with the Transferable Vote system because that means some people’s vote count twice and that is inherently UNFAIR.
We had a referendum on this when the Lib Dem’s were in coalition with Cameron’s Tories and we rejected it.
This is a decision that MUST NOT be taken by Parliament alone. It needs to be put to the people via a referendum.
So many lies, or maybe you're just uninformed.
The Lib Dem coalition vote was for ALTERNATIVE VOTE, not STV. Totally different system. Totally different design, totally different impact.
You also claim it would let someone's vote be counted twice. How? You need to explain how, because no, it actually doesn't. The STV system merely moves votes from A to B when the first option count does not result in a majority. There's no double-count involved.
More than a dozen nations already use STV with excellent results. So you also have to explain why it's so bad, when all the evidence from those who have tried it shows it is actually really well received.
Or, maybe, just stop making things up?
I’m for PR but voter ID is essential when voting.
No it isn't. Voter fraud has been shown to be a complete non-issue in this country
Hurray! About bloody time!
The system in NZ is a good model to use. Proper representation of what the public vote for.
I totally agree with you. It is a good system. Don't go down the STV path.
And yet you still ended up with the horse that talks….
@@tonymarkey6525,. She lasted one and a bit terms. First time she was in coalition with the populist party. She only went full dictator in her second term but was easily forced out. (Three- year terms in NZ).
Under FPP she'd have been there for another two terms..PR gives power to the people.
Where do they all go? I’m paying them to sit, listen and think, not clear off.
In the bar.
Two actually buggered off before this speech - didn't anyone notice?😕
@peterrat100 They are involved in other debates (there's a second chamber, Westminster Hall) and in committees, and in meetings with ministers, and in meetings with constituents, and in their offices working on constituency matters which they will also deal with in person when they return to their constituencies. If you think that the role of the MP is just to sit in the Commons, listen, think and question ministers or contribute to debates, you really need to learn more about what MPs do and realise that there's much, much more to it than just that.
@@chrismaguire3667 On their way to other business, just as important as this debate which they can refer to later via the official transcript in Hansard.
@@MS-19 i do know that, but thank you for your kind comment.👍
Let's hope that this gets the ball rolling.
After all the noise that Reform UK Ltd have been making about the system being unfair, it seems strange that their MPs couldn't be bothered to turn up.
Half the house is empty and you target 5mps who have shown up a lot more than most. Get some credibility and come back 😂
And why do you think that is?
@@Formula1J Farage has one of the worst attendance records in Parliament (the same as when he was an MEP) and I was targeting a party/limited company which is always banging on about the voting system being unfair. This was their chance to speak and they were hiding in the bar.
@fanfeck2844 Well Nige was in a posh hotel having a meltdown about there being no full fat milk (although there was a suspicious gap in the labels) and it being a woke, leftie plot.
Why did it take so long? We may not survive the actions taken so far by this present Labour Government!
you survived 14 years of a conservative government I'm sure you can survive 5 years under labour
There are various levels of proportional representation. Make sure that the correct one is chosen
Yep, don't need another Brexit mess up
We must have voter ID to ensure only British citizens vote
It's called the electoral register and only British citizens are on it. Not on the list? Can't vote. It works fine as it is. Stop with the Americanisation of British politics.
Shows how undemocratic a lot of MP's are when almost 50% of those present voted against this.
Because theres more to it than you think. The largest cities in the UK have a minority of British people living in them, particularly London that as a whole makes up ~12.5% of the entire UK population. All in all the people living in cities across the UK make up almost 85% of the population. She not only called for PR but also to end voter id which would allow anyone and their uncle to vote. Cities tend to have the largest percentage of voters likely a herd mentality thing and since the largest cities harbour a lot of migrants, (both legal and illegal(which doesn't seem to mean much nowadays)) PR could have devastating consequences for native Brits, especially if if comes with the abolishment of voter ID.
Give this smart woman a job! 👏👍😀
She has got one as my MP. Richmond Park constituency.
She literally called to scrap voter ID in the same speech.. You think this is a smart move for the benefit of you and me? Think again.
What happens when all parties ignore the will of the people?
They can’t?
How would they?
Go on, please explain.
@ascgazz REALLY?
@ oh look, someone else without answers, who’d rather attack than educate..
Go on then, explain. 🤷🏼♂️
@@ascgazz Happens all the time. Make commitments you don't intend to uphold, in order to gain votes or to avoid losing votes.
@@DustinHoward-xh9sl you’re assuming they all do that?
Every single one?
Or should we look into the statistics and see which parties do what before being able to make that sort of sweeping statement?
i don't support scrapping voter i.d...
I'm ambivalent on scrapping it if the forms of ID acceptable were broadened. For example why is a TfL Pensioner travelcard accepted but not the TfL young person card?
Tory corruption, thats why. They knew the elderly who often vote for them dont often have photo ID. @MarkStamp-o6p
You didn’t listen, you can’t get people to vote. My God everybody knows ID is there to suppress votes, issue ID and then everyone is equal.
Voter ID is an absolute must.
@@Saintash1964 why? What purpose would it serve?
Why? So certain people can be disenfranchised despite having done nothing wrong, save being born in the wrong social class?
@@MS-19 when has being born in the wrong social class stopped anyone from voting?
@@MrFinbarz to ensure only those who are eligible to vote do so.
@Saintash1964 they do petal. Pl Voter fraud is not a thing. Nobody voting, now that is a thing
Single Transferable Vote [STV] is what London used to elect its Mayor, until very recently.
You get a first choice and second choice on the ballot paper. If your first choice doesn't win your vote gets transferred to your second choice.
That isn't a proportional system for the votes cast.
What we found in London was that the second choices were nearly always for main parties. The system didn't allow the smaller parties in with their new ideas but tended to boost the main parties voter share for their own credibility. I think its a bit of a swizz to call it proportional.
The STV does not suitable for UK,. but there are much better systems of PR.
@@cluckingbells well then it’s a waste of time. It just defaults to the old guard when your first choice loses again.
I have to ask, what is wrong with voter I'd, as it surely prevents fraudulent votes?
Voter fraud is so low that ID requirements stop more legal voters from voting then it stops fraudulent votes from happening.
I couldn’t vote in our last election because my passport was lost. Being under 65 I had to either fork out for a new one or not vote. Not having 100 quid to spare I just didn’t vote.
Studies have shown that voter fraud isn't an issue. At all.
As long as postal votes are easy to obtain, voter ID does little to nothing to prevent voter fraud.
Totally agree. They've sneaked that into the bill in order to have thousands of votes from recent arrivals and foreign students and their families. This will keep the left in power despite PR.
What fraudulent votes? People aren't voting enough. Anybody who talks about voter fraud is a bullshi****.
Well said 👏 madam
Sign the petition
Voter ID must stay.
Disagree, they do not need my id to take tax, they do not need my id to throw me in prison or force me to perform military service in a war, so why the hell should I need id to vote?
@alexanderd8740 - Your comparisons are ridiculouse! What then do you suggest is used to stop fraudulent voting, ie., those voting for someone else? If you are too stupid to get a FREE ID then you should not vote anyway. The elderly will likely have a required ID so that ain't an excuse. Only the most useless Liberal Democrats and the socialists are against this because they want to cheat! Why on earth would you object otherwise?
@@alexanderd8740why is it such an issue to flash a form of ID to ensure voter fraud is reduced?
We don’t live in a high-trust society anymore, times have changed. This is nothing more than an attempt to protect our democratic voting system,at least as far as I can work out. It’s not like it empowered the government in any way.
Add to each ballot paper A None of the above option so we can vote for fewer MPs
We should not have to try to vote for the best of a bad bunch!
Not many MP's bothered to turn up.
It OUGHT to be a compulsory condition. Worstmonster is just a bloody playgroup.
Symbolic victories are better than nothing I suppose. If only our Prime Minister had respect for the will of the people.
How very true.
STV is messy. Just award 1 seat per 100,000 votes, and allow citizens to veto laws.
Is that every law? Will we be required to read evey bill before voting?
@@Ettrick8 That would be the first new law.
@@markrainford1219 his will you ensure all voters will read these niills and actually understand them?
@@Ettrick8no it wouldn’t
@@Ettrick8 Yes ducky, of course I will.
I welcome PR but we need voter ID!
Why do we need voter ID?
@@f104G so anyone can vote right? Just like the US, allow millions of people into the country yet no voter ID to cast a vote. Seems logical 🤔 how else do you ensure each vote cast is legitimate? Cast by someone who has the right of a British national to vote.
@@f104Gfor very obvious reasons
I must say I found the idea that voter ID is undemocratic to be odd. It seems to me to be a common sense introduction to increase the validity of a democratic vote.
I've always found it strange when I would turn up at a polling station and they would just ask my name and cross me off the list. Literally anyone could turn up, claiming to be me, and cast a vote in my name. And then I don't get to vote. So anything that removes the possibility of that happening has to be a welcome improvement.
I'd be interested to hear any explanations as to why it is "undemocratic" as the lady says.
@@WelshEnZo you can't get on the electoral register if you aren't a legitimate citizen. Postal votes don't need ID. Voter ID wasn't brought in to address voter fraud, it was gerrymandering, pure and simple.
Well said.
We are not disillusioned with the system, but the people put up for election by all the parties.
👏👏👏👏
Changing the system might incentivise more accountable candidates
the system has been broken for a while
10 minute votes rarely get followed. Majority just get ignored regardless of who votes what.
At last! This is badly needed and urgent.
It’ll never happen. Turkeys 🦃 don’t vote 🗳️ for Christmas! 🤦♂️😂
It's a trojan horse bill to get rid of voter ID.
Not many mps in the house to listen to this debate. 🙄🙄🙄
The irony here is that if we had PR then Reform would have more seats.
National PR yes.
STV, almost certainly not. STV has been proven to pull votes away from the extremes and towards the least objectionable candidate. Political analysis indicates that with STV, the last election would have resulted with the Liberal Democrats winning a landslide election, with Labour in second. Reform would have been unlikely to achieve any seats at all. They would have been the first choice for a LOT of people, but they would not have been the _second_ choice for many at all, so the runoff would have forced them aside.
@@icedreamer9629
The Libdems may be away with the fairies but they are good at maths.
Voter ID is vital to ensure no corruption .
We already have that. It's postal ballots that need reform. They should only be for those in hospital or out of the country.
Exactly why she wants both an abolishment of voter id and PR. PR with the abolishment of voter ID would be the absolute worst thing for this country, it would have devastating consequences.
No ID doesn't help thoes with none like my self.
I seem to remember starmer wanting rid of first past the post until it worked in his favour.
At last!
Excellent speech talking of the need to preserve democracy etc but remember, it was the majority of MPs and Parties on all sides of the house, who sought to stifle the process of leaving the EU and who attempted to go against the will of the people back in 2016 over Brexit.
A vote of 51.5% vs 48.5% does not indicate that a population has decided on a path forwards. It indicates that a population is as thoroughly unsure and undecided as it is possible to be.
The closer to 50%, the weaker the mandate. **No** major constitutional decision should be made by **any** democratic society on the basis of such mixed feelings.
The biggest democratic and PR vote in UK history.
This MP and party wanted to overturn that epitome of PR.
Strange how these poloticians can believe one thing today but tomorrow it will be bad.
@@icedreamer9629
So the 48.5% should hold sway?
I have lived in the Labour-controlled city of Coventry all my life. Since reaching voting age I have ALWAYS voted Tory or lately Reform. I am now 80. My votes have NEVER counted. So, YES to PR or STV or any system where voters KNOW their votes will finally count.
Bravo
About time we had more than two cheeks of the same butt ignoring and abusing the people
Voter ID is essential!
How could any MP, with any conscience , vote against it?
An MP with a conscience? Such creatures exist only in myths, fables and fairy tales, like an elephant with a pair of wings.
It ends voter ID! That's why it should be amended.
They may agree with changing to a proportional representative system but disagree with the particular proportional voting system selected for the bill.
Because they like being on the gravy train?
Because the bill also asks for voter ID to be scrapped, while most of the bill is good, scrapping voter ID will open it up to abuse and fraud
Remember that referendum in 2011 on electoral reform? The voters decided to retain FPTP to the tune of 2 to 1.
Maybe voters just decided that the other system being put forward was too complicated - ATV, I think it was.
Result 👍😀 but not sure why voter ID is "undemocratic" all votes need to be valid in a democratic voting system or am I missing something ??
What you are missing is that you believe having ID is the only way to check eligibility. It is not.
There was never an issue with illegal votes in the UK, it's not a thing that ever happened in meaningful numbers. The tabloids drummed up a whole bunch of invented, simplistic "logic" and false claims of illegal migrants voting because ID was not required. It was fake. Total invention. Reality was that in order to vote your name had to be registered, and when you register the government perform all sorts of eligibility checks against you in the background - Your national insurance, birth certificate, residency info, criminal status, etc. Illegal migrants do not get on that list, period.
On the other side, there are millions of eligible voters who have no ID for various perfectly OK reasons. For example, someone who can't afford to go abroad on holiday won't have a passport, and might also not be able to afford a car, so won't have a driving licence.
ID requirements disproportionately affect the poor, the elderly, and the disabled, and they only exist because lies were invented to make people afraid.
THAT is why they are undemocratic: They trade a tiny, tiny gain, mostly invented, for the very real disenfranchisement of millions of people, excluding them from voting for no real reason.
It only makes sense if the government provides ID to every single eligible voter for free.
Absolutely marvellous, well done
The irony here is that if we had PR then Reform (the party for the people of the UK) then they would have more seats than the literal undemocrats. Thanks Lib Dem’s.
They wont if she gets her way though. She didn't just call for PR she also called for the abolishment of voter ID. Think about that for a sec, why would they want to abolish voter id and bring in PR at the same time? These people are crooks.
Why the single transferable vote? there are other forms of P.R. Local MP's for local constituency is also outdated, any elected M.P could familiarise themselves with local issues, with local guidance, in a very short time.
Good girl
I totally agree we should have PR...BUT may never live to see…. Democracy is dead in Britain!
It will be high next time round when people want Labour out and want Reform in
Had PR been in effect when we had the recent GE, then reform would have gotten a sizeable share of the vote, more than the lib dems got
Reform could very well have gotten enough seats to be a legitimate opposition to government even if they weren't sizeable enough to become the main opposition, although given the sheer defeat of the tories that is debatable
@@vallarfaxgaming @darynsax Even under PR, Labour would still have had the most seats in July 2024. Sarah Olney, in her contribution to the debate recorded in this video, referred to the Additional Member System which is used in the Scottish Parliament and the Welsh Senedd elections. If that system had been used for the Westminster election, the result would have been: LAB 236 CON 157 REF 94 LIB DEM 77 GREEN 42 SNP 18 PC 4 Northern Irish Parties 18 Others (incl. Speaker) 6. My question to you is: if you were Labour's leader, how would you build a coalition government around those figures? With 236 seats, you would be 90 short of an overall majority. Ideologically, you would not be in favour of working with the Conservatives or Reform UK; the Liberal Democrats would bring you up to being just 13 seats short, but they would be very cagey about going into a coalition after their experience of 2010-2015.... You would probably work best with the Greens, but you'd still need 48 seats just to get over the winning line. Bringing in the SNP would take you to within 30 seats of the majority; Plaid Cymru could take you to within 26, and perhaps you might get the Northern Irish SDLP and Alliance on your side, but would still be some way short. The 6 "others" wouldn't be much use to you - one would be the Speaker who has to be politically neutral, and the others would be independents who (in this particular election) took their seats from you, e.g. Jeremy Corbyn in Islington, or the various seats with relatively high Muslim populations which voted against Labour as a result of its stance on the situation in Gaza. Tricky one, isn't it?!
@MS-19
Then Labour would have to run a minority government on a supply and confidence basis. Which to my mind would not necessarily be a bad thing. It would dampen their tendency toward idealogical excess by requiring that they would have to rely on at least some opposition support to get any innovative bill through parliament. That would be the case whichever party was running a minority government. I would suggest that those bills that were passed would be more likely to be both necessary and in the public interest, instead of being driven by party ideology or advantage. We might even have meaningful debates in parliament instead of it just being the rubber stamp for the executive that it is now.
We HAVE "proportional representation" in Australia, and yet we have a Federal Government that came to power with only 32% of "first preference" votes, they received sufficient support as a second choice, from minor party voters to make it happen.