WESTMINSTER'S first past the post voting system is "failing" Scotland, with millions of votes "ignored", campaigners have said.
The Electoral Reform Society (ERS) insisted it was now "long overdue" for all elections to be conducted using proportional representation (PR), as it claimed the method used to elect MPs to the House of Commons should be "consigned to history".
The campaigning body used the anniversary of the Referendums (Scotland and Wales) Act on July 31 1997 to call for changes to be made.
Elections to the Scottish Parliament and Welsh Assembly are already conducted using PR systems – with both these devolved administrations having extended PR to local council elections too.
"English voters are in danger of being left behind," the ERS said in a new report on the issue.
"Not only are the devolved parliamentary elections in Scotland and Wales run under PR, but both parliaments have legislated for the further expansion of PR systems into local elections in each country."
Comparing the Holyrood election results with UK general election results in Scotland, the report noted that the last seven general elections in Scotland had seen the largest party win on average 75% of seats north of the border on an average of just 43% of the votes.
"In every UK general election since 1997, the largest party in Scotland has won a majority of Scottish seats on a minority of votes," the report noted.
But in the six Scottish Parliament elections that have taken place over the same period, the largest party won on average 45% of the seats, having received 37% of the regional list votes in Holyrood's system – where people have both a constituency and a regional ballot.
Willie Sullivan, senior director at ERS Scotland, said: "We've long known that Westminster's winner takes all voting system has been failing Scotland – creating a virtual one-party state that sees millions of voters' preferences ignored.
"Across the last seven UK general elections, the largest party has won on average 75% of Scottish seats with just 43% of the votes.
"Compared to the results in the Scottish Parliament, that's a result four times as warped in terms of seat share – with FPTP (first past the post) delivering disproportionate results that leave everyone worse off."
With Scotland having had PR elections since the first Holyrood ballot in 1999, he said that "voters know that their ballots will count", adding that "it's only votes for Westminster that are holding Scotland back".
Sullivan continued: "Reform is vital if we're to have a House of Commons that represents the interests and votes of the people of Scotland.
"Until then, every voter will continue to lose out. We need a fair and proportional voting system for Westminster – it's time that our UK Parliament followed Scotland's lead and made sure every vote counts."
A UK Government spokeswoman commented: "Britain's long-standing electoral system of first past the post provides a clear, well-understood link between constituents and their representatives in Parliament.
"This ensures greater accountability and allows voters to kick out those who don't deliver.
"The British public voted to keep Britain's electoral system in the 2011 UK-wide referendum and the voice of the people in this referendum should be respected."
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel