Tag: UK politics

New Scottish poll shows why it’s time to ditch Holyrood’s voting system

By Richard Wood

The latest poll from Ipsos shows why it’s time to ditch the Additional Member System used to elect MSPs.

The company’s latest survey grabbed the headlines for placing Reform second, behind the SNP, on the constituency vote. Neither Nigel Farage’s rising party, nor UKIP before it, have even won seats at Holyrood so this result would be a seismic shift in political behaviour.

However, beneath the headlines of Reform’s surge, the polling numbers alongside seat projections tell a different story. One of a creaking electoral system past its best.

The poll puts the SNP on 35% and 28% for constituency and list vote shares respectively. According to projections by Ballot Box Scotland, that is estimated to give the party 60 seats. That’s almost 47% of seats available.

The difference is staggering. Under AMS where seats are meant to match list vote share, BBS projects that the party would likely win around 40 seats. That’s still above the 28% of seats they would be entitled to under a fully proportional system (usual caveats about different voting systems impacting voting intention).

The biggest difference here is with the SNP. The party has lost significant support since 2021 but benefits from a fragmented unionist vote, with four parties competing for anti-independence voters – namely the Lib Dems, Labour, Conservatives and Reform.

BBS projects Scottish Labour would win 19 seats if Scotland voted like this. That’s 4 fewer than if a more proportional AMS was used (23).

Reform lose out the most, projected to win 6 short of the 23 they would win in a “better AMS”.

The Greens are projected to win 17 seats (AMS ideal: 21), the Conservatives 11 (AMS ideal: 14) and the Lib Dems 5 (compared to 8 under AMS ideal).

READ MORE: Dual mandates ban passed unanimously in Scottish Parliament

This result would mark a major shift in Scottish party politics, and a major decline in support for the Westminster duopoly. But that change risks not being fully shown in terms of seats.

Next year marks 27 years of devolution and the sixth Scottish election. Wales has reviewed and changed its fairly disproportional voting system for something somewhat better. Scotland’s sixth parliament should legislate to do the same.

READ MORE: Scotland’s STV council elections show England a better way of doing local democracy

The risk of 2021 was Alex Salmond’s Alba gaming the system to win a disproportionate independence supermajority. As we know, that outcome never emerged. This time, the threat of a seriously disproportionate election result comes from something much more likely. If the results in May look something like this, let’s hope they’re a wake-up call to our new legislators.

Kate Forbes is stepping down in 2026. A record number of MSPs aren’t standing again

By Richard Wood

Deputy First Minister Kate Forbes is stepping down as an MSP at the next Scottish Parliamentary election.

Her upcoming departure marks a record number of MSPs standing down at any Holyrood election.

The announcement came as a shock to much of the Scottish political scene after she contested the 2023 SNP leadership election and secured Scotland’s second top job under First Minister John Swinney last year.

In a letter to the FM on 4 August 2025, the DFM said she does not wish to “miss any more of the precious early years of family life.

READ MORE: Minority mayors and unrepresentative local government: England can learn from Scottish councils

How many MSPs have stood down at each election?

So far, the total for 2026 is 35 MSPs (as of 8 July 2025). This beats the previous high of 34 in 2021, which included former Scottish Conservative leader Ruth Davidson.

And back in 2016, there were 25 MSPs who stood down (23 who retired and 2 who were deselected by their parties). Among the retirees at this election were former First Minister Alex Salmond, former Scottish Conservative leader Annabelle Goldie and the Presiding Officer Tricia Marwick.

A similar number stepped down at the election before. Among the 20 who retired in 2011 were former Deputy First Minister Nichol Stephen and former Scottish Green co-convenor.

Just 13 MSPs retired in 2007 including independent MSP Dennis Canavan and former Deputy First Minister Jim Wallace.

And in 2003, there were 10 MSPs who stepped down including our shortest-serving First Minister Henry McLeish and Westminster’s 1967 Hamilton by-election winner, the SNP’s Winnie Ewing.

Each year the number has gone up:

2026 – 35

2021 – 34

2016 – 25

2011 – 20

2007 – 13

2003 – 10

READ MORE: Dual mandates ban passed unanimously in Scottish Parliament

IMAGE: Via Scottish Government (lisence)

How many MSPs are retiring in 2026? Is it a record number?

By Richard Wood

UPDATE: There are now 35 MSPs stepping down in 2026 following the announcement by Deputy First Minister Kate Forbes.

The late June announcement of Presiding Officer Alison Johnstone’s retirement from Holyrood means that 34 MSPs are stepping down from the Scottish Parliament in 2026.

This figure matches the number of retiring MSPs in 2021. That was the record-high number, meaning that any further announcements will ensure that 2026 has the highest number of retiring MSPs in Holyrood history. Considering the last retirement announcements for 2021 were in March that year, it’s almost certain that 2026 will mark a new record.

That’s perhaps not surprising, with the number of long-standing MSPs from the so-called 1999 club calling it a day, including Nicola Sturgeon, Richard Lochead, Rhoda Grant, Fiona Hyslop and Christine Graeme all stepping down. But it also includes newer MSPs including Humza Yousaf, Mairi Gougeon and Beatrice Wishart.

Age plays a role for some of these MSPs in both categories. As does arguably scandal, with Michael Matheson set to retire as well. Then there’s the wholly valid reason of some MSPs saying they want to spend time raising their young families, away from the demanding nature of a parliamentary role.

READ MORE: Minority mayors and unrepresentative local government: England can learn from Scottish councils

How many MSPs have stood down at each election?

So far, the total for 2026 is 34 MSPs (as of 3 July 2025). This matches the previous high of 34 in 2021, which included former Scottish Conservative leader Ruth Davidson.

And back in 2016, there were 25 MSPs who stood down (23 who retired and 2 who were deselected by their parties). Among the retirees at this election were former First Minister Alex Salmond, former Scottish Conservative leader Annabelle Goldie and the Presiding Officer Tricia Marwick.

A similar number stepped down at the election before. Among the 20 who retired in 2011 were former Deputy First Minister Nichol Stephen and former Scottish Green co-convenor.

Just 13 MSPs retired in 2007 including independent MSP Dennis Canavan and former Deputy First Minister Jim Wallace.

And in 2003, there were 10 MSPs who stepped down including our shortest-serving First Minister Henry McLeish and Westminster’s 1967 Hamilton by-election winner, the SNP’s Winnie Ewing.

Each year the number has gone up.

  • 2026 – 34*
  • 2021 – 34
  • 2016 – 25
  • 2011 – 20
  • 2007 – 13
  • 2003 – 10
  • 1999 – N/A

*As of July 2025.

READ MORE: Dual mandates ban passed unanimously in Scottish Parliament

Which MSPs are stepping down in 2026?

As of late June 2026, the following 32 MSPs are stepping down:

SNP

Annabelle Ewing, Audrey Nicoll, Bill Kidd, Christine Grahame, Elena Witham, Evelyn Tweed, Fergus Ewing, Fiona Hyslop, Gordon MacDonald, Graeme Dey, Humza Yousaf, James Dornan, Joe FitzPatrick, Mairi Gougeon, Michael Matheson, Michelle Thomson, Natalie Don-Innes, Nicola Sturgeon, Richard Lochead, Rona Mackay, Ruth Maguire, Shona Robinson, Willie Coffey.

Conservatives

Douglas Ross, Edward Mountain, Liz Smith, Maurice Golden, Oliver Mundell.

Labour

Alex Rowley, Richard Leonard.

Liberal Democrats

Beatrice Wishart.

Greens

Alison Johnstone.

Independents

John Mason.

What about 2031?

We’re still along way from the election after 2026. Much will depend on the make-up of the new parliament – with big questions still to be answered like how well will Reform do next year? Will there be a coalition or a confidence and supply arrangement? And if John Swinney emerges as First Minister will he step down before 2031 (when he’ll be 67)?

But with so many of the 1999 club now having left Holyrood’s benches, there’s a decent chance that 2031 will be the first election where the number of retiring MSPs is lower than the previous one.

READ MORE: Scotland’s STV council elections show England a better way of doing local democracy

Minority mayors and unrepresentative local government: England can learn from Scottish councils

By Richard Wood

This year’s local elections showed the unfairness of First Past the Post in action. A third of England went to the ballot box this May, but seats ultimately failed to reflect votes thanks to the unrepresentative voting system.

Unrepresentative local government

As with the House of Commons elections, English councils are elected via First Past the Post. And of course, the same problems persist at the local level: citizens aren’t fairly represented. Take, Kent County Council where Reform won a majority of seats on 37% of the vote. Our Shropshire where the Lib Dems took a majority of seats on a minority of votes.

England’s local electoral system is not first for purpose. Especially in the age of multi-party politics.

There’s a lesson here to be learnt from Scotland. Local authorities from Dumfries & Galloway to Shetland have successfully used STV to elect councillors since 2017. STV ensures that how Scots vote is reflected in local councils, so why not England? The upcoming elections Bill strikes as a clear opportunity to push this issue.

READ MORE: Scotland’s STV council elections show England a better way of doing local democracy

Minority mayors

Unlike Scotland, England also has a number of directly elected executive mayors. This year six mayoralities were up for grabs, now all elected using First Past the Post having either previously been voted via the Supplementary Vote or brand new mayors. All mayors were elected with less than half the vote. The worst culprit here was the West of England where Labour’s candidate won on 25% of the vote.

Greater Lincolnshire: Andrea Jenkyns (Reform): 42.0%

Hull and East Yorkshire: Luke Campbell (Reform ) 35.8%

Doncaster: Ros Jones (Labour): 32.6%

North Tynside: Karen Clark (Labour): 30.2%

Cambridgeshire and Peterborough: Paul Bristow (Conservative): 28.4%

West of England: Helen Godwin (Labour): 25.0%

With such weak mandates, while there are flaws with single-member executive positions, if we are to have them in England they should be elected via preferential voting (the Alternative Vote also known as ranked choice voting).

The current system of low votes is unsustainable.

Similarly, while Scotland doesn’t have mayors currently, if they are introduced after the Holyrood elections they should be elected via such a preferential method.

English local government needs reform. Scotland had the answers.

READ MORE: 3 tests Anas Sarwar’s Scottish metro mayor plans must meet

IMAGE VIA PIXABAY

Labour’s false “supermajority” and widespread tactical voting expose the flaws of FPTP

The UK’s new Prime Minister Keir Starmer

By Richard Wood

The 2024 UK General Election has exposed the flaws of Westminster’s First Past the Post once again.

The 4 July vote shows just how much the voting system used to elect MPs distorts how people vote at the ballot box. While Labour did well, Keir Starmer’s party won 63% of seats on just 34% of the vote.

This is a staggering mismatch between seats and votes, exposing the absurd unfairness of our electoral system once again.

Meanwhile, Reform secured 14% of the vote. Under a proportional voting system they would have roughly 14% seats but in the end they only scraped five seats. Similarly, the Greens only managed four seats on 7% of the vote.

The Lib Dems won 72 seats (11% of those available) on 12% vote, by coincidence broadly in line with their share of the vote. While the Conservatives – champions of our regressive system – suffered at its hands by winning 19% of seats on 24% of the vote.

The election has been called the most unrepresentative in British political history. In fact, the Gallagher index (a measure of electoral proportionality) was 24 (the highest ever in a UK election), backing these claims.

Of course, anti-Consevative tactical voting likely widened the disparity between seats and votes – with Lib Dem votes piling up in areas they could win and Labour in areas they could take. But that’s no excuse for the reality where we have a system in which, forgetting all motivations for why people vote a particular way, the total number of votes per party doesn’t result in result in matching seat shares. Tactical voting is a symptom of First Past the Post, showing the need for electoral reform. And at the end of the day, people deserve to vote for their favoured candidates without the fear that their vote won’t count. You should be able to vote for something, rather than forced into voting against something else.

READ MORE: Labour conference votes in favour of Proportional Representation

What next for the electoral reform movement?

First Past the Post has once again been exposed as a failed system. But with this comes opportunity for change.

While Labour’s leadership oppose a change in voting system, the massive mismatch is cutting through to citizens. There’s an opportunity here to stress this mismatch and make the case for Proportional Representation and continue the fight for reform.

It’s time to redouble our efforts to secure electoral reform. It’s time for Proportional Representation.

READ MORE: How proportional was the 2021 Scottish Parliament election?

How you can help

The below organisations are fighting for fair votes. Learn more and join them below:

Image source: House of Commons (CC 3.0 License)

3 tests Anas Sarwar’s Scottish metro mayor plans must meet

By Richard Wood

Leader of the Scottish Labour Party Anas Sarwar has called for Scottish metro mayors in a speech marking 25 years of devolution.

The remarks follow his party winning all but one metro mayoral seats up for election south of the border this May, the most notable of which was Richard Parker’s win against incumbent Conservative Mayor Andy Street.

The main appeal of metro mayors is their ability to champion the areas they represent on scale not quite seen by constituency MPs. There’s little denying that Andy Burnham is able to grab media and government attention in a unique way suited to our current news and political landscape. Not to mention that to many voters elected mayors are seen as more accountable than a largely unnoticed council cabinet committee.

Furthermore, a metro mayor equivalent for Dundee for example could give different parts of Scotland the political attention they deserve, shifting focus away from the central belt.

READ MORE: Scottish Tory Murdo Fraser supports electoral reform at Holyrood

However, metro mayors are far from a panacea. Despite the profile brought by the likes of Andy Burnham and Sadiq Khan, the elections that put them in power are characterised by low turnout.

On top of that, elected mayors mark a shift away from deriving local government executives from elected councils. Concentrating such powers in one individuals would be a major jump from the culture of consensus set out with the set-up of the Scottish Parliament and shift to STV for local authorities, pushing Scotland in a more majoritarian direction.

Additionally, Scottish local government has far bigger problems such as funding and structural issues that imposing elected mayors or provosts won’t fix.

Any discussion about moving to a metro mayor system must be open, honest and frank. Crucially, three tests must be met if Scotland were to go down the path of introducing metro mayors.

READ MORE: Scottish Labour MSP “sympathetic” to Scottish electoral reform

1. Checks and balances

    Elected mayors put a significant amount of power in the hands of one individual. Yes, they have a team that do much of the day to day work but ultimately directly elected executive mayors arguably give mayors too much power. A simple truth about democracy is that despite best intentions, one individual cannot fairly represent the views of all their constituents. Any elected mayors would need to be accountable to voters at elections and to elected councils – proportionately elected and with real powers of scrutiny – throughout their term.

    2. Preferential voting

    The UK government’s Election Act changed the voting system for directly elected executive mayors from the Supplementary Vote to First Past the Post. The Supplementary Vote was far from perfect but it at least gave a broader mandate to elected mayors as opposed to FPTP. If Scotland follows England, we should learn from the mistakes of the Elections Act and use the Alternative Vote to elect mayors. A preferential voting system would empower voters and give mayors the broad mandates they need to lead.

    3. Referendum

    Lastly, directly elected executive mayors should not be imposed on a populace without consent, whether that be by any new Scottish Government or local authorities themselves. Any proposals should be subject to a significant consultation process and conclude with a referendum to determine whether they are the right decision for each community. Likewise, communities should be able to vote to revert to a cabinet system for local government if they choose.

    READ MORE: Scottish election manifestos: democratic reform pledges compared

    The adoption of directly elected executive Scottish mayors is an intriguing prospect but it would have significant downsides, notably the concentration of executive power in one pair of hands and a major shift away from the consensus-building democracy that has characterised Scotland in the age of devolution.

    There are of course potential benefits as seen in England but any concrete proposals for reform should be carefully examined and criticised where appropriate.

    If Scottish Labour, or any other party, do ever introduce elected mayors then their implementation must pass the three tests outlined above. However, lawmakers should in the first instance focus on more pressing issues facing local authorities as opposed to looking south for flashy reforms that aren’t necessarily what they seem. Anas Sarwar should consider all this if introducing metro mayors is ever something he gets the powers to do.

    IMAGE SOURCE: This work contains Scottish Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Scottish Parliament Licence.

    Should the Scottish Government be able to appoint ministers who aren’t MSPs?

    Scottish Parliament (outside) with partially cloudy sky.

    By Richard Wood

    The appointment of David Cameron to UK foreign secretary via appointment to the House of Lords raises an interesting question about the relationship between the executive and the legislature. Primarily at Westminster but also at Holyrood.

    The big issue in Westminster is the absurdity of the (by convention) only route for people to become ministers who aren’t MPs is through being appointed to the House of Lords. For life. There’s then the issue that these ministers can’t appear before MPs to be held to account. The situation is frankly absurd and in need of reform. Rishi Sunak’s appointment puts a spotlight on this bizarre route to government. If we are to allow people who aren’t legislators to join the executive – and there’s a strong case to allow that to be the case in line with plenty of other democrscies around the world – then we need to fix this bizarre Westminster process.

    READ MORE: By-elections for defecting MSPs: does Wales offer a solution?

    So, what’s the situation in Scotland? Currently, only MSPs can become cabinet secretaries in the Scottish Government. It’s right that most ministers come from the elected Scottish Parliament but with just 129 MSPs, there is a good case for enabling cabinet secretaries to be appointed from outside the legislature. Such a rule would strengthen the diversity of talent within the Scottish Government. But any rule should have democratic accountability.

    Crucially, if we are to go down this road then MSPs appointed to cabinet should be approved by the Scottish Parliament. This would be a similar nominations and vote process to that of the Cabinet of the United States and other democracies, ensuring that such cabinet secretaries are accountable to parliament.

    Furthermore, that accountability should be strengthened by enabling such cabinet secretaries to make statements and answer questions in parliament. MSPs should be able to directly question any and all cabinet secretaries, including those chosen from outside parliament.

    There could even be a limit on the number of people non-MSP cabinet secretaries appointed to ensure that the majority of cabinet members come from the legislature, if that’s a concern.

    This is hardly the most pressing reform that could improve Scottish democracy – Holyrood needs better Proportional Representation, fixed four-year terms and restrictions on second jobs and dual mandates – but reform in this area is worth considering in light of former Prime Minister David Cameron’s appointment to the role of UK Foreign Secretary.

    READ MORE: How proportional are Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish elections?

    5 reasons to ban MSP-MP dual mandates

    New Zealand and Scotland – proportional but imperfect voting systems

    Upgrade Holyrood joins Make Votes Matter’s Proportional Representation Alliance

    Upgrade Holyrood has joined Make Votes Matter’s alliance for Proportional Representation.

    The alliance includes all the UK’s main opposition parties, leading democracy organisations (apart from Labour) and key PR supports from right across the UK. Make Votes Matter’s goal is to replace First Past the Post with Proportional Representation for elections to the House of Commons.

    Upgrade Holyrood primarily supports better democracy in Scotland – by arguing for an end to dual mandates, the introduction of a recall process for MSPs and better Proportional Representation at Holyrood. But Upgrade Holyrood also passionately supports the introduction of PR at Westminster.

    Founder of Upgrade Holyrood, Richard Wood, said:

    “Adopting a system of Proportional Representation is the single-most important improvement we can make to democracy in the UK. We need to correct the distorted link between seats and votes so that voters are accurately represented and wasted votes are minimised.”

    “The voting system used to elect Members of the Scottish Parliament has its flaws but it does deliver largely proportional results and is far more representative First Past the Post. Westminster has a lot to learn from the way Scottish Parliament elections are conducted.

    “Without Proportional Representation at Holyrood, the SNP would unfairly dominate parliament due to their near monopoly of constituency seats. Scottish Labour and the Scottish Conservatives would have next to no representation, not to mention that both Anas Sarwar and Douglas Ross owe their admittance to the Scottish Parliament to PR.”

    “Westminster needs a major shake-up and I am proud that Upgrade Holyrood has joined the Alliance for Proportional Representation to help make that happen.”

    _______________________________

    More about Make Votes Matter’s Proportional Representation Alliance can be read here.

    READ MORE: 12 reasons the UK needs PR right now

    READ MORE: Why I’m standing for election to the Electoral Reform Society’s Council – Richard Wood

    READ MORE: How proportional was Norway’s election? Lessons for the UK

    How proportional was Norway’s election? Lessons for Westminster

    Norwegian flag – (Pixabay)

    By Richard Wood

    On Monday 13 September, Norwegians elected their new parliament (called the Storting).

    The big stories of the night were the success of the left and centre parties, Conservative Prime Minister Erna Solberg admitting defeat, and the fall in support of the controversial right-wing populist Progress party.

    The election may not have hit the headlines across democratic world in the same way as the upcoming Canadian and German elections, but it has been a significant election for Norway – ending 8 years of right-of-centre governance.

    But what voting system does Norway use? And how proportional was its recent election and what lessons can we learn in the UK?

    READ MORE: Why I’m standing in the Electoral Reform Society Council election – Richard Wood

    Norway’s electoral system explained

    Unlike the UK, Norway uses a form of Proportional Representation (PR) to elect its parliaments. This means that, unlike at Westminster, how people vote at the ballot box is accurately reflected in the parliament. Without a form of PR to elect representatives, unlike Norway’s Storting, the House of Commons is semi-representative at best.

    At the last UK election, the Conservatives got 43.6% of the vote but thanks to the UK’s First Past the Post system, they won 56% of seats in the House of Commons. Meanwhile, the Lib Dems won 11.6% of the vote but only 3% of seats available while the Green Party of England and Wales won 2.7% of the vote but only one seat.

    The UK’s voting system clearly distorts the link between seats and votes, unfairly advantaging larger parties and wasting countless votes.

    This is not the case in Norway.

    READ MORE: 12 reasons the UK needs Proportional Representation now

    The vast majority of OECD countries use some form of Proportional Representation to elect their MPs and Norway is one of them.

    Norway uses a form of Open List PR with a 4% threshold to elect 169 MPs across 19 constituencies. This includes levelling seats to further ensure national party proportionality. Voters also have a say over the ordering of party lists in their constituency for the party they vote for, empowering voters more than in a Closed List PR system (such as the one previously used for UK elections to the EU parliament where lists were inflexible) or First Past the Post.

    More about the voting system can be read on the Electoral Reform Society’s site here.

    Norway’s 2021 election results

    The country’s voting system ensures that seats broadly match votes. The full results for the 2021 election are show below.

    • Labour: 26.4% of the vote (48 seats), 28.4% of seats)
    • Conservatives: 20.5% votes (36 seats), 21.3% of seats
    • Centre: 13.6% of the vote (28 seats), 16.6% of seats
    • Progress: 11.7% of the vote (21 seats), 12.4% of seats
    • Socialist Left: 7.5% of the vote (13 seats), 7.7% of seats
    • Red: 4.7% of the vote (8 seats), 4.7% of seats
    • Liberal: 4.5% of the vote (8 seats), 4.7% of seats
    • Green: 3.8% of the vote (3 seats), 1.8% of seats
    • Christian Democrat: 3.8% of the vote (3 seats), 1.8% of seats
    • Patient Focus: 0.2% of the vote (1 seat), 0.6% of seats

    On the back of these results, Conservative Prime Minister Erna Solberg admitted defeat and it now looks likely that a left of centre government will be formed – led by the Labour Party. Analysis suggests that complex coalition talks are expected to follow the vote.

    Norway 2021 election results – Original work: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Storting2021.svg Original author: Gust Justice This version has updated borders – Link – CC BY-SA 4.0

    READ MORE: Scottish Conservative MSP calls for electoral reform

    How proportional was Norway’s 2021 election?

    Put simply, Norway’s latest election results were very proportional. The proportion of seats won by each party strongly correlates with the proportion of votes cast for each party as shown by the above results. This is in stark contrast with UK election results such as the 2005 election where Labour won a majority on just 35% of the vote or the 2015 election where UKIP won just 1 seat on 13% of the vote.

    Overall, there is a strong link between seats and votes at Norwegian elections. However, it is worth caveating that seats are distributed so that rural areas have slightly more representation per person than urban counterparts, slightly skewing the link between seats and votes.

    Furthermore, although thresholds are common in PR systems, the 4% threshold in Norway means that elections are not purely proportional – this may be reduced to 3% in the coming years. This is for information purposes and the merits of thresholds in such systems can be debated elsewhere as the purpose of this article is to highlight how much more representative a PR system is than FPTP. For more about the ins and outs of Norway’s election system, please read the Electoral Reform Society article on PR in Norway.

    After eight years of a Conservative-led government, Norway has voted for a change. The Labour Party may have lost seats in this election but PR means that government formation is not about who is the biggest party. Instead Nowegian parliaments accurately represent how people vote with governments formed by whichever coalition of parties can command a majority in the Storting. In this case, the governing right-of-centre parties lost seats overall while the left and centre made gains. All in all, the distribution of seats fairly reflects votes cast at the ballot box.

    Norwegian elections are highly proportional and have limited wasted votes. Norwegian votes matter – all thanks to Proportional Representation.

    Westminster should learn from countries such as Norway and adopt Proportional Representation to upgrade UK democracy.

    Upgrade Holyrood is a Scottish politics site dedicated to improving Scottish democracy while at the same time being an advocate for PR and other democratic improvements at the UK-level.

    Read more about Upgrade Holyrood here.

    Follow Upgrade Holyrood on Twitter: @UpgradeHolyrood

    READ MORE: Canadian and German elections put contrasting voting systems in the spotlight (via Politics.co.uk)

    Canadian and German elections put contrasting voting systems in the spotlight

    Germany’s SPD Chancellor-candidate Olaf Scholz (Pixabay)

    Upgrade Holyrood’s Richard Wood has written a new article for Politics.co.uk (published 9 September 2021), highlighting the upcoming German and Canadian elections and the need for Proportional Representation in the UK.

    The full article can be read here: Canadian and German elections put contrasting voting systems in the spotlight.

    Two leading democracies go to the polls later this month, both facing far from certain outcomes. The end of the Merkel era places Germany at a crossroads with a diverse range of multi-party coalitions on the table. Meanwhile, Canada’s election is Justin Trudeau’s gamble to turn his minority government into a majority one, despite polls suggesting this could backfire and hand power to the country’s Conservatives.

    Held within a week of each other, these elections are two very different interpretations of democracy due to their contrasting electoral systems. They show how the UK has two possible futures ahead. The Canadian route, based around First Past the Post (FPTP), typifies just a semi-representative democracy. And the German route, based around Proportional Representation (PR),which ensures an accurate link between votes cast and seats won.

    Richard Wood (2021)