《卫报》发布独家分析，对比当前民调背景下多种投票制度对英国议会的影响 1。研究结果揭示，现行制度下席位分配与选票占比存在巨大偏差。
在第一过去杆制（首先到达终点制）下，改革党将获得46%的议会席位，而其选票占比仅为28% 1。相比之下，比例代表制下的地区政党名单制会使改革党的席位占比（28%）与选票占比相符 1。附加成员制下改革党将获33%席位而得票28% 1，单一可转移投票制下则为27%席位配28%选票 1。这种制度设计的偏差程度各不相同——绿党每获得一个席位需要280,000张选票，而改革党仅需26,000张 1。
对比之下，2024年大选中工党领导人基尔·斯塔默以34%的选票赢得了650个议会席位中的411个 1。
候任首相安迪·伯纳姆于2026年5月表示，"我致力于比例代表制。我认为它会改变政治文化" 1。工党、自民党和绿党等多个党派均支持这一立场。不过，英国选民在2011年关于替代投票制的公投中明确拒绝了选举改革 1。
The Guardian has released an exclusive analysis comparing how different voting systems would reshape Britain's parliament based on current polling data 1. The research reveals stark disparities in seat distribution across various electoral models, particularly highlighting how the current first-past-the-post system benefits some parties while disadvantaging others.
Under the existing first-past-the-post system, Reform would secure 46% of parliamentary seats despite receiving only 28% of the vote 1. In contrast, regional party list proportional representation would align Reform's seat share directly with its vote share at 28% 1. Under the additional member system, Reform would gain 33% of seats for 28% of votes 1, while the single transferable vote system would result in 27% of seats and 26% of votes 1.
The analysis underscores significant inefficiencies in seat allocation. The Green Party faces a seat cost of 280,000 votes, whereas Reform's cost stands at just 26,000 votes per seat 1.
Incoming Prime Minister Andy Burnham has expressed strong backing for proportional representation, stating: "I am committed to proportional representation. I think it would change the culture of politics" 1. This position aligns with support from multiple parties including Labour, the Liberal Democrats, and the Greens 1.
The latest general election in 2024 saw Prime Minister Keir Starmer's Labour Party secure 411 of 650 parliamentary seats with 34% of the vote 1. Electoral reform efforts have faced setbacks in the past; voters explicitly rejected the alternative vote system in a 2011 referendum 1.
评论
还没有评论，欢迎留下第一条。