Actually, it's very fair. Each local area elects a person to represent the area in parliament. What could be fairer than that? Of course if the electorate fail to do their job and just vote for whoever has the right party label, that's the fault of the electorate, not the system. The system could be improved certainly. Getting rid of party names and symbols on the ballot paper would be a good start.
The problem
@Condate is that for many of those that bother to vote, their vote simply doesn't count in a first-past-the-post system. (This is why the Greens have v little representation and we have and a government formed in the past who haven't come top of the popular vote.) We have a "representative democracy" and yet no-one represents my views in parliament. Worse still do any casework for me if it goes against (his) ideology, which it probably would, based on his voting record.
@andrewbowden I think nailed it.
If you remove party names (as they once did), parties need to bang out their candidate's names all the time. A waste of time.
A whole host of people vote for the party, particularly at a General. And on the basis of what they THINK a party represents rather than reading the manifesto (more typically read after an election to see what the winners have failed to deliver on). For instance "Tories are good on the economy and immigration" but policies of austerity and net non-EU immigration have failed quite badly. (I could give other parties' examples, including our own, but they are currently in government.)
I do yearn for a more responsive and representative democracy. And fairer voting would be part of that. Ditching some of the more absurd traditions of parliament, getting an elected 2nd chamber of statesmen-and-women rather than political hacks and PR will help. After all most people are the in middle of the political system by definition, but the current system gives you a right-wing government about 2/3rds of the time ("let's stick with what we know") and a left-wing one the rest of the time.
Life means making some compromises and forming friendships with people of slightly different opinions - why shouldn't politics be the same?
I am sorry, dear readers, that was a long one. I've been away too long! (Friends will know I've been doing a lot of caring recently.) 2 things to end up on, re comments below.
1) Former MP Andrew Stunell WAS the chief whip for a while!
2) Election expenses rules mean you declare everything, including large donors. Most Lib Dem money is raised locally. Would that we had the massive resources of the Tories!
(All comments above are my own although any resemblance to Lib Dem policies, alive or dead, is probably not co-incidental as I am a Lib Dem!)
