How Does It Work?
Overview
Parliament would have two types of MPs who would be equal in every way apart from the manner in which they are elected. There would be the same total number of MPs as we have currently.
One type would be Constituency MPs (CMPs) who are elected exactly as MPs are elected under the first-past-the-post system now, just for slightly larger constituencies. Then, for each region of Britain (South West, London etc.), there will be ‘top-up’ Regional MPs (RMPs) who are allocated in proportion to the votes each party received in that region.
Voting takes place just as it does now – voters select a single candidate, or party, to vote for, knowing that nearly every vote counts. Every vote is counted towards the Regional MPs.
Regional Elections
The Regional Top-Up system is based on the use of the 11 European electoral regions in the UK, excluding Northern Ireland which already uses an alternative voting system. These follow county boundaries and are a reasonable and known division of the country.
Constituency and Regional MPs
There will be 508 Constituency MPs and 138 Regional MPs. The constituency MPs are elected exactly as they are now, on a first-past-the-post basis in their constituency. Each constituency will be roughly 22% larger than the existing constituencies.
For each region, all of the unsuccessful candidates are put on a list in order of the percentage of the vote they received in their constituency. This means that the most locally popular candidates will be at the top of the list.
The Regional MP seats are allocated by running the d’Hondt formula over all votes cast in each region. Candidates are elected from each party in the order they appear on the newly created party list.
This has four main advantages:
-
Regional MPs are still elected in the single constituency where they stood, and thus are also ‘constituency’ MPs. They are elected, and unelected, by local voters. This means that many constituencies will have two MPs from different parties.
-
There are no party lists of cronies; only the candidates most popular with the public are elected.
-
Using the regional system, rather than a national system, means that ‘regional’ parties like Plaid Cymru, the Scottish Socialists and the English Democrats can be properly represented.
-
It is possible for two high quality candidates from a constituency to both be elected if they are popular enough.
Party Voting
In order to ensure that every vote counts, any party that stands candidates in one third (1/3) or more of the constituencies in a region will also appear on every ballot paper for the region. This allows voters to vote for a party even where there is no local candidate; all such votes automatically move to the regional ‘pool’ where they will count towards a Regional MP.
This system provides the maximum possible choice for voters, and also gives a result that properly represents the political sentiment of the country.
Distribution of MPs
This is a guide to how the Regional MPs would be distributed within each region. For the moment, the numbers are simply based on double the number of MEPs for each region, which works out roughly in proportion to both the population and the number of MPs.
|
Region
|
Electorate |
Current MPs
|
Under Regional Top-Up
|
|
|
Constituency MPs
|
Regional MPs
|
|||
| East Midlands | 3,312,944 |
44
|
34
|
10
|
| Eastern | 4,252,669 |
56
|
42
|
14
|
| London | 5,257,624 |
74
|
58
|
16
|
| North East | 1,939,709 |
30
|
24
|
6
|
| North West | 5,206,474 |
76
|
60
|
16
|
| Scotland | 3,873,163 |
59
|
47
|
12
|
| South East | 6,231,875 |
83
|
63
|
20
|
| South West | 3,998,479 |
51
|
39
|
12
|
| Wales | 2,251,968 |
40
|
32
|
8
|
| West Midlands | 4,056,370 |
59
|
47
|
12
|
| Yorkshire & the Humber | 3,792,415 |
56
|
44
|
12
|
Voting system
Voting takes place in exactly the same way as it does now. Voters place an ‘X’ next to their favoured candidate, or party where there is no local candidate.
Although there is no change required in the physical method of voting, the way in which voters use their vote would change considerably. Firstly, because votes for losing candidates are reused to elect the Regional MPs, there will be less emphasis on the ‘two-horse race’ contests that distort the current system in many constituencies.
Secondly, because every vote counts, more people will be willing to cast a vote, especially in formerly ‘safe’ seats. Increasing voter turnout is one of the primary aims of the political class at the moment.
The proportional distribution system
The primary requirement of a proportional representation system is to ensure that every party that has earned enough votes has some level of representation. By ‘enough votes’ we mean the absolute minimum percentage of the vote that should give an elected representative under a totally proportional system. In the West Midlands, for example, where there are 59 MPs, any party receiving 1.7% of the vote should have an MP elected in that region.
There are four steps in distributing the Regional MP seats:
-
Add up all of the votes (and party votes where there was no local candidate) for each party across the region.
-
Create a list of unsuccessful candidates for each party in order of the percentage of the vote achieved locally.
-
Calculate the minimum percentage of the vote needed for a single represenative (1.7% in the West Midlands). Discount any parties that didn’t reach the minimum percentage from the rest of the calculations.
-
Assign the Regional seats using the d’Hondt system (same as in the European elections).

#1 by Roger W on October 26th, 2009
this was (basically) my idea from a couple of years ago!! Glad you have picked it up…..
It is important to still have the majority of MP’s from a constituency as we do now (as you have proposed also), to maintain the link we have today with our reepresentatives – but with a small proportion taken from the “top up” over a region. In my view the differences in population of the regions need to be ironed out first, to allow more similar electorate numbers for each – more as a means of transparency in the election process of assigning regional seats, than any difference in the end result.
Good luck – this is definitely the way electoral reform should be going, and the parties in westminster today would do well to follow it.
What support do you have from MP’s? Have you met with some to discuss in detail? Maybe you need to be on the committee dealing with this…..
#2 by Anthony Butcher on October 26th, 2009
Thanks for the support Roger. I have had a couple of responses from MPs so far, which I will probably put in an update posting at some point. By and large though, I don’t think that they are very interested!
I would love to be on the committee dealing with this, but how on Earth I could make that happen I don’t know. Do you have any possible contacts?
#3 by Gary on January 15th, 2010
How does Northern Ireland have a different system? Our party system may be different but our electoral system has always been FPTP just as it has been anywhere else in the United Kingdom. We use PR for local, Assembly and European Parliament elections but this is no different to Scotland and Wales using the Additional Member System for their respective devolved bodies.
#4 by Adrian on February 4th, 2010
I like it, but why do we have to fit it ito EU regions?
Why not County reserve MP’s? Percentage of vote should be just as easy.
#5 by Adrian on February 4th, 2010
You already answered my question- sorry
#6 by Martyn on April 12th, 2010
Why use the EU regions? This shows a clear EU bias and discriminates against parties representing genuine regions such as Cornwall or Yorkshire (Yorkshire proper: that’s with Middlesbrough and Saddleworth and without any of Lincolnshire).
#7 by Anthony Butcher on April 13th, 2010
It’s nothing to do with an EU bias – the regions are just conveniently sized and already in use (rather than reinventing political regions to use). England is too big to use as a single region, and counties are too small.
A political system can’t be designed around micro-parties such as Mebyon Kernow. Such parties would still be able to stand in each constituency in their area of interest as they do now, so it wouldn’t affect them.
#8 by x on May 7th, 2010
What about compulsory voting?
#9 by Robert Feal-Martinez on May 8th, 2010
Whilst the system appears to be fairer, my one concern would be the effectiveness of the actual counting process. We seem to struggle now to get counting right.
Imagine the recounts when there may leterally be 5 votes in it at the Regional Level.
#10 by Anthony Butcher on May 8th, 2010
It’s definitely a valid concern, but we do manage for the European elections across large areas of the country. Although the vote is higher in General Elections, the system should be able to cope.
#11 by Anthony Butcher on May 8th, 2010
I don’t like the idea of the state compelling anyone to do anything without a very good reason. If people choose not to vote, then I don’t think that we have any right to force them to. On top of that, many people don’t vote because they don’t know who to vote for or what the issues are; it is not necessarily a good thing to force them to add essentially random votes into the system for the sake of it.
This General Election has shown that people will come out and vote when they are interested and have something to vote for. It’s up to our politicians, media and political activists to inspire people to come out and vote.
If a system such as Regional Top-Up was introduced, which ensured that nearly every vote counted, then I would expect the turn-out to grow considerably anyway.
#12 by Alex on August 6th, 2010
Good, but it should be IRV not FPTP.
#13 by Anthony Butcher on August 6th, 2010
That could work, if the first preference votes were passed upwards for the top-up.
I think that the difference is marginal though. Bearing in mind that people can already vote for their preferred candidate/party, is there much advantage in offering them second and third preferences? Would that outweigh the additional complexity of changing the voting method? Certainly worth considering now that we might already have AV/IRV for the next general election anyway.