The present winner-takes-all voting system frequently gives governments exaggerated majorities and leaves a tiny minority of voters in marginal seats to decide elections. A fairer voting system would produce a more representative parliament and make everyone's vote count equally. This election could provide a historic opportunity for achieving voting reform. You can help maximise that opportunity by making the voting system an issue during this election campaign.

As in previous elections, LCER is particularly supporting Labour candidates who are supporters of electoral reform. We have compiled a list of those Labour MPs and candidates we have evidence of supporting electoral reform. List of Labour MPs / candidates in favour of electoral reform

Will 2005 be different? Examining the effects the electoral system could have on the result:

At a seminar organised by The All Party Parliamentary Group on Electoral Reform on 19 January 2005, psephologists John Curtice and Dr Adrian Blau presented analyses of the recent performance of the electoral system; and forecast what effect boundary changes, population movements, turnout and tactical voting may have on the outcome of the next election. Dr Blau’s main conclusions were that there is an increased chance of a hung parliament or a small majority for the governing party, and that there is an increased chance of Labour winning more seats than the Conservatives while at the same time being behind on the popular vote. He saw such a “nightmare scenario for first-past-the-past”, with Lib Dems holding the balance of power and pushing for electoral reform, as being more plausible than it has ever been, even though still unlikely.

LCER / Make Votes Count / Electoral Reform Society's joint fringe meeting at Labour’s Spring Conference in February gave another opportunity to engage in some useful number crunching ahead of the election. John Curtice presented his ideas on ‘will 2005 be different?’ and focused specifically on some of the potential impacts for the Labour party. In his presentation, Curtice suggested that, despite the 13 seat reduction in Scottish seats, the electoral system is still quite biased in favour of Labour. Indeed, there are aspects which have worsened. The Conservative vote is concentrated in large rural constituencies and expanding suburban/commuter belt constituencies, whose boundaries are still based on 1991 census figures. The Labour vote is spread out giving them more seats for votes. This means that the Conservatives have to be winning by 7 per cent over Labour to become the largest party at Westminster.

Labour’s position would be weakened slightly by any diminishing in the type of tactical voting seen in 1997 and repeated in 2001, when Curtice estimates that 18 Labour MPs owed their seats to such action, although this could be higher given the embedded nature of tactical voting over elections since the 1980s. In the current political climate, and with polling data showing a near doubling since 2001 of Lib Dem voters’ second preferences going to the Conservatives, the impact could be to cut by around 2 per cent the margin in votes between the two parties needed for the Conservatives to make real progress. One final observation from Curtice was that polls have repeatedly over-estimated Labour’s share of the vote compared with actual results. So, while many commentators may be predicting an easy win for the Labour, the voting system is helping to obscure the fact that it may be a closer race, at least in terms of the popular vote.