The only justification for not doing this is protectionism. Starmer is placing party above country. We can see how damaging the Tories are. I do not want to see their likes again.

  • Syldon@feddit.ukOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    most are probably happy with mine. Not many have anything to do with their MPs. Most are happy that their tribal party is in the seat.

    • jabjoe@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      You could easily argue PR is about tribal voting. Part of me would like parties to disappear all together. But your always going to get groups forming. So I’d losen them by outlawing things like three line whip.

      MPs should represent all of those in the constituency. Regardless of their voting. Mine in her letters is clearly trying to win people round. I’d never vote for her, but I still expect her to do her job as a local MP.

      • Syldon@feddit.ukOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        You could never outlaw a 3 line whip when a party runs on a manifesto. When an MP stands on a manifesto then it is reasonable to expect them to vote for that pledge.

        You will always get tribal voting. Even now with the shambles that the Tories are, you will still see 25% who support them. The reverse would be true with Labour. The problem we have atm is that there is no real choice but to vote tribally. Tactical voting should never be a thing. How can it be a good thing to vote for what you do not want.

        • jabjoe@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          When the party goes against the manifesto, I don’t MP should be forced to go with the party. It makes a mockery of the whole system.