I think I'm repeating myself. Producer, your most recent post is bang on target. Excellent. Ludwig, Yours is even more on target. Sustainability is the only issue now that counts. However, no country on the planet is taking it seriously, or even seriously considering it, so while I support your party, I accept that, historically, the only force for change of human behaviour is total disaster in the form of violent revolution, and that only happens when life becomes totally intolerable for the majority of the people. That gives us about twenty more years and then, I hope, I'll be dead and avoid the horrors.

Producer said;
This means that some interests are over represented, others are
underrepresented and in some cases delivers no representation to a voter at all.
>

Producer does not understand how the parliamentary system works.
Just because the candidate that you voted for does not get elected does
not mean you have no representation.
Some years ago I went to the local member who I did not vote for with a
problem and he fixed it.
He did not know whether I voted for him or not.

So your assertion that you are not represented is false.

ybgirp

'That gives us about twenty more years and then, I hope, I'll be dead and avoid the horrors.'

We were taught the same dire prediticions by the socialist in the 70's. Just happens that far more people are heaps better off than then. Now that the climate scandal is known by all except the gullibe (before it was global cooling, the hole in the ozone layer and sheep letting off) a new over population mantra is needed.

runner,

It's from your myopic perspective that you judge the planets ability to withstand a constant and unsustainable human onslaught. Have a gander at this:
http://www.chinahush.com/2009/10/21/amazing-pictures-pollution-in-china/

One of the reasons that the people around you are "heaps better off" is that we access most of our cheap goodies from China. China has a vast population and has become an economic powerhouse from it's ability to give us what we demand with little thought to sustainable practice. Nice for us, of course, but, as you can see, not so nice for the environment.

We're a paradoxical species, still overwhelmingly led by the nose by our instincts to consume first and think later.

Poirot, those photos are indeed shocking.
I think about the only solution will be the end of globalisation.
That will kill off the massive Chinese export trade and turn them back
towards a more sustainable lifestyle.

Globalisation is slowly ending and will accelerate as energy gets more
expensive and with restricted supply.
That problem has already started in China with very significant
shortage of diesal and that has caused shortages of coal which has
resulted in widespread blackouts in Eastern China.

Bazz – You can’t base a system on your positive experience at division level. It may be the case that someone else has had a negative experience with a similar scenario. Any system including proportional representation will have positive and negative outcomes at all levels. Your comment is focused on a division not the whole electorate. It relates to an outcome of an issue, not the issue of proportional representation.

I also said - “The difference is that a proportional system is the only one that delivers one vote, one value over the WHOLE electorate!”

I do understand that – The current preferential system is not democratic. It does not deliver one vote one value. This means that some interests are over represented, others are underrepresented and in some cases delivers no representation to a voter at all.

Perhaps it is you that does not understand how the parliamentary system works?