Cameron & Clegg union - the disproportionate representation of preference?
(image from the BBC)
Well, on the one hand, we could say that some degree of proportionate representation is being achieved here as the combination of both parties sees their having an overall majority in the House of Parliament. On the one hand, it is not only that the combination of both the Lib Dems and the Conservatives is representative of most of those whom voted in percentage terms, but also the differing stances of those whom supported either party.
But that, to myself, seems quite the sleight of hand. Percentage-wise, the nation could be told that the majority is being represented in a coalition of compromise. However, if the nation’s preference, as illustrated by the percentage of votes acquired by the top 3 parties is taken into consideration, then somethings seems quite amiss here. In order of the nation’s preference, the Conservatives come out first, Labour second, and Lib Dems third. But it is the third that casts the deciding vote on which of the top two forms the government. And given the Cameron-Clegg union, the nation’s second choice is cast aside for the first and third.
Yes, whilst we talk about how many seats in parliament such and such a party ought to get given their percentage of votes, how is it that a party that has been preferred the least - the Lib Dems - is now in a greater position to decide policy matters than Labour, which has been preferred over it?
Whilst we talk about percentages and proportionate representation in Parliament, in this case, the nation’s preference appears to be disproportionately represented in government and the cabinet.