We live in a country where each constituency has a single MP. Yet for most people this means the MP who “represents” them in parliament doesn’t share their politics, didn’t win a majority of the vote in their local area, and was chosen by a tiny handful of party insiders long before election day.
In the 2024 General Election, the majority of people found themselves with an MP they didn’t vote for. That’s 57.8% or 16.6 million people represented by someone they didn’t want. In fact, Labour is the only party where a majority of their voters have an MP they voted for. It’s no surprise that people feel like politicians don’t listen.
While these MPs will, no doubt, try their best to help their constituents and stand up for their local areas. But when it comes to more political issues, these MPs will be marching into the voting lobbies along party lines. But it’s precisely to influence national political issues that we elect MPs in the first place.
MPs without majority support are the norm
In the 2024 general election, around 85% of MPs were elected on less than half the vote. That’s 554 constituencies where the majority of people wanted someone else to be the MP – this is compared to 229 in 2019. It gets worse though, 266 constituencies (41% of all seats) elected their representative on less than 40%. The record for lowest vote share was an incredible 26.7% – barely over a quarter of voters.
That 26.5% vote share was made possible in South West Norfolk as the right wing vote was split three ways, between Reform, the Conservatives and an Independent Conservative. Together, those three won 62% of the vote, compared to the Labour candidate’s 26.7%. It’s pretty clear voters wanted a right-wing MP, yet as the vote was split three ways, and Labour won the seat.
Candidates are chosen from the top down
But who chooses the candidates? Before voters even get a say, party HQs or small groups of local activists have already decided who stands. Sometimes candidates are parachuted in from outside the area, hand-picked for loyalty to the leadership or their faction.
While all the political parties contain a broad range of views, the rest of us get one candidate per major party, and one shot at choosing between them. You can’t say, “I like this party but prefer their other candidate.” You can’t choose between shades of opinion.
It doesn’t have to be like this
One MP can never represent the full range of political opinions in an area. Under fairer, proportional, voting systems like the Single Transferable Vote, things look very different.
Instead of one MP per area, you elect a small team of MPs to represent a larger region. On the ballot paper you number the candidates in order, across or within parties, so you can choose who best reflects your values.
If you like a party but not its chosen candidate, you can back someone else from the same party. And because several MPs represent each area, almost everyone ends up with at least one MP they actually voted for. Someone they can turn to and say, “You speak for me.”
When Scotland changed to the Single Transferable Vote for Scottish elections, the number of people who ended up with a councillor they voted for jumped to 75%.
The Single Transferable Vote is a tried and tested system that works
First Past the Post gives power to party HQs and factional insiders. It narrows choice and locks millions out of meaningful representation.
The Single Transferable Vote gives that power back to voters. It creates competition within parties, encourages cooperation across them, and ensures that every voice has a chance to be heard.
It’s time we stopped pretending that one MP for everyone is working for anyone.
Add your name to our call for a fairly elected parliament
Join our call for proportional representation