Ian Dunt

So let alone, if there was any fear that any of these guys would think independently and be prepared to vote against their own government, in this case, they're no longer even allowed to do so because they've been so loyal that there's been a formalization of the relationship.

Well, for a start, in the most brutal way possible, which is that it doesn't count the votes.

So we ignore about two thirds of the votes in every election.

What do you mean?

First past the post, the only vote that counts is the votes for the winning candidate.

So first of all, you lose all the votes for people who just didn't vote for the winning candidate.

They have no representation.

We act like politics is about winning.

It isn't.

Voting is supposed to be about representation.

OK, not about just triumph.

You know, one man triumphs over everything.

But then you also lose the franchise if you vote for the winning candidate after the point that they've won.

So the first vote after victory is a wasted vote.

And what you'll see, especially in urban seats, especially for Labour historically, is just piling up of votes, thousands and thousands of extra Labour votes, where they do no good.

They are disenfranchised votes.

If you'd spread those votes around the local area, around the country, those would elect more Labour MPs.

But in fact, you don't get MPs on that basis.

So firstly, we basically just ignore a huge amount of votes.

The second thing it does, though, I think is even more pernicious.