		<div class="wpcnt">
			<div class="wpa">
				<span class="wpa-about">Advertisements</span>
				<div class="u top_amp">
							<amp-ad width="300" height="265"
		 type="pubmine"
		 data-siteid="111265417"
		 data-section="2">
		</amp-ad>
				</div>
			</div>
		</div><p><a href="http://londonglossy.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/deadlock-over-voting-system-bill.jpg"><img class="alignnone size-full" title="Peers defied MPs to insist a referendum on changing the voting system should only be binding if turnout is higher than 40 per cent" src="http://londonglossy.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/min-deadlock-over-voting-system-bill.jpg" alt="Peers defied MPs to insist a referendum on changing the voting system should only be binding if turnout is higher than 40 per cent"/></a></p>
<p>Both Houses of Parliament remain deadlocked over controversial legislation to hold a referendum on changing the voting system for general elections.</p>
<p>Peers have called for a 40% turnout to make the referendum result binding but MPs voted by 310 votes to 231, majority 79, to overturn the measure for a second time.</p>
<p>The Bill will now go back to the Lords, where peers will decide whether to reinstate a threshold and prolong the stand-off.</p>
<p>The legislation paves the way for a plebiscite on dropping the first-past-the-post (FPTP) system for Westminster elections in favour of the alternative vote (AV), which allows electors to rank candidates in order of preference.</p>
<p>Ministers need to get the Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill on to the statute book before peers begin their February half-term recess at the end of business in order to give the Electoral Commission time to plan for a referendum on the coalition&#8217;s preferred May 5 date.</p>
<p>Earlier peers voted by 277 to 215, majority 62, in favour of former Labour minister Lord Rooker&#8217;s move which would mean the AV system would not be automatically adopted in the event of a victory for the &#8220;yes&#8221; campaign if turnout in the referendum falls below the 40% threshold.</p>
<p>Some 27 Conservative peers and one Liberal Democrat rebelled to support Lord Rooker&#8217;s amendment, setting up the parliamentary &#8220;ping pong&#8221; process with the Bill being passed between the two Houses until a final agreement is reached.</p>
<p>Ministers urged MPs to remove the threshold when the Bill returned to the Commons.</p>
<p>Instead MPs supported an amendment requiring the Electoral Commission to &#8220;publish the most accurate estimate it is reasonably possible to make&#8221; of the turnout in the four nations of the United Kingdom.</p>
<p>The amendment is unlikely to have any major impact on the argument over a threshold, but it was tabled because of the &#8220;double insistence&#8221; rule which operates during ping pong: by convention a Bill will fall if the Commons insist on disagreeing with the Lords a second time without offering any alternative amendment.</p>
			<div style="padding-bottom:15px;" class="wordads-tag" data-slot-type="belowpost">
				<div id="atatags-dynamic-belowpost-68edca2626fa4">
					<script type="text/javascript">
						window.getAdSnippetCallback = function () {
							if ( false === ( window.isWatlV1 ?? false ) ) {
								// Use Aditude scripts.
								window.tudeMappings = window.tudeMappings || [];
								window.tudeMappings.push( {
									divId: 'atatags-dynamic-belowpost-68edca2626fa4',
									format: 'belowpost',
								} );
							}
						}

						if ( document.readyState === 'loading' ) {
							document.addEventListener( 'DOMContentLoaded', window.getAdSnippetCallback );
						} else {
							window.getAdSnippetCallback();
						}
					</script>
				</div>
			</div>
Discover more from London Glossy Post
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
