VetoCampaign

It doesn't make sense to force the diversity of views within a constituency into a single MP. Much better to have multi-member constituencies, so (almost) everyone can have someone they voted for, and also someone to choose to represent them on any major issue. Also, of course, competition between members of the same party - a switch from parties choosing the MP to parties choosing the candidates.

The point of the veto is to optimise governance. If constituencies cannot elect a single member majority support then These "constituencies" are not really constituencies, as a majority cant be represented because either, such a system is impossible, or the electoral commission is incompetent and bounded mutually antagonistic populations together. It's impossible to govern in such a system in such a way as to serve the majority. The end result is that high use of veto will demand a better electoral system, usually some type of PR or the EC will have to redraw constituency boundaries in such a way that a majority can be represented. A PR system will require veto, otherwise it won't govern in a way that will maximise the common good. The way veto functions in PR, depends on the type of PR, the principle of it's use is outlined below. PR necessitates a veto option since it allocates all seats without ensuring representation for all potential voters, risking the election of MPs who represent no one. It still allows for voting for the least undesirable, and it has the potential to provide small minority parties a disproportionate influence over policy that the majority oppose. PR didn't stop Germany from kneecapping itself.  The principle that applies is that a percentage VETO results in the same percentage of empty seats. For example, if there is a 30% veto, then 30% of the seats will remain empty. The rest are assigned as per vote share. This arrangement retains proportionality, allows more voters to be represented in future elections, and keeps pressure on elected MPs to do a competent job; otherwise, even more seats will become empty. There's no way around requiring the majority's consent to optimise governance.

I’m beginning to think that Swiss form of government is a better idea, my understanding is that they hold a referendum on the big issues to see what the people want … that’d be a novel idea wouldn’t it, a government listening to the people

If you want a government that serves the majority, all MPs must be elected with majority support. Add a VETO option to the ballot that triggers a rerun if a majority of voters choose to VETO. Prevent minority rule and maximise the common good. Sign the petition to support:

If you want a government that serves the majority, all MPs must be elected with majority support. Add a VETO option to the ballot that triggers a rerun if a majority of voters choose to VETO. Prevent minority rule and maximise the common good. Sign the petition to support: