Andy Burnham should rip up our undemocratic first past the post system – even if some in Labour disagree | Neal Lawson

A poll in the Mail on Sunday at the end of June was remarkable. It had not just Reform as low as 21%, but also Labour and the Tories. It was remarkable because it starkly demonstrated the fragmented landscape of the UK’s electoral terrain, as well as the electoral weakness of its main players.

Polls since have varied, not least with the Burnham bounce, but this week’s YouGov voting intention figures put Reform, Labour and the Tories on 23%, 22% and 20% respectively (although it almost no longer matters which exact figure applies to which party). Add in the Greens and the Liberal Democrats on 13% apiece, the SNP dominating Scotland and Plaid Cymru Wales, then Restore UK and independent candidates and you have an unprecedented variety of options laid out before the British electorate.

And all this despite the first past the post (FPTP) electoral system, which has for so long upheld two-party politics. It does so by punishing any party outside the duopoly by refusing to match votes to seats. If this unprecedented level of fragmentation exists in the face of a voting system that coerces people to back only their least bad option, then how diverse would this landscape be if people could vote with their heart and know that their vote really counted?

This now complete mismatch between what voters want and what they get is the root cause of the governing crisis destabilising British politics. Labour won two-thirds of the seats in the Commons in 2024 on just a third of the vote, and its leadership assumed that this result conferred it legitimacy in the eyes of the public. But governments increasingly find that a Commons majority upheld by an unrepresentative voting system is more vulnerable to voter backlash. In this context, support quickly melts away, as Keir Starmer and Morgan McSweeney found out.

If Britain continues under FPTP, then this governing chaos will deepen, and the only beneficiaries will be anti-democratic extremists.

But now there is a golden chance to change all this. Next Wednesday, the representation of the people bill will come before parliament for its final stages. An amendment has been tabled to set up a national commission to look at which system of proportional representation (PR), which does match votes to seats, would best suit our country. It has huge backing in the Commons, in the Labour party and among the public. The prime minister, Andy Burnham, is also a longstanding supporter of electoral reform. The political conditions have never been more favourable to begin making changes to the voting system. What could possibly go wrong?

This: a minority but powerful view within the upper reaches of the Labour party, the cabinet and the party bureaucracy is vehemently opposed to PR and the plural politics of cooperation it demands. According to this tribal view, only Labour, governing alone, can represent the interests of “their voters”. And so it is preferable to lose all power than to share it. Labour winning – however tiny its share of the vote – is more important than democracy working. At best, those with this view may calculate whether PR or FPTP delivers the most Labour MPs, equating self-interest with the national interest.

But all their paternalistic calculations miss the very big point: democracy should not be designed around what is best for Labour – or any party – but around what works best for the country.

Labour’s rearguard reactionaries will try to block the idea of a national commission, water it down or kick it bureaucratically into touch. They will say only the cost of living matters, and that no one brings up PR on the doorstep. But it is precisely our rotten voting system that denies the changes people want, because it prioritises the cautious views of a few swing voters in a few swing seats and impels Labour to pander to them.

The game is over for this old top-down, command-and-control politics. The myth of strong government from FPTP is dead. It is time for change, to do what Willy Brandt, the fabled leader of the German Social Democrats, implored the left to do in 1969, and “dare more democracy”. That means finally embracing multiparty government, and ensuring everyone’s vote is counted equally: it is the only way to end the cycle of chaos.

Radical Manchesterism beats in our prime minister’s heart. There, he made big changes happen by listening to voices beyond Labour and working cross-party to build a long-term consensus to transform a region. Next week, by backing himself and his best instincts on PR, he can transform the country.

• Neal Lawson is director of the cross-party campaign organisation Compass