How First-Past-the-Post Blocks the Policies YOU want to see

Britain’s broken electoral system doesn’t just distort results - it strangles the policies voters actually want. The wealth tax is the perfect example.

Last month (July 2025), more than 30 leading economists, led by Thomas Piketty, urged the government to introduce a modest levy on assets above £10 million. It would affect fewer than 75,000 people and could raise up to £22 billion a year for public services - almost half of the £51 billion fiscal hole facing the Treasury. Polling shows majority public support, and even among the wealthiest, there is significant backing. According to Patriotic Millionaires, 80% of UK millionaires support a 2% tax on wealth over £10 million, and 72% believe the government should raise taxes on the super-rich to reduce taxes for everyone else.

And yet, Rachel Reeves won’t touch it. Not because the economics don’t stack up - they do - but because first-past-the-post has left successive governments paralysed by a fear of upsetting swing voters in marginal seats.

This is the real poison of FPTP’s ‘winner takes all’ form of politics: it rewards cowardice over conviction.

The Prison of Electoral Positioning

Labour’s “landslide” masks a fragile mandate. The party won 63% of seats with just 34% of the vote - the least representative result in British history. That shaky foundation shapes every decision.

Labour’s manifesto promise not to raise income tax, VAT or National Insurance for “working people” wasn’t driven by economic sense. It was a defensive move - designed to neutralise attack lines about being “the party of high taxes” - and it has now become a fiscal straitjacket.

Obvious revenue sources are off-limits. Middle earners are squeezed instead through stealth tax rises, frozen thresholds, and cuts to public services. Ministers calculate not what the country needs, but what might lose them the next election.

First-past-the-post breeds this defensive thinking. A handful of marginal constituencies can hold a government’s entire domestic agenda hostage.

Elsewhere in the world, proportional systems give governments room to act. Spain introduced a ‘solidarity wealth tax’ in 2022, ranging from 1.7% to 3.5% on assets above €3 million. Switzerland - hardly a socialist state - has taxed wealth since 1840. These policies work because their electoral systems reward delivering for the majority, not pandering to a swing-seat minority.

The pattern is clear: countries with proportional representation invest more in public services, implement more redistributive policies, and act more decisively on climate. Their governments answer to the broad public will, not just the small slice that can tip the balance under first-past-the-post.

The Human Cost of Political Cowardice

Every day this broken system costs us. The richest 250 families in the UK hold £748 billion in combined wealth while the NHS struggles to keep the lights on. Schools make do without basic resources while private jets avoid the taxman. Public services crumble while inequality deepens. This isn’t fiscal responsibility - it’s a moral failure. And it happens because our system rewards avoiding risk over delivering change.

It’s interesting to note that Parliament is ahead of the government on this topic. More than 150 MPs and peers from all major parties have joined the All-Party Parliamentary Group for Fair Elections, calling for a National Commission on Electoral Reform. This independent body would bring together experts, practitioners and the public to consider all options for proportional representation - and deliver recommendations the country can act on.

The public is ahead of the government too. Recent polling shows 64% want electoral reform addressed before the next election. Support for proportional representation is now a majority position across voters for all five main parties - including Conservatives, where support has more than doubled since 2023.

Breaking the Cycle

The wealth tax is not just an idea with widespread support - it’s a test of whether our democracy can deliver what people want. Right now, the answer is no. Under first-past-the-post, governments operate in a permanent crouch, always looking over their shoulders, afraid to act boldly. That fear locks us into underfunded services, rising inequality, and a politics defined by what can’t be done.

We can break that cycle. A fairer electoral system would free governments to focus on long-term good over short-term survival, allowing popular, evidence-based policies like the wealth tax to succeed. Until then, we’ll keep watching good ideas die on the altar of electoral mathematics. The choice is simple: keep the system, or keep our ambitions for a better country.