Proportional Representation (PR) has been shown to make a Parliament that looks more like the country it represents. Research has been conducted into its impact on the representation of women and ethnic minorities. However, there is also emerging evidence that PR can advance LGBT+ representation and rights.
In 2019, the House of Commons proudly became the “gayest in the world”, with 45 openly LGBTQ+ MPs elected. Since then, this number has increased to 61, with more MPs coming out, including Jamie Wallis, who became the UK’s first openly transgender MP. .
Despite this, however, the UK has fallen behind some European neighbours for LGBT+ rights. 2022 marks the third year in a row that the country has fallen in ILGA-Europe’s ‘Rainbow Map’ of 49 European countries ranked on LGBT+ rights, from 10th to 14th. The organisers criticised the UK government for stalling on proposed reforms to laws surrounding gender recognition and conversion therapy.
Countries with PR have frequently led the way when it comes to LGBT+ rights. 25 of the 30 countries which have legalised same sex marriage use PR, including 12 of the first 13 to have done so. Of the 11 countries which rank A or A- in the LGBTQ+ Travel Safety index, 8 use PR. All 6 of current or former openly LGBT+ heads of state are in countries which use PR.
Of course, correlation is not causation, so what research has been done into the effects of electoral systems on LGBT+ representation and rights?
Proportional Representation and LGBTQ+ representation
The leading factor in whether LGBT+ candidates are elected is not systems, but societal acceptance of them. However, researchers have made two key arguments relating to PR and LGBT+ representation. Firstly, First Past the Post hinders representation of LGBT+ candidates in elections. As Andrew Reynolds writes:
“First-past-the-post (FPTP) systems give an incentive for parties to run lowest common denominator candidates, who are very often straight males from the dominant ethnic group. Thus women and gay candidates have a particularly difficult time winning FPTP seats unless some special mechanisms are in place (e.g., reserved quota seats or affirmative action districtics)”
Also, when the country in question is supportive of LGBT+ candidates, PR can help them to get elected. As Elisabeth Rödel writes:
“In proportional representation systems that include an intraparty preference vote, the effect of proportional representation is conditionally dependent on prevailing attitudes towards homosexuality. When the mean justification towards homosexuality reaches a sufficient level, then the intraparty preference vote influences the share of LGBT MP’s even in a positive manner.”
Essentially, if a society is accepting of a broader range of sexual preferences in general, then PR can help elect LGBT+ politicians. Indeed, while the UK has the highest number of LGBT+ MPs, it is New Zealand, whose House of Representatives is elected under PR, which has the highest proportion of LGBT+ MPs, at 10%.
Incentives for more progressive MPs
Evidence also suggests that Proportional Representation can encourage MPs to be more progressive on LGBT+ rights. Research on Taiwan, which uses a mix of FPTP and PR to elect its legislature, showed that MPs elected under its PR system are more likely to support same sex marriage.
Similarly, since most PR systems allow voters to express multiple preferences, or use multiple votes, it can be a vehicle for voters to support a party, while condemning individual candidates. Research on the 2017 German general election showed that MPs from CDU/CSU who opposed same sex marriage, had greater swings against them, than those who supported it.
In short, PR allows for greater democracy, and for voters to truly hold their MPs to account. In societies with positive opinions of LGBT+ rights, this allows voters to incentivise their representatives to hold these positions too.
Blowing open the debate
There is also strong evidence that PR can lead to a broader and better debate on LGBT+ rights, and thus faster action on issues like same sex marriage. Salomon Orellana points out that, after New Zealand introduced PR, the two party system collapsed, particularly with the rise of the New Zealand Greens in 1999. This party had a much more progressive stance on issues like LGBT+ rights, and the increased number of Green MPs led to a greater coverage of these issues.
Evidence also shows that PR leads to far right parties moderating their stances after elections, and to overall less polarisation in the political debate. As we have seen figures on the far right of politics in the UK and US demagoguing LGBT+ rights, the need for consensus based decision making is needed more than ever.