Labour is most in danger of losing a seat here, and the candidate in that list position is a Remain supporter.
|Change UK||1. Frances Helena Weetman|
|2. Penny Hawley|
|3. Kathryn Louise Heywood|
|Conservative||1. Richard Lawrie|
|2. Chris Galley|
|3. Duncan Crute|
|Green||1. Rachel Featherstone|
|2. Jonathan Elmer|
|3. Dawn Furness|
|Labour||1. Judith Kirton-Darling|
|2. Paul Brannen|
|3. Clare Penny-Evans|
|Lib Dem||1. Fiona Hall|
|2. Julie Pörksen|
|3. Aidan King|
|Brexit Party||1. Brian Monteith|
|2. John David Edward Tennant|
|3. Richard Leslie Monaghan|
|UKIP||1. Richard Elvin|
|2. Chris Gallacher|
|3. Alan Breeze|
|Party||1st seat||2nd seat||3rd seat|
|Party||To gain seat||To lose seat|
1. European elections in England, Scotland and Wales are counted using the D'Hondt method. Our aim is the most effective use of votes to maximise the number of Remain supporters elected in this somewhat complex system.
2. Based on the 2014 European election results, we have calculated how many votes each party needs to either gain or lose a seat.
3. We can then see whether tactical votes are most effectively used defensively or offensively, and which party is in danger of losing a seat or best placed to gain one.
4. In mixed parties such as Labour, we also consider whether the candidate in that list position is a known Remainer.
The D'Hondt system is better than first-past-the-post, but quite flawed despite being theoretically more proportional. You are only able to express one preference, not rank candidates 1, 2, 3, etc as in other systems. The regional seat allocations also disadvantage smaller parties – true proportional representation is impossible when there are only 3 or 4 seats available, for example, and this in turn skews the national result. This means that you need to try to cast your single preference vote optimally.
As it is a new party, it did not take part in the 2014 European elections and so we have no hard evidence as to how it might perform. There are polls, but they fluctuate a lot. No doubt some Remainers will back Change UK, but their lack of electoral track record means that cannot be described as a 'tactical vote'. With the Remain vote split, it is possible that they will win very few or no seats, making votes for them 'wasted' in tactical terms.
The Brexit Party is also a new party with no 2014 track record to refer to. It seems likely, however, that it will take most of UKIP's vote this time along a broadly similar geographical pattern. Where the calculation suggests seats being won from or lost to UKIP, in the final result it is likely that will mean the Brexit Party.
The party-list system means independents are very unlikely to be elected. No independent has ever won a UK seat, all the way back to the first European Parliamentary elections in 1979.
Labour is an unusual case in that its party policy on Brexit is ambiguous. After taking feedback on this issue, we have taken the approach of looking at the positions of MEP candidates instead of parties as a whole, so we advocate a vote for Labour in cases where they are tactically best placed and the candidate who would win a seat is a known Remain supporter.
They are only best-effort recommendations, worked out using the formula explained on these pages, after considering the quirks of the D'Hondt system. There are other methods that could be used, for example a more defensive set of recommendations aimed at always protecting existing seats instead of winning new ones, but we have tried to take a balanced approach based on the maths. Please do send feedback to firstname.lastname@example.org
Think we’ve got it wrong? Want to suggest a better method? Email email@example.com
We're not making recommendations for Northern Ireland because it has different parties and a different electoral system for these elections (using STV).