Apart from PFPTP ProFirst, several other suggestions have been made on the same basic premise, namely that if all the votes for a party, from every constituency, were taken and shared evenly between all its MPs, exact proportionality would be achieved.

But because not every party can field a candidate in every constituency, some proposers have suggested that in order to avoid a large number of people having to vote tactically, a separate "proxy" ballot might be essential so that you can vote for your preferred party even if it has no candidate in your constituency.

This, it is claimed, would be a far more exact form of PR than any of the systems usually promoted. It avoids the usual problems that hinder adoption of other PR systems, where a significant number of people still end up with their second - or even third - choice. With a "proxy" vote, every party that had at least one MP elected, would be proportionally represented in Parliament by means of the system of proportional voting power in the House that is an essential part of all of these proposals.

It would mean that no vote could be seen to be wasted, even in “safe” seats, and so many more people would vote. An increase of up to 10% in turnout might be anticipated.

However, the main disadvantages compared with the PFPTP ProFirst alternative are:

  • The "proxy" ballot form could run to several dozen alternative names under some versions.

  • The second ballot form and the logical requirement that a voter cannot vote twice - once for a local constituency candidate on the main form and then for a party or independent candidate not standing within that constituency would make the polling count very complex.

While PFPTP ProFirst did not originally address the issue of voters who would prefer to enter "None of the above", a much simpler "proxy" procedure within ProFirst is now proposed:

  • Under PFPTP ProFirst, on every standard ballot form an additional voting box could be included marked [Other party/candidate]. Votes for "Others" would then be counted-in exactly the same as votes for all parties winning at least one seat, and would be assigned proportionally as discussed below.
  • It will be made clear that a vote in the [Other] box will be assigned nationally (i.e. within that constituency's part of the UK) to all the parties not standing for the local constituency to which the ballot form applies. While it could be argued that this seems to pass the "Other" vote to all the minor parties and independents regardless of whether that voter would support them, in practice - since PFPTP would assign such "other" votes in proportion to the votes gained nationally by the party concerned - then the "other" votes would be distributed in a way that reflected the overall desire of those who vote for a minority party or independent.