How could Britain look under proportional representation? See the results for your area

Composite: The Guardian View image in fullscreen Composite: The Guardian How could Britain look under proportional representation? See the results for your area These visualisations from exclusive polling modelling show how the UK parliament could change under different voting systems New analysis produced exclusively for the Guardian reveals how different voting systems would return wildly different seat totals in the UK parliament based on current polling. While the current first past the post (FPTP) system could leave Reform UK just 30 seats short of a majority based on recent polls, the modelling shows how proportional systems would be likely to give the UK a more finely balanced parliament that better represents the votes people cast. New research conducted by More in Common suggests that, under proportional systems such as single transferable vote or regional party list, the UK could end up being governed by a progressive alliance of parties. Incoming prime minister Andy Burnham has recently signalled support for proportional representation, adding his voice to other Labour figures as well as parties such as the Liberal Democrats, the Greens, the SNP and Plaid Cymru. Electoral reform has also enjoyed increased public support in recent years . How proportional systems could change the map Proportional representation (PR) aims to produce a parliament that more closely reflects how people voted, allowing voters to back their preferred party without worrying as much about tactical voting. It often makes it harder for a single party to win a majority and can result in more coalition governments. Alongside the current first past the post system, More in Common modelled three different PR systems for the Guardian: regional party list, single transferable vote (STV) and additional member system (AMS). The More in Common research shows that no single party would achieve a majority according to their projected polling, regardless of which system is used. The current FPTP would give Reform 46% of the seats off just 28% of the vote, in touching distance of a strong coalition if the Conservatives lent their support. Meanwhile, the proportional systems would not give Reform such a boost: regional party list is estimated to give them 28% of seats off 28% of the vote; AMS would give them 33% of the seats off 28% of the vote; and STV would give them 27% of the seats off 26% of the vote. Under each of these systems, either a progressive coalition of parties – consisting of a combination of Labour, the Lib Dems, the Greens, the SNP or Plaid Cymru – or a Reform-Conservative coalition would be the only paths to forming a government. In the north-east of England, Reform is estimated to win 85% of seats under FPTP. However, this number would drop dramatically under proportional systems – to 51% under AMS, 33% under party list and 30% under STV. Each of Labour , the Greens and the Conservatives would be the main beneficiaries – with the Greens going from no seats