[Archived] Election

[only2garners]

Can't help thinking that that system will result in more hung parliaments with the Liberals choosing who to side with and therefore holding the balance of power. Surely it can't be right for the third choice party to have that power.

Of course you could have a Lab/Con Alliance but I can't honestly see that happening.

Den - I've just posted on the AV thread about how hung parliaments will be only slightly more likely under AV than FPTP. I think I'm right in saying that the overall outcome would probably not have changed in any elections over the last 40 years or so. One perverse outcome would be a greater landslide for one party in years like 1979 and 1997.

I am also constantly baffled why people are automatically against hung parliaments, coalitions and a centre party holding the balance of power. To take the last election the Lib Dems held the balance of power and in theory had three options - coalition with Conservatives, coalition with Labour or refusing either and allowing the Conservatives to attempt to run a minority Government. Had they gone with Labour the country would have been outraged that their clear desire to get rid of Labour had been stymied - cue future electoral disaster. Had they refused either party, the Conservatives would have stumbled along for a few months being unable to get anything done and gone back to the country in the Autumn to ask for a clear mandate, which they would have almost certainly got - Lib Dems being probably blamed for the second quick election and consequently being destroyed. So coalition with the Conservatives was the only real option they had in those circumstances. In any event it was clear that Labour were not interested in coalition - no one who sends Ed Balls in as a chief negotiator is serious in wanting to reach an agreement. They have taken the decision to step back om the assumption that the cuts that all parties would have had to implement would be electorally disastrous, playing what they believe to be the long game.

The reality is that the people collectively wanted Labour out and also didn't want to give the Conservatives a licence to implement their full policies.

[Al]

Why have you put this post in this thread? PROBABLY MY FAULT.

I do not agree that there is only slightly more chance of a hung parliament under AV. Most people who vote Labour would rather vote for a stuffed monkey than vote Tory, and vice versa, so it follows that most voters second choice will probably be Lib/Dem. If that will not cause more Lib/Dem victories, and therefore more hung parliaments, I don't know what will.

From your posts I get the feeling that your sympathies are with the Lib/Dems and so a hung parliament is the best you can hope for. That's why you want AV and that's why you would prefer proportional representation. Hung parliaments only produce compromises that suit nobody.

You are trying to mislead people into voting for the method that suits your particular party without declaring your intentions. That is not right. Declare your politics and your real reason for wanting AV.

EDIT. Mods. I think this and the last post should be moved to the AV thread. Your choice.

[only2garners]

I put my post here as I was responding to other posts about AV and trying to correct some misapprehensions. It appears I still have some work to do.

AV does not mean more hung parliaments. Australia uses AV and whilst last year's election was hung, it was the first time since 1940. As I pointed out in the AV thread, the UK now has it's second hung parliament since that time, both produced under FPTP.

Sorry to disappoint you but I'm not a Lib Dem supporter. I am though a very strong supporter of proportional representation as I believe you cannot have a true democracy without the voters' support being adequately represented in parliament. Having a system which constantly completely excludes minority opinion makes for a sterile parliamentary debate and encourages those not represented to pursue their aims by extra-parliamentary means.

[ABBEY]

Ive just been watching the news and they were all debating and i cant believe how few MPs where in the seats.Id make the buggers clock on/off ,debates and voting etc surely should be done when everyones there? If im at work I dont get paid if im not logged in .

[Al]

I put my post here as I was responding to other posts about AV and trying to correct some misapprehensions. It appears I still have some work to do.

AV does not mean more hung parliaments. Australia uses AV and whilst last year's election was hung, it was the first time since 1940. As I pointed out in the AV thread, the UK now has it's second hung parliament since that time, both produced under FPTP.

Sorry to disappoint you but I'm not a Lib Dem supporter. I am though a very strong supporter of proportional representation as I believe you cannot have a true democracy without the voters' support being adequately represented in parliament. Having a system which constantly completely excludes minority opinion makes for a sterile parliamentary debate and encourages those not represented to pursue their aims by extra-parliamentary means.

I gave my reason why I believe that AV will produce more hung parliaments. Please tell me why you believe that it will not. What happens in other countries is irrelevant. The party structure is totally different there.

If you did not vote for Lib/Dems who did you vote for, or are you not prepared to say?

[jim mk2]

The reality is that the people collectively wanted Labour out and also didn't want to give the Conservatives a licence to implement their full policies.

The reality is this "coalition" is a Conservative government in all but name that is hiding behind the Lib Dems while implementing a full-blown rightwing Tory agenda.

[rebelmswar]

The reality is this "coalition" is a Conservative government in all but name that is hiding behind the Lib Dems while implementing a full-blown rightwing Tory agenda.

Really?

They seen pretty pussified to be rightwing to me. If this is a rightwing agenda then they don't have much of an imagination.

I am amazed that you made it through the Thatcher years without throwing yourself off something high.

Did you know that Atlas Shrugged is in post production and should be out this year? Well part one will be.

Personally I can only see this issue benefiting the left.

[only2garners]

I gave my reason why I believe that AV will produce more hung parliaments. Please tell me why you believe that it will not. What happens in other countries is irrelevant. The party structure is totally different there.

If you did not vote for Lib/Dems who did you vote for, or are you not prepared to say?

There is a lot of evidence around that AV is unlikely to increase the number of hung parliaments. For example I will direct you to this article -

http://www.parliamentarybrief.com/2011/04/why-it-doesnt-really-matter-who-wins#all. Below is a key quote.

Yet even then, and indeed at every other election between 1983 and 2005, the boost to Liberal Democrat representation would apparently not have been sufficient to produce a hung parliament. Indeed, in four of those seven elections the government would have had an even bigger majority.

I voted for David Borrow, the incumbent Labour candidate in my constituency, South Ribble last time. However, I'm not a Labour supporter - my vote was tactical to try and stop the Conservative winning. Of the three major parties I have more sympathy for the Lib Dems but my preference would be to vote Green. That is not generally an option in South Ribble, so I try to influence as best I can. This of course includes looking at the individual candidates as well as party policies. This was another reason why I voted for David, who is a decent bloke, rather than the right wing anti-Euro Conservative Lorraine Fulbrook. the Lib Dem never had a chance of winning so I didn't want to waste my vote. Under AV of course, I could have safely voted Lib Dem with Labour as second preference.

Now your turn.....

[Al]

The article you referred me to agrees with me that AV would favour the Lib/Dems. I would have prefered that you constructed your own arguments and not someone else's.

At the moment Lib/Dems have the balance of power under FPTP. If AV then favours the Lib/Dems is it not even more likely that there will be hung parliaments under AV?

I have read several articles by John Curtice in the Independant and he changes his mind like the wind.

On November 4th 2010 he said it could well benefit the Tories and on 27th April 2010 he indicated that it would benefit the Labour party.

[RibbleValleyRover]

The article you referred me to agrees with me that AV would favour the Lib/Dems. I would have prefered that you constructed your own arguments and not someone else's.

At the moment Lib/Dems have the balance of power under FPTP. If AV then favours the Lib/Dems is it not even more likely that there will be hung parliaments under AV?

I have read several articles by John Curtice in the Independant and he changes his mind like the wind.

On November 4th 2010 he said it could well benefit the Tories and on 27th April 2010 he indicated that it would benefit the Labour party.

If it creates hung parliaments i would assume it would favour Labour and the Lib Dem's. The Lib Dem's holding the balance of power and more often than not doing a deal with Labour who are closer politically. There is the argument of course that if the Conservatives have the most seats there would be public pressure from the general public/floating voters (who have no political allegiances) forcing the Lib Dem's to do a deal with the Conservatives, a factor we saw in the most recent election results but that is no guarantee.

[only2garners]

The article you referred me to agrees with me that AV would favour the Lib/Dems. I would have prefered that you constructed your own arguments and not someone else's.

At the moment Lib/Dems have the balance of power under FPTP. If AV then favours the Lib/Dems is it not even more likely that there will be hung parliaments under AV?

I have read several articles by John Curtice in the Independant and he changes his mind like the wind.

On November 4th 2010 he said it could well benefit the Tories and on 27th April 2010 he indicated that it would benefit the Labour party.

I don't think anywhere I have suggested that AV would not improve the Lib Dems representation. As they are currently woefully unrepresented compared to the number of votes they get this could surely only be a good thing for democracy. Of course it wouldn't suit the narrow political interests of Labour and Conservatives as they both gain hugely from the current imbalanced system. As for hung parliaments, the Lib Dems winning a few more seats (and they would still be seriously underrepresented under AV) does not in itself mean we will have significantly more of them. It will happen if the country is split between the two or three main parties as it was last year - if we have a situation like 1979 or 1997 when the majority wanted one particular party then AV is more likely to produce a bigger landslide than FPTP.

In any event as I have already said I don't think AV is the answer - I would much prefer a proper PR system where all views could be properly represented in Parliament and we would not have to have the informal coalitions that we currently have in Labour and the Conservatives. But given a choice between AV and FPTP, which is what we will have, then AV has to be the choice for me, if only because if the referendum results in a no vote then any hope of electoral reform will be dead for a generation.

By the way Al, you still haven't declared your political allegiance.

[Al]

I prepared a fairly long reply to you Garners and then had a computer blip and lost it before I had the chance to post it. Sorry but I can't bring myself to type it all again with one finger.

Suffice it to say we must agree to differ and my particular leaning is towards Labour but I believe that to redress the balance the Tories need one term of office every 10 to 15 years.

[thenodrog]

G

[jim mk2]

Eton-educated born-to-rule Tory shows the true face of this government.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/8424883/Oliver-Letwin-We-dont-want-more-people-from-Sheffield-flying-away-on-cheap-holidays.html

[thenodrog]

I don't pretend to know where he is coming from but I do kind of agree with the notion. All our carbon footprints need reducing. Driving more efficient cars, installing alternative heating to our houses and avoiding purchasing roses flown from Kenya on Valentines day and eating asparagus flown from Chile is all rather pointless when we lug ourselves and masses of luggage half way across Europe twice a year for no good reason is it?

My biggest criticism of democracy is that it leads to damaging short term governmen. Important decisions made for the long term good of the human race and the planet are frequently being deferred cos there is a Gen Election in 4/3/2/1 years.

[broadsword]

I no longer agree with it.

Will switching to energy-efficient light bulbs make any difference? Will staying at home instead of jetting off make any difference at all? I think we are encouraged not to fly and to use awful LED lightbulbs because they are a soft target. The theoretical model for warming might be persuasive, but I'm not so sure that this is borne out by real-world data.

Carbon will eventually be used up, all you are doing by staying at home or living in the glow of LED's is slowing down the rate of consumption very very marginally.

I'm very cynical about it all, and am beginning to think that there must be a pay-off for someone in it somewhere. Possibly the manufacturers of bio-fuels and LED light-bulbs.

[Ozz]

Meanwhile, the `The Retail Recession` is ahead of us. Carnage out there.

High Street bosses predict recession to continue.

[Paul]

<br />I don't pretend to know where he is coming from but I do kind of agree with the notion. All our carbon footprints need reducing. Driving more efficient cars, installing alternative heating to our houses and avoiding purchasing roses flown from Kenya on Valentines day and eating asparagus flown from Chile is all rather pointless when we lug ourselves and masses of luggage half way across Europe twice a year for no good reason is it?<br />

My biggest criticism of democracy is that it leads to damaging short term governmen. Important decisions made for the long term good of the human race and the planet are frequently being deferred cos there is a Gen Election in 4/3/2/1 years.<br />

<br /><br /><br />

Good grief! Are you actually acknowledging the serious environmental issues we face?

[Paul]

<br />Meanwhile, the `The Retail Recession` is ahead of us. Carnage out there. <br />

<br />

<a href='http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/apr/05/andy-bond-retail-recession-asda-hmv' class='bbc_url' title=''>High Street bosses predict recession to continue.</a><br />

Yes heard this on the radio today. On the otherhand our sales for the first quarter are 56% up on last year. Our largest customer is up 109% YOY and this is without the boost Easter always gives our sales (Easter was April 5th in 2010). Next week we anticipate our largest ever week for April.

The bulk of our customers have increased their retails by 15% to move to the next price point which accounts for the VAT rise. A 2.5% VAT increase has led to a 50p increase in the product price.

Our distribution costs are running 4.8% above budget and we are about to increase prices by 2.4% to compensate for this. Entirely due to fuel cost increases.

It's very difficult to know what is happening. Our policy is simply to charge whatever is needed to make a profit. I'm convinced real inflation is closer to 12% than the government figure of about 4.5%

[thenodrog]

<br /><br /><br />

Good grief! Are you actually acknowledging the serious environmental issues we face?

1. Why 'Good grief'? why wouldn't I be acknowledging environmental issues?

2. If you didn't have an overriding agenda you really should be address your incredulation / indignation to Bryan.

[broadsword]

Yeah, that was weird. I'm presuming Paul should've quoted me.

I'm waiting for the compelling empirical proof that me switching to LED light-bulbs and rowing across the channel and getting on a push-bike is going to make one iota of difference to the climate.

I think it's less to do with "saving the planet" and more to do with flogging bio-fuels and crap bulbs.

[Paul]

Yeah, that was weird. I'm presuming Paul should've quoted me.

I'm waiting for the compelling empirical proof that me switching to LED light-bulbs and rowing across the channel and getting on a push-bike is going to make one iota of difference to the climate.

I think it's less to do with "saving the planet" and more to do with flogging bio-fuels and crap bulbs.

Yes, problem with using a mobile to post on the web. Apologies to thenodrog for that cock up.

You're right Bryan most of this is window dressing but I don't think one can dispute the huge environmental issues we face. I'm too old for it to be a real problem for my lifetime but I seriously have visions of my kids living in some sort of nightmare world we often see portrayed in futuristic movies.

[broadsword]

Don't get me wrong, I do re-cycle, don't use plastic carrier bags, leave things as I find them etc. I do have a concern for the environment. But worrying about my carbon footprint? Nah.

By the way, I know someone whow orks in a power station, I am reliably informed that these wind turbines have a fairly short lifespan (10 years I think), after which they have to be replaced. Doesn't seem very environmental to me.

[Ewood Spark]

Don't get me wrong, I do re-cycle, don't use plastic carrier bags, leave things as I find them etc. I do have a concern for the environment. But worrying about my carbon footprint? Nah.

By the way, I know someone whow orks in a power station, I am reliably informed that these wind turbines have a fairly short lifespan (10 years I think), after which they have to be replaced. Doesn't seem very environmental to me.

It doesn't matter how long their lifespan is as long as the following criteria are met :-

1) Their constituent parts can be recycled.

2) The energy they produce in their lifetime is greater than the energy required to build a replacement.

[thenodrog]

10 months since the election and Alastair Darling and his irresponsible chums in New Labour are still haunting us from the grave. Hot on the heels of the infamous Treasury note left by Labour's Liam Byrne 'Dear chief secretary, I'm afraid to tell you there's no money left.' we now are holed beneath the water line by Alastair Darlings very last act as Chancellor in signing us up to bail out failing countries within the euro zone. It appears he's chucked another £4billion of our money down the down the pan!

http://news.aol.co.uk/uk-news/story/osborne-to-join-bailout-discussions/1718294/

From that report.....

"Meanwhile, a survey commissioned from YouGov by the People's Pledge campaign found that almost two thirds of voters are opposed to the UK contributing to a bail-out, and a majority back the holding of a referendum on continued EU membership if the country is forced to take part. " aesf calling, aesf calling......