Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Kilkrazy wrote:

filbert wrote:My own personal caveat to this debate - and it is a drum I have been banging lo these past few months, is that there seems to be an awful lot of people who are of the opinion that a hung parliament will be a 'good' thing for the UK. I cannot disagree with this more; coalition governments have always been weak and ineffectual in UK politics. This will not change at the next election and is a bad thing for a country just coming out of a serious recession. We need firm government, whether that is a Labour or Tory one.

Coalition governments got us through two world wars.

The problem with strong majority rule is they can as easily ram through bad bills as good ones.

One of our current problems is too many laws being passed too quickly to make effective legislation.

Plenty of other European countries manage with coalitions.

To be fair KK, a World War is quite a distraction from the minutiae of government and precludes squabbling over domestic issues.

I don't disagree that coalition governments can work; I just don't think it will work within our system as it stands and certainly not without a sea change in the nature of UK politics. As for strong majorities pushing through crap bills, well that's always been a problem and it is one of the reasons we have a bi-camaral system, to provide checks and balances. It is also why we need effective oppostion.

I think we are in an economic situation now which is analagous to the world war in the sense that it seriously threatens the stability and prosperity of the nation.

Getting out of it will require pain. The pain needs to be shared around fairly, so that everyone will agree to it. A coalition government gets a bigger chunk of the population on board.

Blair and Brown did more damage to the Uk and are greater long term threats to our continued surivial than Hitler and Napoleon.

We had the Channel to keep the latter out, Blair was a cancer in the system.

Concerning my 'continued survival,' speak for yourself gentile.

http://www.voterpower.org.uk/

Apparently the rest of the Uk has 3.7 times more vote power than me

Not really surprising to be honest, I'd guess the majority of us live in strongholds. As it happens I'm quite happy with the candidate which is a certainty to get in here, as the old one is hanging up his boots. He's a fairly interesting character who opposes a lot of his parties own views. Supposedly Brad Pitt is also making a film about him aswell, which is interesting, with Orlando Bloom playing him, not so interesting.

I refuse to vote this year for one reason.

I don't think any of the parties can actually lead this country.

When the tories were in power, my family (who were hard working lower class folk) were practically destitute. Along came Mr Blair and my family are living comfortable lives until he stepped down and that useless cretin Brown stepped in.
The tories are upper class untrustworthy pigs who would sell their own mothers to get ahead.

Here's to a hung parliment - cheers.

Ha ! I'm only outpowered by a margin of 1.52, with 56% of voters not voting for the winning candidate in the last election.

ooh get you in your very safe constituency. We ultrasafers can only envy you with your slightly less meaningless vote.

While I am not living in the UK anymore, where I WAS living, one person does not really have one vote, they have the equivalent of 0.131 votes. :(

However, only 49% of people did not vote for the winning candidate, so hurrah for Democracy!

Vote tory if you would prefer to see the poor robbed and the money given to the already wealthy with such vigour and enthusiasm that Marie Antonette would blush and ask if you were sure.

or

Vote Labour, if you want to see your tax money wasted in such an appauling fashion that even a drunken sailor would be ashamed.

or

Vote Liberal because they have never had a go before so it might take them a little bit longer to work out the best way of really screwing up the entire country.

Lets face it the other two have proved beyond all reasonable doubt they should not be permitted to govern us.

reds8n wrote:http://www.voterpower.org.uk/

Horribly misinformed site designed solely to beat the drum for the 'advantages' of proportional representation.

All electoral systems are first past the post if one candidate is elected, the idea that you have rounds of voting doesnt help as it encourages mediocrity, if your first choice is not good enough you get to vote for your second. However democracy should be about proactive choice, one ballot with ONE choice with a single majority. The idea of having rounds of elimination and second choices doesnt work as you still do not get the candidate you want, just less chance of not getting the candidate you don't want. Which is something entirely different.
This throws the philosophy of public mandate from the positive to the negative and you get less democracy that you started.

Proportional representation works better with 'lists' however lists do not account for local MP's you would be able to subdivide into regions at best and thus the electorate is denied their local representative.

All forms of democracy are inherently unfair by its nature few people if any get what they want, however local candidacies with a single majority winner is the best avalable stem for a nation of our size and population. There are many things wrong with our government system this isnt one of them. Frankly despite what voterpower.org implies all cast votes count, even those to joke candidates, the idea of the election is to determine who is fit (or least unfit) to govern. Votes for Monster Raving are protest votes on the quality of democracy. Casting a vote for the losing candidate is not wasting a vote its participating in the group process, its an exercise of assertiveness not compromise.

The proportional representation dogma aside the sites informatiojn is itself misleading for three reasons:

1. It takes no account for voter turnout. It only looks as votes cast, not available votes. In nearly all the constituencies if those who did not vote at all last election voted against the incumbent MP (for a single choice) the incumbent would likely fall. Very few even ultra safe seats have an actual 50% majority of the available electorate.


2. It takes no account of voter apathy. While turnout was poor in previous elections, it is becoming increasingly poorer. Anyone who actually does vote in the midst of this apathy will find their voting value increased.
This is different from point 1 because we do have stats for previous elections voter turnout which voterpower.org has decided to ignore. However voter apathy is likely increasing by all accounts, just look at the reaxctions here if fewer people vote those that vote count.


3. It takes no account of trends in popular opinion. People turned off Tory in droves in 1997, Labour is possibly going to suffer the same fate this time. Safe seats might not be safe, or as safe.

This site would do nothing but fuirther dishearten voters. In live in watfor which is marginal and can go one of three ways ansd my vote is only o.7 of a vote accourding to ths BS of the website. This is patently untrue, too many people are deciding not to vote, which I find alarming in the extreme. Votes damn well count and I will be voting Conservative this election.

I hate New Labour with a passion after what they have done since 1997, Old Labour was disagreeable but was loyal. New Labour shook the whole system just to provide for itself and has set our politics down a new and uglier road. New Tory are following them and the Lib Dems would to given the chance. But whichever you like least do vote for, because while too many people are being disillusioned and staying away rest assured the BNP fanatics are not staying away neither are the Islamics. For all the evils of New Labour it will be ten times worse if the disillusioned populace stays away enough for the fanatics to gain seats, and that frankly is more than an outside possibility, and that as yet refrains to comment on the growing trend of vote rigging.

How voting works:

YOU like to sit at home watching the last few episodes of lost whilst drinking a few glasses of wine. THEY like to go to the local supermarket, get drunk on cheap cider and have sex with trees, smearing the residue on your letterbox.

THEY outnumber YOU

bah :(

This is quite an interesting site that will take let you see how you might vote given a list of policies rather than the parties that put them forwards.

Votes are only meaningless in a safe seat for the people who vote against the safe candidate.

The people who vote for him or her are all thoroughly vindicated and empowered.

CadianXV wrote:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8603591.stm

BBC wrote:Prime Minister Gordon Brown has confirmed that the UK general election will be held on 6 May.

Who are you going to vote for? Why? Do you still support Browns policies, or do you think Cameron would make a better leader?
Perhaps you prefer a smaller, independent party? Do you think there will be a hung parliament?

For our international Dakkites, who do you prefer? Why?

Discuss ad nauseam.

Help me out here. What are the rules for calling an election in a parliamentary system? Thats not standardized?

radiohazard wrote:I refuse to vote this year for one reason.

I don't think any of the parties can actually lead this country.

When the tories were in power, my family (who were hard working lower class folk) were practically destitute. Along came Mr Blair and my family are living comfortable lives

Explain this one to me please. I want more details.

My grandmother was working class, she worked in a factory, as a taxi driver, in a shop, in a bingo hall, among many other things.

She got two grants which enabled her to buy her little terraced house in Middlesbrough under Thatcher.

So please, tell me how they went from destitute to comfortable with the help of TB (Thats Tony Blair, not tuberculosis, although.... they are kinda similar)

Great thread!
I know the system seems gloomy for you guys, but I gotta say to me, the politics in britain seem far more enlivening and less frustrating than in Ireland. You've got people who actually believe in stuff and make policies out of that- sure, it might be objectionable and crazy, but at least there's some sort of thought. Our government, which is mostly far less qualified, generally just nicks british ideas and waters them down, making them less efficient and more individualistic (because Irish people like to pretend they're cantankerous and independant).
Our two main parties are actually REALLY identical, being the same party that split in half during the civil war.
I look forward to moving to the UK, getting into the system and becoming embittered and angry too, but for now I envy you guys a bit.
If I was there, and could vote, I don't know who I'd go for though. I'm pretty left, but the Lib Dems seem insane and I don't know much about your Greens but knowing Green parties in general and the attitudes of a lot of what I imagine are green party potential voters in the UK, I can only assume they're mental.
Labour seem pretty authoritarian and awful, and anything I've read on the Conservatives makes me feel dirty.

I have a feeling OUR Green Party might be slightly different to YOUR Green party, if you catch my drift, Boss!

I went on the Times election coverage website yesterday and was suprised at how small the Lib Dems number of seats acctually is. I thought they's be up around the 20% point, but they have (only fractionally) just under 10% in House of commons and the lords.

They do seem to be doing better at the local elections.

Our news today had Brown giving Labor's electoral manifesto and the reporter at the end said a very pertinent thing...
"How can anyone trust Labor to do something in the next 3 years, when they haven't been able to do it in the last 13 years."

Frazzled wrote:
Help me out here. What are the rules for calling an election in a parliamentary system? Thats not standardized?

From Parliament's website: The Parliament Act 1911 established the maximum life of a Parliament as five years. Parliaments have twice been extended beyond five years, during the two world wars.
A general election is one in which all the constituencies in the United Kingdom are contested. The size and number of constituencies are reviewed at intervals of between 8 and 12 years by the Parliamentary Boundary Commissioners and agreed by Parliament. The total number of constituencies to be contested at the next UK General Election will rise from 646 to 650.

The reasons for calling a general election are varied, but generally originate from the desire of governments to obtain a further and/or increased majority in the House of Commons for the next five years. Naturally, in such instances, the timing may be determined by the government's view of its chances of victory. But governments may be forced into a position whereby they have no option but to seek a renewal of confidence by the country in their own policies.

And here's a list of Governments Britain has had since 1945: Dates of General Elections since 1945:
Day of election : Government Elected
Thursday 5 July 1945 : Labour
Thursday 23 February 1950 : Labour
Thursday 25 October 1951 : Conservative
Thursday 26 May 1955 : Conservative
Thursday 8 October 1959 : Conservative
Thursday 15 October 1964 : Labour
Thursday 31 March 1966 : Labour
Thursday 18 June 1970 : Conservative
Thursday 28 February 1974 : Labour
Thursday 10 October 1974 : Labour
Thursday 3 May 1979 : Conservative
Thursday 9 June 1983 : Conservative
Thursday 11 June 1987 : Conservative
Thursday 9 April 1992 : Conservative
Thursday 1 May 1997 : Labour
Thursday 7 June 2001 : Labour
Thursday 5 May 2005 : Labour

panshandle wrote:Lets face it the other two have proved beyond all reasonable doubt they should not be permitted to govern us.

Yeah they have. Well, sort of, the Liberal party last held power in 1915, and they were half of what became the Liberal Democrats.

I would just like to remind people that NONE of the buggers in power would of actually done anything about the expenses, if it had not been leaked. NONE of them were in the process of changing the system, NONE of them were on record as saying that the system was wrong at the time of the leak. The only reason that it changed was because it was leaked, if nothing had been said it would of carried on as it was. Just remember that they all said that they weren't doing anything wrong, it was all within the guidelines. NONE of them had the balls to actually say before the leak to say that it was morally wrong and that the rules were wrong.

Wolfstan wrote:I would just like to remind people that NONE of the buggers in power would of actually done anything about the expenses, if it had not been leaked. NONE of them were in the process of changing the system, NONE of them were on record as saying that the system was wrong at the time of the leak. The only reason that it changed was because it was leaked, if nothing had been said it would of carried on as it was. Just remember that they all said that they weren't doing anything wrong, it was all within the guidelines. NONE of them had the balls to actually say before the leak to say that it was morally wrong and that the rules were wrong.

This is made even worse by the fact that 3 of the 4 politicians who will face charges (and the possibility of jail time) have been awarded legal aid (money from the the taxpayers) to help them fight their prosecutions. Sigh.

This does not shock me, most of them are only out for number 1, and everyone else comes a distant second.

I'll probably be voting green. Labour and conservative are basically both the same and I'm not a fan of lib dems. So much for NUS big push to get students to vote too, 'vote for whoever won't punish students, but make sur eit counts [vote for a big party] - they're all gonna screw students! If BNP/UKIP weren't such racist parties i might be tempted, but the newsletters i get stuffed through my door make me laugh, until I come back to reality and am horrified that they actually stand for it and it's not a spoof.

If a party came out and said they would be toughwer on the lazy asses we have they'd get my vote straight off. I don't mind work being given to immigrants etc. who do the job. What pisses me off is paying for the bums with my tax money and how well we treat our criminal and LET THEM OUT EARLY!!!! We live in a annny state for sure. Heck, I'm not allwed to step off the ground onto a ladder/chair/table etc. without first having working at height training to put up sodding CHRISTMAS DECORATIONS. And don't even get started on that whole idea the Gov't had not long ago to call it winterval in stead incase they offend immigrants/those with a different religion. Can you imagine us trying to ask other countries with a different culture to change their religious festivals to suit our beliefs?

Politics here is rubbish, we need a party who will put the country first, not their own quest for power.

The long-expected T.V date is upon us- who do you think will come out on top? Will it make a difference to you? And is this more or less important than the manifestos?

Link to Nick Robinson's commentary of the forthcoming debate: http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_8621000/8621657.stm

I'm interested in the debate; sadly Nick Clegg has torpedoed the Lib Dems with his comments about UK Citizenship for illegal asylum seekers.

With all the regulations and restricts this 'debate' has, I would imagine it will be less entertaining and or informative than PM's questions, which happen every week.

Strictly only if I can't think of anything better to do.

I'll be watching, partially as I'm at work so no Sims 3 or WoW to distract me. lol

But I am interested in what they have to say if I'm honest, and I'm hoping to see Brown squirm a little.

I've decided that I'm voting Conservative this time for the first time ever, although sadly it doesn't mean as much as it should. Mainly as I'm slap bang in the middle of a Very Safe Con seat .. doh.

I'll still be voting mind you.