Pilgrims' Patter
The Forum => The B-Ark => Topic started by: LeeChase on May 08, 2010, 04:27:56 PM
-
http://www.takebackparliament.com/
Say no to wasted votes
Say no to tactical votes
Say no to flawed system
Get what you want in parliament, this is what we should have had this year.
Seats___%___Party
235___36.1__Conservative
189___29____Labour
150___23____Liberal_Democrat
20____3.1___UK_Independence_Party
12____1.9___British_National_Party
11____1.7___Scottish_National_Party
7_____1____Green
7_____1.1__Others
4_____0.6___Democratic_Unionist_Party
4_____0.6___Sinn_Fein
4_____0.6___Plaid_Cymru
3_____0.4___Social_Democratic_&_Labour_Party
2_____0.3___Ulster_Conservatives_and_Unionists_-_New_Force
1_____0.1___Alliance_Party
1_____0.2___English_Democrats
1_____0.1___Respect-Unity_Coalition
1_____0.1___Traditional_Unionist_Voice
1_____0.1___Christian_Party
1_____0.1___Independent_Community_and_Health_Concern
0_____0____Trade_Unionist_and_Socialist_Coalition
0_____0____Scottish_Socialist_Party
-
Load of cobblers , PR has so many variations even the Lib Dems can't decide which version they want . Some versions are less representative then first past the post .
Most people don't give a flying fig except at election time .
-
And that would let the BNP through the back door! Sadly Cameron will have to do a deal with Calamity Clegg!
-
If it gives validity to the racist scumbags of the BNP it flies in the face of democracy.
STV only to ensure that each MP has garnered 50%+ of votes.
-
agreed , "say no to tactical votes" ? PR is all about tactical votes ! the two most popular versions have you giving your top 4 choices of candidates lol
i ask 3 Lib Dem members in the run up to explain to me which version their party wanted , all 3 said PR ! i had to explain that it covers many differing types to which i just got blank expressions and shrugged shoulders . For something the whole Party now seems fixated with they are very clueless as to what it exactly entails .
All i could say to them in the end was be carefull what you wish for , you just may get it .......
-
The UK Parliament works on the principle that each constituency elects a member to represent them. He/she is a representative, not a delegate, so the electorate chooses him/her, but has no control over how he will vote on individual issues. Once elected the members may form or join alliances, but are not obliged to do so. Political parties have no status within the system. You do not vote for a party (although you may think that you do.)The sovereign may invite anybody except himself/herself or members of the immediate family to form a government. That person may form any group or alliance to do this and this person does not have to sit in the House of Commons. The majority of leaders, whose appointment is called First Lord of the Treasury (for convenience, called Prime Ministers) in the nineteenth century actually sat in the House of Lords.
Political parties are a relatively modern phenomenon, and do not have to exist. In the past they were at best loose alliances. Possibly in the future the idea will be dropped. Benjamin Disraeli actively worked against Sir Robert Peel, but in theory they were both Tories.
The problem with proportional representation is that it assumes that you must belong to a political party before you can stand. It follows from this that we would need a fundamental rethink of our constitution before we can start to consider PR. Since our constitution is flexible and evolves by precedent this is not impossible, but let's not kid ourselves that it will be simple, whichever of the numerous systems we choose. And that's grounds for a lengthy debate in itself.
If you get PR, you cannot elect a representative, but a party would nominate delegates. At present we have a system of three line whips, but a representative may ignore its instruction (often at risk to his career), whereas a delegate is mandated and will be simple voting fodder.
Many MPs, including some leaders appear not to appreciate all this.
Be careful what you wish for; you may get it.
-
So if the Lib Dems got together with the BNP, Sinn Fein and all the other minority parties, they would have a majority and could dictate how the country is run.
What could possibly go wrong?!
-
Unfortunately (?), Aggy, democracy gives validity to everyone, whatever their views.
-
...... or Boston & Skegness can keep electing Tories on fat majorities who don't give a flying fig about the area, do nothing about encouraging industry or enhancing the well being of the local population, but make sure the usual crowd benefit from the system - great.
Our electoral system stinks, is as far from being democratic as you can get. Of course no system is prefect but something that's mildly representative of what the population wants/votes for wouldn't go amiss.
Fairfax is right in his historical analysis, but the reality is that political parties hold almost total sway over its members - who represent the party not their constituents. They are voting fodder already. With a delegate system at least their is no pretence to be something they are not.
-
It'd be nice if the local MP lived in the area, not in London.......... ::)
-
I actually did a spread sheet to see what true PT would produce.
20 differnt parties with seats, and the only viable government initially would be a Lib Lab pact.
However by the time the second election came round there would be probably arround 40 parties with seats (possibly including the Boston United party) and the deals made to keep parliment working might include promotion of Boston to the Pemier League.
Can't see any other things going for it.
-
The Boston constituency need not be foregone conclusion. In 1966 the Holland with Boston Conservative majority was 316; in 1997 the Boston and Skegness majority was 647 and in 2001 515. It appears that the locals like the man that they know, but he has to prove himself. The present MP needed two elections to reach a four-figure majority. Sir Richard Body built on the 316 majority as a very effective rebel, but was closely run when the boundary was changed.
Prior to him the long-term incumbent, Sir Herbert Butcher came in on a Liberal ticket before becoming a National Liberal and then a National Liberal & Conservative. A predecessor was the only Labour representative so far. Conservatives are relatively new to Boston and the volatile immigration in the area could change the scenario in the near future. Residents from other countries have the right to register to vote.
One final thought - the greater the number of candidates the bigger the Tory majority.
-
And boundary changes are a whole new issue ...... ::)
-
i may be missing a trick here but i saw a proposition on the table the other night that would create different constituancies of roughly the same population . Obviously cities would have far more sway than rural areas but i think it has to be better than a system that would select "representatives" that have never been near an area if even only in election periods .
-
If it gives validity to the racist scumbags of the BNP it flies in the face of democracy.
STV only to ensure that each MP has garnered 50%+ of votes.
In Germany there's a threshhold of 5% or something that a party has to achieve before it attains any representation. Seems a sensible way of eliminating the likes of the BNP.
-
With national voting the BNP would likely achieve their 5%.
It is also not true PR and could be constued as simply a means of getting more seats for the Libs.
-
Even further off-topic I have to be at The Stump Monday 1400 hrs .. can anyone advise me where to Park . . ?
-
Market Place, Wide Bargate or the Multistorey down Pen Street.
-
You sure Shoddy ? can we not have a vote on it lol
-
Ok, Can we organise a referendum on it before 2pm tomorrow? ::)
-
I rather like this old video explaining the version of PR preferred at the time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NSUKMa1cYHk (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NSUKMa1cYHk)
Essentially it involves making the constituencies 5 or 6 times bigger and selecting your top 5 choices. This maintains the link and provides a link between MPs and constituencies.
I'm not sure what the favored system is now but if a percentage of the population vote BNP, UKIP, Green or whoever then why should those views racist, fascist or otherwise not be represented.
-
Thanks Shoddies L . .
-
NOT BEEN OFFICIALY ANNOUNCED YET BUT.
Brown quits from today.
Cameron & Clegg to form a coalition Government.
Clegg gets a referendum on political reform.
CAMERON TO BE PM.
Expect announcement very soon.
-
Now I must admit that I haven't read all of the previous comments - as I haven't got too much time at the moment - but judging by the title "Petition for PR" I think I can guess what the discussion is about.
On the one hand I can see the merits of Paul Raynor becoming our next prime minister. He's spent most of his working life closely associated with dishonest people, and might be a good candidate to try and sort out any future MP expenses scandal. But personally I'm not sure he has the experience to solve the national debt problem.
Hope I haven't misinterpreted the discussion!
-
So the parliament was hung. Best news for ages. They should have been hung long ago.