May 9, 2010 at 11:31 am
All this talk of electoral reform and the LibDems using it as a bargaining chip with the two MAIN parties has got me slightly confused.
I wonder just how much a difference to the LibDems it would really make and would we be in the hung parliament territory every time we have a general election?
Trying to find a definitive answer on the net I found some reference to alternative results which seems to prove that the LibDems are just bad losers…
Using the results from 2005
First-Past-The-Post – 355/198/62/31
Additional Member System – 242/208/143/53
Alternative Vote – 366/175/74/31
Single Transferrable Vote – 263/200/147/36
Proportional Representation – 232/213/145/58
In all cases the LibDems came third albeit with slightly improved results (AMS, STV & PR) but we’d be left with no party with a clear majority in those three but a clear majority in FPTP & AV. Hung Parliaments all round then?
I’m of the view that the Tories have won, with a reduced majority but they still won. The 1000 or so protesters from some loose coming together of electoral reform pressure groups is hardly enough to convince me we need to change. And if we do it will be at least 5 years before anything can be changed. So no quick fix for the LibDems, and maybe even then if a referendum is held and the UK votes against ER then it may never happen…
So, anyone able to enlighten me further?
The 2005 figures used above come from the BBC/ERS in a nice little “dummies guide” graphic if anyone else is feeling left behind by all this…
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8644480.stm
:confused:
By: Creaking Door - 9th May 2010 at 21:30
Well according to these results only one-in-five Scots want independence (and I know that many will have voted tactically since it wasn’t a referendum on independence)…..but almost as many Scots voted Conservative.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/election2010/results/region/7.stm
Irrespective of the emotion of the issue it seems clear that Scotland would be poorer, much poorer, if it was independent.
By: ThreeSpool - 9th May 2010 at 20:16
Many Scots want independence. Many English people want them to have independence.
And many Scots don’t want independance.
I, for one am against independance. I see it offering no real value to our country, and as more of a show of a nationalistic government craving power. It is a wasted effort, whn other, better servings things could be done.
By: Gooney Bird - 9th May 2010 at 19:46
Yes, but had they been an independent country during the banking crisis, they couldn’t have afforded to bail out RBS!
By: Moggy C - 9th May 2010 at 19:09
Yes, but don’t worry. SNP policy is to join the Euro so there will be no problems in the financial department.
I think we really do have agreement nowadays. Many Scots want independence. Many English people want them to have independence – it’s only fair after all, why should they be shackled to us?
You only have to go to Scotland and see all the T-shirts with pictures of an Australian multi-millionaire on them with some stuff like
“Ye can take oor lives, but ye cannee take oor freedom”
to see how nationalistic they all are up there
Moggy
By: Red Hunter - 9th May 2010 at 17:27
Al – that sounds like a good offer. Oil revenues are budgeted at about £8.5billion this year so 92% of that is about £7.8 billion. Scotland costs Central Government about £33 billion currently so you can have the oil and save the Central Government cash.
There was a report a couple of years ago which, if memory serves correctly, stated that even if Scotland had kept all the revenue from oil since 1980 it still would have been in deficit for all but 4 of the years.
By: Moggy C - 9th May 2010 at 16:59
Please do all you can to achieve independence for England – I think that would be a fantastic dream come true!
Certainly. I am a dyed-in-the-wool supporter of independence / home rule for Scotland and Wales and will do everything in my power to help out.
Moggy
By: Al - 9th May 2010 at 16:55
The real need is to stop the Scots and Welsh, who have a perfectly good parliaments of their own, having such an influence on the rest of the UK.
Time for true independence for England I reckon
Moggy
By ‘the rest of the UK’ do you mean England and Northern Ireland, or do you mean a ‘United Kingdom’ with only one country in it?;)
Please do all you can to achieve independence for England – I think that would be a fantastic dream come true!
I chatted with my local SNP MP last week, and he affirmed that under international laws (that have already been ratified), 92% of North Sea oil, present and future, would be in Scottish territorial waters.
Would you like a loan, at very reasonable rates?
By: Creaking Door - 9th May 2010 at 16:09
Well, maybe not that bad, but England would have a Conservative government now.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/election2010/results/region/48.stm
By: Moggy C - 9th May 2010 at 15:57
The real need is to stop the Scots and Welsh, who have a perfectly good parliaments of their own, having such an influence on the rest of the UK.
Take all the Scottish and Welsh constituencies out of it and labour are somewhere just a little ahead of the greens, bnp and monster raving loony party.
Time for true independence for England I reckon
Moggy
By: Bob - 9th May 2010 at 15:49
The factor that Liebour have had 13 years to sort this out, but only now will consider it in order to save their, frankly worthless skins, makes me laugh too.
And the fact that, as they are always the bridesmaid, the LibDems will jump into bed with anyone to try and get some fix for their lust for power, makes it seem that the election was all for nothing.
I hear some ‘pundits’ going on about how this shows the voters wanted a change in the electoral system but I suspect that is a biased viewpoint from some – the only change I read into this election is a desire to see the back of Liebour and the noses-in-the-trough Liebour MPs….
By: Creaking Door - 9th May 2010 at 14:34
…under PR the BNP would have about 30 seats at Westminster.
More like twelve seats (563,743 votes) actually…
…but that’s more than the Green Party (285,616 votes), who got a seat, and more than the SNP (491,386 votes) who got six seats.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/election2010/results/
But who is to say with PR how people would vote?
By: Red Hunter - 9th May 2010 at 14:31
That is undeniable – I was just wondering if that reality had crossed many peoples’ minds….
By: EGPH - 9th May 2010 at 13:59
I wonder if any of the the three main parties has realised that under PR the BNP would have about 30 seats at Westminster. Now that really is democracy!:cool:
As someone who could quite happily shoot Nick Griffin and do the time, I think that if PR gives the BNP some seats in Parliament it is a price we must pay, that is democracy and everyone who gets enough votes gets a say!
By: Red Hunter - 9th May 2010 at 13:53
It’s always been blindingly obvious why the Liberals want PR and the others do not. I wonder if any of the the three main parties has realised that under PR the BNP would have about 30 seats at Westminster. Now that really is democracy!:cool:
By: EGPH - 9th May 2010 at 13:40
Being a Lib Dem supporter, In British politics anyway, I think the sooner this country moves into the 21st Century like the rest of Europe the better and we will have many move people voting Lib Dem and we can have a properly representative system of govt!
In more modern voting systems like Scotland, Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic, non majoritarian systems have provided stable representative government
By: Creaking Door - 9th May 2010 at 12:58
Yes, that amused me too! If they really wanted PR why not introduce it after their landslide victory in 1997? With Lib-Dem backing then who could have stopped them?
But no, Labour only started talking about PR when it looked like they’d lose the general election. :rolleyes:
By: bazv - 9th May 2010 at 12:26
The loser usually mentions PR,nulabour had 13 yrs to change the system to PR but funny old thing …they never did LOL :rolleyes:
Broon,Mandy and Darling…what a bunch of TWA Teas :rolleyes:
By: Creaking Door - 9th May 2010 at 11:54
But how many more people would vote Lib-Dem (say) if their votes were all to count in a PR system?
On the whole I tend to favour a system closer to PR; it seems to work for countries like Germany…
…but I don’t think absolute democracy is workable.