Jump to content

Referendum?


observer
 Share

Recommended Posts

On a new "proportional" voting system for the Westminister Parliament, presumably status quo (first passed the post) or Single Transferable Vote. The idea of course is to assure the LibDems of some MPs, but it will certainly deliver hung parliaments - which way will you vote? :?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

against

 

If it goes through, why not apply it to all aspects of life?

 

What about Football..... it would be interesting with 2 goals each at the end of the game and then take corners and possession into account to ensure a winner?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The STV system is specifically designed to benefit the largest "third"Party, as both Tories and Labour voters are likely to opt for the Libs as second choice - that's the theory anyway - and that's why Clegg & Co are gagging for it. Problem they've got, is after this Coalition episode, I doubt many folk will vote for anything that will provide more hung parliaments and won't be voting LibDem anyway - so the LibDems can look forward to another 90 years out of office! :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think the Lib Dems will benefit as much as they think if their system comes in. A large number of voters won't take up the opportunity to select a second choice.

They will be the party who will lose most because a large number of their voters at the last election feel that they have been sold down the river. The Tories will also lose support for forming the alliance so the party that should come out best is Labour but only if they return to Labour principles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Generally, folk don't vote FOR a Party, but for the least worst and AGAINST the one they definately don't want. Thus, most will vote Tory or Labour as first preference, then LibDem as a back up - the AV system is designed to keep the LibDems in existence as a Party - a good reason for not supporting it. :wink: As for Baz's comment, after 18 years of Thatcher, folk would have voted for Labour, regardless of their policies - it was about getting the incumbents out - such is the nature of democracy and the fickle nature of the electorate. :roll:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obs, I agree with your comment. It was about getting the tories out back in '97. They were corrupt, inept and ineffectual and had no respect from the public............ just like what has happened now.

 

I would still argue though that in a pure two horse race, more would vote tory than labour

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't forget more people voted against Maggie than for her, atleast a better voting system will hopefully stop that :!:

 

The last time I looked at a ballot paper there were only boxes for putting your cross in to vote FOR a candidate, none for voting AGAINST :roll::roll::roll:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The part of the proposals that ARE relevent is the equalisation of Constituencies; currently, the Tories tend to represent large rural areas, whilst Labour monopolise small but densely populated urgan constituencies - most now with smaller populations than the Tory ones (especially in Scotland). But instead of pruning by 50 MPs, this was a golden opprtunity to get rid of half of 'em, down to 300 - we still have more politicians per capita than most other countries - and it costs us money. :shock: As I've suggested ad nauseum, there's simply no need for PR where you have a constituency base - PR can be covered by scrapping the House of Lords, and having a second chamber of 100, directly proportional to the votes for ALL parties at an Election - sorted. :roll:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

this referendum is pointless as most decisions are made by belgians and just implemented by our useless civil servants.

We should have a referendum to pull out of europe. If not then we should just ignore all the stupid rules and guidelines that come from this cost ineffective body of uselessness called the european union. However this would mean paying the mep crooks' expences so let's get out.e

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obs, where have you been since the election, "Coalition" is the new buzz word, meaning love and happily ever after, people will no longer get married they will enter a "Coalition" and live happily ever after, Think of it no divorce no single parents, I see you have not got the warm and cosy love message from Dave and Nick :wink::lol::lol::lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would oppose a change in the voting system. First passed the post is simple, easy and can be understood by most people, even if they don't like it. All the other systems will be over the heads of a lot of people.

However, if they introduce single transferable vote, I would simply vote for my preference and not give a second preference. I have already done that on numerous occasions in ballots in various organisations to which I belong. I am afraid second best is not good enough for me so I don't have a second preference.

 

Of course there are also the arguments about PR being more likely to produce an indecisive result. I am not sure if I like this Coalition yet, but generally speaking I have always opposed the idea of a coalition. I will reserve judgement now that we've got one.

 

I can't stick you people (and that seems to be most of you) who find it impossible to stand back and try to judge politicians on what they have achieved rather on what they did for you personally.

If you look at post war Prime Ministers dispassionately, Maggie is right up there with Churchill. So is Blair. Wilson and MacMillan were not bad, but not in the same class. The rest were not much at all, in fact I have trouble remembering who they were!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How you can put Bliar with Thatcher, never mind Churchill is beyond me! Personalities don't make good governance, policies do - and the best "team" we ever had, who left a legacy worthy of the name, was the '45 Atlee Government who rescued this Country from the aftermath of WW2 and put us on the road to recovery, with fairness a fact not a slogan. :roll:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...