Proportional Representation.

[peach0000]

Your second idea is an interesting one. It's certainly right to look at how all the different bits of the system fit together, too, not just at voting for the Commons.

 

0.15% of the national vote getting you an MP seems far too low for me, though that's a matter of opinion - and I agree that there should be more representation for smaller parties.....just not that small.

As well as at least 6 BNP MPs, you'd probably get a couple of Monster Raving Loonies, Respect, several different far left factions, probably another far right faction, the political wings of minor republican/loyalist terror groups and some other comedy group in parliament....and it would encourage the existence of a multitude of tiny parties. Coalition negotiations could get very interesting in a close election! If any of those groups can win a seat under the existing system or can muster 8%-10% in a multi-member constituency, fair enough, but I don't think 0.15% of the national vote is a serious level of support. 

The 0.15% was just what would happen with pure PR where one seat equals roughly 0.15% if we had 650 MPs. Also in 2010 the only parties that got more that 0.15% of the vote and didn't get a seat were UKIP, BNP, Ulster Unionists and English democrats. The biggest change would have been with the Lib Dems getting a lot more seats and the Conservatives and Labour getting a lost less

[Alf Bentley]

The 0.15% was just what would happen with pure PR where one seat equals roughly 0.15% if we had 650 MPs. Also in 2010 the only parties that got more that 0.15% of the vote and didn't get a seat were UKIP, BNP, Ulster Unionists and English democrats. The biggest change would have been with the Lib Dems getting a lot more seats and the Conservatives and Labour getting a lost less

 

True, but most of the smaller parties only contested a handful of seats to avoid losing too many deposits. If they knew that 0.15% of the national vote guaranteed them an MP (and possibly influence over a coalition government), they'd be sure to find the funds to contest a lot more seats - and I'm sure quite a number would get 0.15% or more. There'd probably even be frivolous parties set up specially to take advantage - Jedi Warriors or whatever.

 

Anyway, all interesting stuff and we need electoral and political reform, fairer representation for smaller parties and more devolution, I think we're agreed on that. Must work now! 

[Webbo]

 

- Labour or Tories could win an absolute majority by getting less than 35% of the vote on a 60% turnout

 

The tories got 38% (more than Labour in 2005) in the last election and didn't get a majority. The tories need around 40% to get a majority.

[Rincewind]

When there was no overall majority in the last election I was in favour of a coalition even if it was the Tories. I was hoping the libdem would have some influence and control the more ruthless policies but they just laid on their back to be fecked

Like the most vulnerable. I would like to see an Independent coalition with no party agenda just what is good and fair flor everyone. There is too much focus on power money and connections outside politics that influence policies.

[Alf Bentley]

The tories got 38% (more than Labour in 2005) in the last election and didn't get a majority. The tories need around 40% to get a majority.

 

According to the BBC and Wikpedia, the Tories got 36.1% in 2010, though it might be 38% if you exclude Northern Ireland.

 

I take your point about the disparity, though. I remember that a couple of decades back, the boundaries favoured the Tories, but now they favour Labour, apparently.

 

The percentage needed to win outright this time will probably be lower, due to UKIP and others taking more votes - though you're right that the Tories will probably need a higher percentage than Labour, the experts reckon...

[MooseBreath]

When there was no overall majority in the last election I was in favour of a coalition even if it was the Tories. I was hoping the libdem would have some influence and control the more ruthless policies but they just laid on their back to be fecked

Like the most vulnerable. I would like to see an Independent coalition with no party agenda just what is good and fair flor everyone. There is too much focus on power money and connections outside politics that influence policies.

If the vulnerable are just laying on their back to be fecked then maybe that's their problem right there. They're obviously not charging enough, and that's putting it mildly.

[Webbo]

I don't like the idea of PR, eternal coalitions with too much power to the 3rd, or even 4th party. It seems like that's the way things are moving though. If we do get it it needs to be regional PR similar to the Euro elections to keep some sort of link with the constituencies.

[Rincewind]

Clegg laid on his back and is only saying no now there is an election looming. Milliband has also been quiet up until now which is the thing that pisses me of about politics.

[peach0000]

Clegg laid on his back and is only saying no now there is an election looming. Milliband has also been quiet up until now which is the thing that pisses me of about politics.

Firstly there was a coalition agreement that included lib dem policies, secondly Clegg was never going to stop all conservative policies and thirdly i feel that Miliband hasn't been quiet and has been outlining policies in speeches for the past couple of years, for me Miliband probably isn't heard as much as Cameron as he isn't currently prime minister so therefore has less to say and what he does say is often less relevant as is often the case for the leader of the opposition. 

[Rincewind]

Firstly there was a coalition agreement that included lib dem policies, secondly Clegg was never going to stop all conservative policies and thirdly i feel that Miliband hasn't been quiet and has been outlining policies in speeches for the past couple of years, for me Miliband probably isn't heard as much as Cameron as he isn't currently prime minister so therefore has less to say and what he does say is often less relevant as is often the case for the leader of the opposition. 

Yes I suppose you are right plus Milliband's speeches are not as newsworthy according to the media.An increase in foodbanks and evictions is not what the public want to hear although a 0.0001% improvement in the economy is fantastic news.

[Strokes]

Yes I suppose you are right plus Milliband's speeches are not as newsworthy according to the media.An increase in foodbanks and evictions is not what the public want to hear although a 0.0001% improvement in the economy is fantastic news.

Yeah damn the media, only feeding us positive news and glossing over the bad. Bloody Tory propaganda!

[peach0000]

Yes I suppose you are right plus Milliband's speeches are not as newsworthy according to the media.An increase in foodbanks and evictions is not what the public want to hear although a 0.0001% improvement in the economy is fantastic news.

That wasn't really my point I feel that like for like stuff is covered fairly but the fact that the PM is a conservative means that his speeches on say foreign policy is more newsworthy that that of the leader of the opposition who has little influence in the short term.

[Guest MattP]

Yes I suppose you are right plus Milliband's speeches are not as newsworthy according to the media.An increase in foodbanks and evictions is not what the public want to hear although a 0.0001% improvement in the economy is fantastic news.

The post of a Labour voter watching a majority be flushed down the toilet.

I wish the press would take more notice of Miliband, every time he's on the television his rating seems to drop even further.

[Rincewind]

If you were a newspaper owner, a supporter and donator to the Government (any party) and you had heard that you were in line to be included in the Honours list would you;

 

A) go with a story that embarrasses the Government  and makes it appear that their policies are failing.

or

B) Go with a story that makes them look good and their policies are succeeding.

 

Just answer A or B no further comment is needed.

[MooseBreath]

I agree ken all media should go through down n out quality control before being released its the only way the public can be assured of its integrity

[Rincewind]

I agree ken all media should go through down n out quality control before being released its the only way the public can be assured of its integrity

I think you have missed the point but never mind. No doubt if things were reversed and another party other than the Tory's were in power you would be complaining about the lack of fair news reporting and manipulating of figures. I think they are all as bad as each other. Not the grass root politician who goes into it to make a difference but the ones further up the ladder who will do anything to stay in power and mix with influential people to do so. Have you not heard of contracts being given to businesses that contribute to party funding? The owner of the Mail is a contributor I believe. So would it be in his interest to bad mouth the government?

The government has also the final say on TV license fees so the top executives do not want to go too far or there would be no rises in fees.

It happens also at local level with services and charities that are funded by the local authority.If they complain too much funding is removed. A lot of services  in Leicester are now run by the council. That is one reason why InDNO who you have consistently critisised have gone independent and do not want to be at the beck and call of outside forces. We can then deliver what is needed for the people we want to help without interference. I know people that go regular to council meetings and have seen what goes on that the public are unaware of and certain measures are passed without consultation with the public which should happen. You as a member of the public have a right to know and be consulted about what is happening in the city.

For the record Peter Soulsby has fallen out with InDNO because we are outspoken and are not quiet to please him.

So it is not just the Tory's we speak out against but the system.

 

(DNO is now Independent DNO CIC

[Guest MattP]

If you were a newspaper owner, a supporter and donator to the Government (any party) and you had heard that you were in line to be included in the Honours list would you;

A) go with a story that embarrasses the Government and makes it appear that their policies are failing.

or

B) Go with a story that makes them look good and their policies are succeeding.

Just answer A or B no further comment is needed.

B Ken. How many journalists have been given knighthoods by governments?

[Guest MattP]

InDNO - in, out, shake it all about.

DNO Cic - Communism in comfort

[Rincewind]

7/10 for effort

[Guest MattP]

Are you turning down your knighthood Ken?

[Rincewind]

I very much doubt I would be offered one.

My question above referred to owners of newspapers not the journalists. They do the work then the editors decide if its what the public ought to see.