Pass the crisps: UK Election watch
497 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 11 12 13 14 15 … 20 Newer→ Last
-
If you don't want to represent minority interests, stick with FPP
Actually I think safer would be to say "If the only minorities whose interests you care to account for are the two biggest ones, then go for FPP". It's never been about representing "majority interests" that's for sure.
-
Since we are touching on Electoral Reform, can the Mansplainers in the house explain again why MMP is better than the Australian system? i.e. Preferential Voting.
Australia's system of preferential voting gives each voter a ballot in which they order their preferences. If their first preference is not elected their vote goes to their second, and so on (apologies if this doesn't really explain it - I can find few people even among the Australian National University's politics faculty who can in any detail). What this means in practice is that the largest two parties almost always win. It has literally been over four decades since a third party candidate made it into the lower house. Since the lower house is where most power lies (in theory the upper house is nearly equal, but not in practice), Labor and the Liberal-National coalition have guaranteed majorities and power, with all that that implies.
Some people like that, and I respect many of their arguments. However, the constraint it puts on policy debate is severe, particularly as the Australian parties tend to be very much controlled by their leaders and the caucus room. There's a narrowness of political debate and movement that NZ hasn't experienced for decades.
The upper house has multi-member electorates working on the same system. In theory you only need 16.7% of preferences to win, but depending on the deals Labor and the Coalition do with minor parties, it can be more or less, and they will almost always do everything in their power to shut out the Greens and Democrats, successfully destroying Dems representation over a series of elections. The 2004 election saw a senator elected with only 1.9% of the vote as a result of this kind of distortion.
-
Thanks George.
This details the Australian system and it's spreading appeal in more detail.
The Global Spread of Preferential Voting: Australian Institutional Imperialism?.
-
Craig
<quote>Perhaps I'm rather naive, but it might have helped if most of those "veterans" had at least tried to hide their utter contempt for Cameron's attempt to drag the Conservatives out of the hole they'd dug.</craig>
Yep
And Ashcroft complaining about the TV debates was remarkable. The Tories have been pushing these for at least a year, convinced that their man would wipe the floor with his opponents.
Maybe if Lord A had paid more taxes he would not have become the distracting story he is.
My view is that the most representative result of this election would be a centre right coalition. Not my personal preference but that is the way the votes seem to have gone.
But, If the Lib/Dems blow this chance of electoral reform then they don't deserve a single vote from the UK electorate again, ever.
-
Oops. I should edit that last post but I like the </craig> ending to my quote block :-)
Can PA give us special Craig tags?
-
recordari, it's hard to say MMP is "better" than PV on any kind of first principles. The evidence is really in the "how has it worked in practice". In Australia, as George points out, PV has produced a two party system consistently. So it's not really much different to FPP on that score.
Whether you think that's good or not is another matter. In Australia there are some pretty substantial racist minority parties who have been excluded from power. But so has every other minority party. There have only ever been 2 indigenous Australians in Parliament, and there are none at the moment. That's a pretty sorry tale, IMHO, but I do wonder how much of that is because of what Australians are like rather than because of what their parliamentary system is like.
-
but I do wonder how much of that is because of what Australians are like rather than because of what their parliamentary system is like.
Perhaps we need to take the vote off irrational unpredictable human beings and tell our alien overlords to shake their pseudopod and hurry up with the harsh but loving rule? (Just eat those pricks next door first.) :)
And since I haven't posted an only marginally relevant You Tube clip for a while... Ladies and gentlemen, is it wrong when Thom Yorke gives you a woody?
-
PV has produced a two party system consistently. So it's not really much different to FPP on that score.
PV (AV) can give third parties who have enough votes in a particular constituency representation, as it essentially means that people don't have to split their vote. Australia lacks a centrist third party attracting more than 25% anywhere however, so most votes now fall to the side towards the Greens, or occasionally right/nationalist/libertarian/single issue parties.
Those are the reasons why it might be attractive to the Lib Dems. They can do well out of it. They should realise that if for any reason they start to fall under 25% they'll very likely face annihilation under PV. Hence the attractiveness of this system to both Labour and the Conservatives. It's proportional representation that locks in the major parties.
-
That's a pretty sorry tale, IMHO, but I do wonder how much of that is because of what Australians are like rather than because of what their parliamentary system is like.
Indeed. Surely we would be better at it?
Can PA give us special Craig tags?
The mind booggles.
Ladies and gentlemen, is it wrong when Thom Yorke gives you a woody?
Well, mine was more metaphorical than yours I'm guessing, but god that was beautiful.
-
If anyone's interested, here's what they came up with 12 years ago in the UK: courtesy of the late Roy Jenkins.
A new committee could spend five minutes retrieving it from the vault and blowing off the dust. Or a couple of years going nowhere.
-
Those are the reasons why it might be attractive to the Lib Dems. They can do well out of it. They should realise that if for any reason they start to fall under 25% they'll very likely face annihilation under PV. Hence the attractiveness of this system to both Labour and the Conservatives. It's proportional representation that locks in the major parties.
Yes, it's Clayton's PR. The PR you have when you don't really want PR. They might as well stick with FPP, at least it's an honest 2 party system.
-
Can PA give us special Craig tags?
For creative filth, perhaps - to hide the utterances from zealous filters
-
but god that was beautiful.
'twas but a pale shadow
-
Perhaps we need to take the vote off irrational unpredictable human beings and tell our alien overlords to shake their pseudopod and hurry up with the harsh but loving rule?
don't blame me, I voted for kodos
Should'a voted for that hope-y, change-y stuff instead, I suppose.
-
Perhaps we need to take the vote off irrational unpredictable human beings and tell our alien overlords to shake their pseudopod and hurry up with the harsh but loving rule? (Just eat those pricks next door first.) :)
I will never vote for any species I would not [edit: willingly ] have sex with. This does not necessarily exclude aliens, but pics first.
-
Looks like Ben's voting for the Green Party, then.
-
Noice
-
And I've used up my Alien Sex Fiend post already. Dang it!
-
And I've used up my Alien Sex Fiend post already. Dang it!
I think you technically only get one gratuitous use. From now on they have to be on topic and relevant. That should keep it down to one a day.
-
From now on they have to be on topic and relevant. That should keep it down to one a day.
Lucky you said that, cause I was just about to post a Muppet Sex video. But hang on, how is that not on topic and relevant?
That last sentence seems to be suffering from emphasis dyslexia. I'll have to work on that.
-
Green onion girl references are the exception, naturally
-
So here's a twist - Gordon Brown has, in fact, thrown himself on his sword in an attempt to woo the LibDems.
The question is, with the Tories offering a referendum on AV, will it work?
-
And now things get even more... peculiar.
Brown quits -- but not yet. I seriously still think this is more risky for Clegg than the pundits seem to think: Does he really want to be the occasion for a Labour palace coup (or a Tory one come to that). I think there's also legitimate questions about whether there's a democracy deficit in Brown standing down after five months, when that's not what Labour went to the polls on. And, yes Gio, I know that the UK has a parliamentary system not a presidential one. It is also a country where there's widespread cynicism and distrust of politicians and the political process.
There's the nagging question of what the SNP and PC would expect to sign up. A deal where the burden of any deficit reduction fall entirely on England (which was the DUP's price for a deal with the Tories) would go down like the proverbial bucket of sick, I suspect.
But we shall see...
ETA: @Lucy: Snap!
-
Well Labour have apparently promised voting reform with or without the referendum
-
Well Labour have apparently promised voting reform with or without the referendum.
So, arguably the most important and radical electoral reform since women's suffrage would be rammed through the House by a government with a wafer-thin majority (however you slice the Parliamentary cake) without a referendum?
Sounds an awful lot like the old politics very much as usual. If Clegg really believes this is an idea whose time is now, he should have a little faith that he can go out and win the argument.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.