Proportional representation.
Posted by: Don Atkinson on 23 May 2014
Proportional Representation.
Given that we now have four parties receiveing significant numbers of votes in this year's Local Elections, is it about time we introduced proportional representation and did away with our "first past the post" selection system ?
I note a strange silence on this suject by the Lib-Dems this year.
And this is where a free and multi-facetted press is all about. Much work to do I would think!
ATB from George
Elder Herr: Will you stop talking about the war?
Basil: Me! You started it!
Elder Herr: We did not start it!
Basil: Yes you did — you invaded Poland.
Just been watching Nic Clegg on TV......he looks a broken man to me!!......will he last ? and TBH who cares.
Mista H
Just been watching Nic Clegg on TV......he looks a broken man to me!!......will he last ? and TBH who cares.
Mista H
Probably his wife and anybody with an ounce of decency in them
Just been watching Nic Clegg on TV......he looks a broken man to me!!......will he last ? and TBH who cares.
Mista H
Probably his wife and anybody with an ounce of decency in them
Just been watching Nic Clegg on TV......he looks a broken man to me!!......will he last ? and TBH who cares.
Mista H
Probably his wife and anybody with an ounce of decency in them
Good post Mick
Politics and politicians.
As “h” said, Nick Clegg looked broken. And as he more or less implied, he couldn’t give a s**t. Ok, not exactly what he said, but certainly the tone of the post. I would have made a similar response with respect to any half-decent politician on the receiving end of such a comment.
You can look at the Liberals joining the Tories in coalition two ways. Either they were grasping for power, which is probably how the boulevard press and many who are influenced by it will think, or you can think that they were doing what they were elected for within our democratic system.
We have had four years of stable government during which time the economy has stabilised. There was no overwhelming rise in unemployment, and no run on the pound Sterling.
Coalition government requires certain concessions from both partner Parties regarding their Manifestos, which strikes me as fair enough, because the Parties joining the coalition did not, singly, gain a Mandate to complete the whole programme offered in any case.
The two largest blocks in Parliament [in terms of numbers of MPs and in terms of the popular vote] went into coalition, and in the climate of the times, it would have been tough to have a stabile government with a minority of MPs in the House. So what was done was entirely correct and in the best interests of the country.
I think people who want to run down politicians who are doing their best and doing the best thing for the country would do better to find other targets!
No wonder that there is a reluctance on the part of many very able people to enter politics. People who gleefully jump on the dismay that the Liberals must be feeling on account the latest elections results are showing a remarkably short-sighted view of the situation. Would people prefer that the main third Party in the UK was UKIP?
ATB from George
"The two largest blocks in Parliament [in terms of numbers of MPs and in terms of the popular vote] went into coalition, and in the climate of the times, it would have been tough to have a stabile government with a minority of MPs in the House. So what was done was entirely correct and in the best interests of the country".
FWIW the results of the 2010 election were:
Conservatives 307 seats 36.1%
Labour 258 seats 29.0%
LibDem 57 seats 23.0%
The LibDem's choose to form a coalition with the Conservative's rather than with the previous Labour government. Either coalition would have formed a majority government in terms of seats or popular vote.
Dave
Of course I agree that the Labour came second in the popuplar vote and the number of MPs. No dispute. But I cannot imagine a stable government with Mr Brown as Labour leader!
As it is the largest possible popular vote was represented in a two Party coalition. 59 per cent for Lin-Con grouping compared with 52 per cent for Lib-Lab. The best administration was formed for stabity and in terms of acceptance by the electorate over all, though I am sure that Labour supporters - some of them at least - felt somewhat sore about it!
ATB from George.
Of course I agree that the Labour came second in the popuplar vote and the number of MPs. No dispute. But I cannot imagine a stable government with Mr Brown as Labour leader!
As it is the largest possible popular vote was represented in a two Party coalition. 59 per cent for Lin-Con grouping compared with 52 per cent for Lib-Lab. The best administration was formed for stabity and in terms of acceptance by the electorate over all, though I am sure that Labour supporters - some of them at least - felt somewhat sore about it!
ATB from George.
WTGR IYHO 
Dave
PS I don't feel qualified to comment further. 
What he probably meant was that, compared to Farage/UKIP, Clegg/LibDem sounds broken - but he doesn't care as his is a Labour vote - that right Mista H?
WRONG.....I like Dave Cameron,i could be wrong but he comes across as a strait talking guy and i like him and up to this year i have always voted Con. In this weeks local elections i stuck my cross on Mista UKIP,the reason being the Conservatives WERE in power in Croydon and have been a load of dishonest c*.*.(you fill in the blanks) In next years G/E i will again be voting UKIP.
Reason being London is for me FULL,the road,buses and trains are at bursting point. We need to stop more and more people entering the UK and up to now no party has sorted this problem out.
You folks that live in the sticks need to spend a few weeks in the big city and try getting around in the rush hour....its hopeless. Not 100% sure Lafarge has enough experience to sort the UKs problems out,but i for one am willing to give him a chance. What is there to lose!!
Mista H
Off topic a little.....
If the Scottish Referendum is a yes vote, what do UKIP rename themselves?
Former UKIP (F UKIP)
As McEnroe would say ..........."You can't be serious ?"
Ok, there has been some sort of wake up call in Europe. If Cameron, Agela, Holland et al have any sense they will put some real effort into modifying the EU and cutting the Commission down to size. They might even find ways of dicouraging Eastern Europe migrating to the west of Europe. But pulling out of Europe wouldn't be in our best interest (nor Nigel's, given his steady income from that source) - and the probability of him and his party being as effective, never mind any more effective in Westminster than the Lib-Dems is unlikely IMHO. - and it won't reduce the over-crowding on the transport system that you currently enjoy................because we don't generally put the clocks back to repatriate people.
That would not worry me in the slightest Fat Cat. We own a holiday flat overlooking the Marina in Ostende. Way of life is a lot better along the belgian coast. My only problem would be going to Football.
Mista h
As McEnroe would say ..........."You can't be serious ?"
Ok, there has been some sort of wake up call in Europe. If Cameron, Agela, Holland et al have any sense they will put some real effort into modifying the EU and cutting the Commission down to size. They might even find ways of dicouraging Eastern Europe migrating to the west of Europe. But pulling out of Europe wouldn't be in our best interest (nor Nigel's, given his steady income from that source) - and the probability of him and his party being as effective, never mind any more effective in Westminster than the Lib-Dems is unlikely IMHO. - and it won't reduce the over-crowding on the transport system that you currently enjoy................because we don't generally put the clocks back to repatriate people.
One of the problems Don is they are still coming in to the UK on mass,then after a while going on the good old Rock n Roll,and we tax payers pick up the tab. I am only saying how i feel. i dont want people coming into the UK that put sweet sod all into the system but are quite happy to take out.
Why should any of us that pay UK taxes have to support these freeloaders that turn up on our doorstep expecting us to keep them ?
And answer me this,why are all these people waiting in makeshift camps in Calais trying to cross the channel to England. Why dont they all just stop in France. Answer me that pls !!
Mista h
As McEnroe would say ..........."You can't be serious ?"
Ok, there has been some sort of wake up call in Europe. If Cameron, Agela, Holland et al have any sense they will put some real effort into modifying the EU and cutting the Commission down to size. They might even find ways of dicouraging Eastern Europe migrating to the west of Europe. But pulling out of Europe wouldn't be in our best interest (nor Nigel's, given his steady income from that source) - and the probability of him and his party being as effective, never mind any more effective in Westminster than the Lib-Dems is unlikely IMHO. - and it won't reduce the over-crowding on the transport system that you currently enjoy................because we don't generally put the clocks back to repatriate people.
One of the problems Don is they are still coming in to the UK on mass,then after a while going on the good old Rock n Roll,and we tax payers pick up the tab. I am only saying how i feel. i dont want people coming into the UK that put sweet sod all into the system but are quite happy to take out.
Why should any of us that pay UK taxes have to support these freeloaders that turn up on our doorstep expecting us to keep them ?
And answer me this,why are all these people waiting in makeshift camps in Calais trying to cross the channel to England. Why dont they all just stop in France. Answer me that pls !!
Mista h
You seem to have mis-read my post, so i've highlighted a significant part of it to help you.
The last part of the post outlined the reason that the transport system in London (which according to an earlier post of yours some weeks ago, you hardly ever ue) won't get any easier ie because we don't turn the clocks back. Now, I am willing to stand corrected on this point. ..........Has the UKIP stated that it WILL repatriate all imigrants, (thereby reducing the population of the UK and freeing up the trains and busses) ? If so, which imigrants ? I ask, because my ancestors arrived in Viking Longships a few hundred years ago and i'm beginning to get worried. And I bet Farage is sh*tt*ng bricks at the thought that he and his missus will have to separate.
I am coming to the realisation that if voting made a difference they wouldn't let us do it.
It is certainly mind blowing, the amount coming over. What has made it worse for UKIP type folks, is the unwillingness of the vast majority of the eastern Europeans to adopt our culture, beyond football, drinking beer, junk food and pornography - we share that in common. Other than that, they are not interested in our history or art and literature and customs but prefer to retain their own - there is also a deep seated macho, homophobic, and racist mentality, reminiscent of the 1950's - and a strong impulse of anti-Americanism in their attitudes. Of course we all have faults, whatever colour or creed we belong to, so this is just an observation of the frictions, and not a judgement on whether mass immigration to UK is morally right or wrong.
I have noticed that the generation born of immigrants in the UK, the kids, are much less dyed in the wool than their parents and have no problem adopting our way of life, which is unsurprising, really, and they have the advantage of speaking more than one mother tongue, which a lot of people see as an advantage in life.
Interesting post. Immigration is a complex, but fundamental topic for all countries. It is either key to how you build your country's future, attracting the smartest, most highly skilled people from all over the world, or it's a banner for hatred, typically held high by the last generation of immigrants trying to close the door behind them.
Char focuses on what I believe is key, and that is the strength and attractiveness of a country's history and culture. Take India, for example. How many times have they been invaded over the last few thousand years? And what happens to each new invader? They settle dow, build some nice houses, and are assimilated into Indian culture. I think the same will be true of immigrants to the UK.
How can someone who risks all to get across the channel not, in time, embrace their new homeland as their own? Again, as Char mentioned, and not unlike India, new immigrants settle down, buy houses, and send their kids to school. Those kids learn about, and then take pride in, their newly adopted heritage, regardless of race, creed, color or ethnic background.
I don't know what the reproductive rate in the UK is, but among traditional Anglos here in the US, the rate is dropping. For the US and UK to continue to grow and compete internationally, a fair and orderly immigration system is essential. Ours, and I suspect, the UK's system are both in dramatic need of reform. But it's silly to hate today's generation of immigrants -- no matter how crude some may appear on the surface, their sons and daughters could easily become our next generation's best and brightest!
ATB.
Hook
I am coming to the realisation that if voting made a difference they wouldn't let us do it.
...many a true word was said in jest............
Don
Thanks for highlighting part of your post,that was most kind of you. Most helpful to a simple person like what i is.
These clowns in Brussels carn`t even decide where the E U should work !! Every month moving the entire bloody circus to France for a few days,then back again. I dread to think what that costs each year.
Again these are MY views,but i would be out of Europe tomorrow given half a chance. We would still be able to trade with the rest of the world. One door closes another one opens.
Still would like someone to answer my question.....Why do all these people stuck in Calais not stay in France ? why do some risk their lives hanging underneath trucks desperate to cross to Dover.
Please someone answer me.
Mista H
Perhaps we are still nicer to foreigners than they are in France.
It's a thought at least.
After all most of us are foreign if we go back far enough. For me only one generation really, as I had a Norwegian mother who did not naturalise to British for thirty-two years after marrying an Englishmen. Apparently I spoke Norwegian before English! Oh, I ought to say that my father was born just in Wales, was seven eighths Welsh, but still called himself English. He was a natural for the National Front, and detested all things Welsh!
ATB from George
Oh look what i`ve just read in the paper.......a reporter talking to an Afghan who has just had his tent in Calais crushed by a bulldozer.
REPORTER Why do you want to get to England ?
AFGHAN In England it is good,they give you a house to live in and money,everything you need. Here in France they give you nothing.
Are we Mugs or what !!
Mista H