http://voteforpolicies.org.uk/

jas72 said:
From that site it appears like you only like half their policies makes me wonder if this 1st past the post system is really representative.

Perhaps we should go to some sort of representation ie based on percentage of votes gained.
Click to expand...

You do realise that representation based on percentage gained doesn't mean that a coalition government would push though the 50% of legislation he likes from the Tories, 25% of the stuff he likes from Labour and Lib Dems, it means that with 3 people all arguing constantly almost nothing would get done.

The biggest party talking about getting a little power without a majority is the group thats never been in power, its nothing about better government, its their only shot to appear more powerful by getting a foot in the door, it would be HORRIFIC for actual government and getting things done. A coalition government could end up with not a single thing he wanted being enacted, but all the stuff by the tories he didn't want, and all the stuff from the other parties he didn't want.

The country needs to be lead by ONE party in one direction, when you put 3 cooks in a kitchen nothing gets done, at all, and waste goes through the roof.

Labours now talking a bit more about jointly running the country, and thats only because they've been SO bad for SO long, that a normally also ran party in the LIb Dems is polling higher than them. Labour again just want their foot in the door.

I hate current labour, and Brown, but Brown on his own would end up doing more good for this country than any coalition government, it just wouldn't work.
 
Rich_L said:
I actually think the NuTories, at least the party that Cameron wants and professes them to be - remember the NHS, NHS, NHS, Green taxes, Gay-friendly Big Society - all the hard work he did dragging the Tory dinosaur party into the 21st century before they imploded - that party would be palatable to the LDs - apart from the big bugbear of voting reform of course.

I could see the LDs making concessions on their other policies to agree voting reform - the problem as I see it is that I don't think the Tories can offer enough concessions to 'not' agree to voting reform with the LDs.

Of course what is often forgotten is that the LDs aren't actually demanding an immediate change to PR or an alternative system, they are proposing a referendum on it. Which begs the question, what are the Tories so scared of - if FPP is so good, it will be voted for, no?
Click to expand...

I can see a potential con/lib coalition with voting reform proposed in exchange for agreeing to the cuts (given that Clegg and Cable are closer to the Tories than Labour on the cuts and how to do them than their party and supporters like to acknowledge).

The one thing I don't understand is why Labour are getting promoted as a party of change for electoral reform when AV is not proportional representation and would actually have made the problem at the last election significantly worse (Labour would have achieved around 60% of the seats on the same voting pattern, rather than 55%).

What I would like to see is a referendum on PR (either MMP or STV) followed halfway through the next parliament by a followup referendum on whether to keep/change the system again. This way there is protection against being locked into either setup if we aren't happy with the results.
 
Last edited:
I cant remember the %`s I got but I had 3 for Green, 2 for BNP (!), 2 for UKIP, 1 lib dem, 1 labour.

Kinda hard to decide from that and I was going to vote Lib Dem.
 
I think it's broken. I often had very little preference between policies in some categories, there's no weighting to areas where I feel strongly, I should have selected less categories than all of them I think.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom