Caporegime
So you wanted an all Lib-Dem government? Yeah, because that's PR.
Poll: *** 2010 General Election Result & Discussion ***
- Thread starter Cosimo
- Start date
Associate
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 2,211
The problem is that that is all they are - plans. A number of the things they've planned will be lucky to get through Commons, let alone through the Lords.
Challenging the status quo is great, but not when it's unrealistic.
They have a larger majority than brown did in the commons, and a much larger combined majority in the Lords
But most of the proposals aren't unrealistic, the coalition has enough votes to withstand minor rebellions from either fringe side.
Probably not that the Liberal Democrats would end up propping up a Tory government
It's amazing how some people seemed to think that the Liberals were simply an extension of the Labour party...
It's all they were being offered from Labour as well, no-one was offering PR, because the change curve is too steep for a single parliament.
However, if you look at the various proposals from the Libservatives, you can see several changes to the setup that make much more sense in a coalition likely environment, which will make a future change to PR easier.
Caporegime
Yeah, we're not going to get PR (except maybe in the Lords), but I think AV is better than the current system if only by a fairly marginal degree.
Not really my point though: PR requires compromise between parties - if you're going to vote for a party backing PR you should be willing to support that party if/when it makes compromises.
Associate
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 2,211
They have a larger majority than brown did in the commons, and a much larger combined majority in the Lords
So? Already there are mutterings from Conservative and Lib Dem backbenchers about blocking some of these proposals.
The combination of AV (with redrawn boundaries) in the Commons, PR in the Lords (with increased powers), party funding reform and fixed term parliaments are a great set of political reforms
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2006
- Posts
- 12,130
If that was addressed at me, where did you pick up that bizarre idea
But i cannot last, how can it realistically last until 2015 as they claim it will. If it does there will be no longer a Lib Dem party to vote for. How can they fight against and try to show up the tories if they are still working with them in 2015.
If they are still in coalition in 2015 the Lib Dems will cease to be a party to vote for.
The whole campaign Cameron kept banging on about voting Lib was a vote for labour and how in last nights QT camerons votes on not working with the lib dems was thrown back at them. Well for 2015 it will be come vote lib dem vote cameron.
I'm not saying I wanted a lib/lab tie up more than this but the reality is the lib dems having given up all integrity for very little back. There wasn't a person on that QT panel last night Lib/Lab or tory that thought the Libs had been given anything but scraps for the sake of giving anyway everything they claimed to be.
on the contrary, it's entirely possible (and indeed plausible) that they could follow the plan this election, a Centre right party and a centre left party, picking the best policies from each to form another coaltion. They could also push Labour further to the left (where their support from centrists diminishes) and take over as the two main parties (especially with electoral and party funding reform).
It's a good plan, it's the same one Blair was planning in 1997 but he got too large a majority to make it work
Think about it, if they get AV through the referendum, people like me are far more likely to vote for one then the other than allow Labour a look in...
It's also in both parties benefits to make it work for 5 years, as the first few are going to be tough, and the real benefits will start to show later on.
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2006
- Posts
- 12,130
I wouldn't deny that with the present constituency boundaries, AV would be marginally better than FPTP. However, as I understand it, the Tories plan to change the constituency boundaries; I doubt that they will do so in such a way as to favour either the Liberal Democrats or anyone else.
Moot point really, we are unlikely to get PR anyhow.
As to the present coalition, I look forward with keen anticipation and a fair degree of scepticism to seeing what the true split is between the Tories and the Liberal Democrats so far as compromise is concerned
The current boundaries massively favour Labour. Equalising constituency sizes is simple common sense. The current system is massively gerrymandered.
Moot point really, we are unlikely to get PR anyhow.
As to the present coalition, I look forward with keen anticipation and a fair degree of scepticism to seeing what the true split is between the Tories and the Liberal Democrats so far as compromise is concerned
So do I, if only to see your reaction if they keep the current compromise system going so well
Caporegime
From you; declaring the the Lib-Dem and Conservative coalition as a "Tory government."If that was addressed at me, where did you pick up that bizarre idea
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2006
- Posts
- 12,130
Allegedly.
. . . and will massively favour the Tories - allegedly.
I haven't heard anyone suggest that changing the current boundaries will favour the Liberal Democrats but I have no doubt that someone will pop up to show that the Tories are only planning to do it in order to help the Liberal Democrats
Soldato
No. It will improve the situation for the Tories, yes, but how will equal sized constituencies favour the Tories? They will favour all parties the same, surely?
There is no allegedly about it.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/guide/electoral-bias
http://www.essex.ac.uk/bes/epop 2005/papers/biaepop.pdf
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1530157
http://sasi.group.shef.ac.uk/publications/2001/johnston_et_al_50_years.pdf
And so on.
Which any proposal that equalises things is likely to do as the current system is biased... I haven't seen any evidence to suggest that redrawing the boundaries to equal size constituencies will give the Tories a distrinct advantage, as opposed to neutralising Labour's advantage.
I haven't heard anyone suggest that changing the current boundaries will favour the Liberal Democrats but I have no doubt that someone will pop up to show that the Tories are only planning to do it in order to help the Liberal Democrats
AV favours the lib dems as the third party, as most conservative voters will not put Labour as their alternate and vice versa. But I'm sure you were already aware of that
Soldato
Gem from fb:
"MPs should be taking a 100% pay cut and work for the good of the country".
It has about 500 likes.
Similarly people saying DC's 5% cut is nothing... funny how almost every other incoming government has given themselves pay rises....
"MPs should be taking a 100% pay cut and work for the good of the country".
It has about 500 likes.
Similarly people saying DC's 5% cut is nothing... funny how almost every other incoming government has given themselves pay rises....
I'm sure you will along with millions of others, the thing is though you won't take the risk on voting dems because that could let labour back in. In a coalition they won't be able to critise the tories enough to be seen as a credible alternative to letting labour back in.
The Dems took massive strides in this election to be seen as a credible alternative, this coalition will have done them far more harm than good as a future choice in a 3 horse race for seats. They will be viewed as so desperate for power they will turn their backs on their priniciples for it or turn a blind eye.
For the tories though they can't lose, if it doesn't work they can blame the public for forcing a coalition and have so many more seats than the Dems no one is seriously going to change a vote from tory to dems to keep labour out.
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2006
- Posts
- 12,130
Sadly, I suspect that you are 100% spot-on here.
Actually, disappointed as I am that the Liberal Democrats have formed a coalition with the Tories, I really don't think that they had much choice:
- A Liberal Democrat - New Labour coalition would have been incredibly unstable, would have involved giving away far too much to the SNP & Plaid Cymru and would rightly have been viewed in an even less favourable light than a Liberal Democrat - Tory coalition
- Forcing another General Election would have been a disaster for pretty much every party
- Occasionally supporting a minority Tory government wouldn't have given them even the prospect of a change to the electoral system
Caporegime
The combination of AV (with redrawn boundaries) in the Commons, PR in the Lords (with increased powers), party funding reform and fixed term parliaments are a great set of political reforms
Indeed. Less than I'd have liked, but still much more than I expected. We'll have to wait and see how much of it happens. I'm not expecting many Tories to vote with the AV proposals, for example.