Poll: General election voting poll round 3

[thep02]

Who on earth keeps voting for Sinn Fein?

why would an anti empire nationalist from Northern Ireland not vote for Sinn Fein?

 

[robgmun]

Anyone got any thoughts about a Labour/Tory grand coalition? IMHO it's more likely than ever. It'd be challenging to make it work, but it beats having a minority Labour government propped up by the SNP. If it comes down to those two possibilities, I wouldn't be surprised to hear it being talked about. SNP help is risky and could turn out to be very expensive.

If there ever was a Labour/Tory grand coalition it'll be the end of politics as we know it, it'll be the ultimate **** you to all the people that voted for either party and would just show that with the threat of the gravy train coming to an end they pull together, it would decimate trust for either party

 

[D.P.]

If there ever was a Labour/Tory grand coalition it'll be the end of politics as we know it, it'll be the ultimate **** you to all the people that voted for either party and would just show that with the threat of the gravy train coming to an end they pull together, it would decimate trust for either party

Grand coalitàiins have occurred befor and in other countries, especially in FPTP electors systems where minority parties become more successful.

It is clear that this election is going to be 1/3rd labour, 1/3rd Tories and 1/3 others, th SNP and lib dems making up most of that. Best scenario is one of them them just sequels 300 seats and lid demos pick up 27 or giving a majority coalition, just. But that is not guaranteed at all.


It is hard to imagine labour and Tories joining forces but really, the parties these days are incredibly similar. The new labour is the most right wing Labour Party in the history of the party, and is more right wing than almost every Conservative party of the 20th century.

The labour manifesto reads very much like the Tories, very little expenditure, some austerity measures.


The most extreme of the Tories will vote UKIP so really, labour and Tories could well form a working grand coalition to block minorities.

 

[robgmun]

I don't disagree that at the top the labour and Tories are incredibly similar, but forming a grand coalition in the mind set of the people would be awful. Again you seems to think that the people in this country think and feel the same way that Europeans do.

Imagine if you're a Northener in a ex-mining town that always voted Labour because your family always did and you hated what the Tories did to your community in the 80's? They and 100,000's of them would feel utterly betrayed if Labour got into bed with the tories, same can be said for people down south who are more likely vote conservative.

 

[scorza]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32295970

Does anyone think extending the right to buy to Housing Association tenants as per the latest Conservative election pledge, is a good idea? I found out thanks to Radio 4 this morning that Housing Associations are private not-for-profit organisations so the government will have to compensate them for the discount given to buyers. I see from the link above Labour have said this will cost the taxpayer £4.5bn, the lady on R4 representing HAs said it would cost between £5.8bn and £20bn She also pointed out that it didn't really make sense to give away taxpayers money to some of the most securely housed people in the country when we have so many private renters who are struggling to save for a deposit and in an increasing number of cases struggling to just pay the rent.

 

[robgmun]

I think it's a really bad idea, probably the worst one the Conservatives has had so far this election

 

[Uther]

Seeing as the discount is said to be up to 70% then it could be a good way to get another million votes, and never mind the consequences....

 

[Caged]

Right to buy without a commitment to replace all the 'lost' housing stock, and instead having some sort of religious belief that 'the market' will do that for you is probably the most wrong thing you could do if you were trying to get house prices under control.

Nice vote buyer though.

 

[joeyjojo]

You can't just shift all of the blame away from population growth (which can be controlled given the will) to a lack of building new houses (which is a finite solution).

Firstly, let's take your criticism of inadequate planning. How can you plan how many houses you need when you have a rule that says anyone elsewhere in the EU can decide to move to Britain on Wednesday morning and then require a house in Britain on Thursday afternoon?

...

Secondly, this idea we can just build the problem away. At what point does this tactic have to be offset against some form of population control? When we get to 80m, 100m, 200m people in the UK? I'm not suggesting we'll get to those figures but if you hold the view that migration should be ignored in favour of building the given there is a finite amount of land/resources at what point does it become a limit to your outlook?

Adding EU members isn't an overnight thing as you're suggesting. It took the most recent members (Bulgaria, Croatia, etc.) about 7 years from saying they'd like to join to getting in. That's plenty of time to make forecasts of movement (sensible ones, not Farrage's ones) and respond accordingly.

Also housing it not so finite as many think. Check out this discussion from last month. You've got the Chief Executive of the National Housing Federation and an Oxford Geography Prof saying there's plenty of land and we can build enough houses using bits of knackered green belt if only we had the political will. That's a failure of government, not migrants.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02m5n8m

 

[craptakular]

I'm going to vote Conservative as I have done very well over the last 5 years & they have gotten me on the property ladder too. Also I cannot vote Labour anymore as they only care about bankrupting the country with benefits and showering every migrant with all the money under the sun.

 

[Freakbro]

A key pledge of the Conservative manifesto will be the extension of right to buy, a flagship policy of Margaret Thatcher's government in the 1980s

Because 30 years on we look back and celebrate what a wonderful policy that was

Oh, wait....

 

[estebanrey]

Adding EU members isn't an overnight thing as you're suggesting. It took the most recent members (Bulgaria, Croatia, etc.) about 7 years from saying they'd like to join to getting in. That's plenty of time to make forecasts of movement (sensible ones, not Farrage's ones) and respond accordingly.

I wasn't talking about member states joining the EU, I was talking about individuals' decisions to move about the EU.

Only two things increase population, births outstripping deaths (which we have) and immigration outstripping emigration (which we also have). My point was, with regard to house building you have 16-21year lag before each new child will need new housing (given babies live with their parents in housing that already exists) whereas many immigrants could turn up tomorrow with no warning and require housing immediately.

Forecasts are all very well and good but as I pointed out Labour predicted 13,000 would come a year in 2004 from the 10 new EU countries at the time, in fact it was 50,000.

Also housing it not so finite as many think.

Something is either finite or not, land is finite regardless of how near or far we are to the limit

Check out this discussion from last month. You've got the Chief Executive of the National Housing Federation and an Oxford Geography Prof saying there's plenty of land and we can build enough houses using bits of knackered green belt if only we had the political will. That's a failure of government, not migrants.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02m5n8m

You've avoided the question. Regardless of how much land we have now at what point does your plan to ignore/loosen immigration rules in favour of building the problem away become untenable? How many people do you think the UK could take. 120m people? 150m people? 300m people?

There has to be a limit to your solution.

 

[bam0]

Does anyone think extending the right to buy to Housing Association tenants as per the latest Conservative election pledge, is a good idea?

No, it's a horrifically bad idea. What's going on with the Conservatives making very expensive unfunded commitments at the moment? The 8bn to the NHS, this new right to buy scheme, crazy. And that's ignoring as someone else said that it would be a big transfer of tax payer money to private companies to pay for the discount, nice way to try and buy some voters though. Economic competence, lol.

 

[The Geezer]

Because 30 years on we look back and celebrate what a wonderful policy that was

Oh, wait....

These clown shoes never learn, hunt for the votes no matter what the cost to the country. We are still feeling the pain from Maggie's screw up from this policy.

Look there is a housing shortage, renting is at an all time high, we never replenished the stock from the last sell off ...............

 

[the_r_sole]

Selling off more housing is an appalling idea, but the Tory way is to stop spending public money on such luxuries as housing and allow the private sector to make huge profits from supplying limited "social" housing.
Let's be clear, a volume housebuilder has zero interest in solving the shortage, supply and demand doesn't work for profits in private companies if you meet the demand!!
We need to have some investment in and regulation of the housing sector, selling off old stock at a reduced rate is a short sighted vote winner for the people living in those houses, priced out of the general market

 

[ubersonic]

Between 2011-2012 the UK population rose 419,900. Net migration was 177,000, the were 499,331 deaths and 813,200 births*

This shows that net migration only accounts for 1/5 of the population increase

Eh? Since when has 42% been a fifth?

Here were the figures quoted. 177k is 42% of the 420k population growth quoted, not a fifth.

Births: 813,200
Net migration: 177,000
Births+Net migration = 990,200 (population increase for that year)
990,200 / 5 = 198,020

So you guys are correct it is slightly LESS than 1/5, but I did say I was using approximates.

 

[McPhee]

I don't disagree that at the top the labour and Tories are incredibly similar, but forming a grand coalition in the mind set of the people would be awful. Again you seems to think that the people in this country think and feel the same way that Europeans do.

Imagine if you're a Northener in a ex-mining town that always voted Labour because your family always did and you hated what the Tories did to your community in the 80's? They and 100,000's of them would feel utterly betrayed if Labour got into bed with the tories, same can be said for people down south who are more likely vote conservative.

While that's true, being the largest party after this election could turn out to be a poisoned chalice for Labour whatever the outcome. They'll be secretly hoping for enough seats to form a coalition government with the Lib Dems. Failing that, there are no good options. A grand coalition is simply one of the bad ones, alongside forming an alliance with the SNP or calling a second election.

Of those three, I have no idea which would come about. However, my preference would be a grand coalition. Deals with the Tories are inevitable anyway. Consider what happens when Labour try to pass a budget; either they scrap austerity or the SNP vote it down. Option 3 would be to keep their manifesto pledges by speaking to the Tories and finding some common ground to pass a budget. It'll be like that all the way through the parliament. The SNP will vote against (or abstain from voting) on anything they don't agree with, and Labour will regularly be left begging for Tory support. Or worse; the SNP will negotiate another independence referendum in exchange for votes on certain issues, and will then set about making a spectacle of Westminster by messing up as many votes 'on principle' as possible. Ed goes down in history as the Prime Minister who sold Scotland to get in to power.

I'm not suggesting a Grand Coalition is a good option. It's just potentially not the worst. There's enough common ground between the two parties to form a stable government. It would also be a very strong majority - one that isn't vulnerable to backbench rebellions.

 

[gettothechopper]

terrible idea

social housing people are not the ones who need help getting their own house, its the people who are stuck on high rents who cant get massive deposits together

surely if you are in social housing you wouldnt have money to buy a house anyway ? isnt that the point of social housing??

the shortage of building new houses, and fees and high rental market rents is the real problem


its just a giveaway for votes

 

[scorza]

Births: 813,200
Net migration: 177,000
Births+Net migration = 990,200 (population increase for that year)
990,200 / 5 = 198,020

So you guys are correct it is slightly LESS than 1/5, but I did say I was using approximates.

Good grief - how have you still not got this? Births+Net Migration DOES NOT EQUAL the population increase, you need to minus Deaths from that figure.

 

[McPhee]

Good grief - how have you still not got this? Births+Net Migration DOES NOT EQUAL the population increase, you need to minus Deaths from that figure.

Don't forget Brits who emigrate as well. They seem to get forgotten about rather a lot.