1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

UK Election Results 2010

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by ParadigmShifter, May 6, 2010.

  1. Krill

    Krill Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Messages:
    3,332
    Location:
    Stoke-on-Trent, England
    If it is a kilt and no undies, and it applies to Women too, you should have a couple of representatives stand down here as well!
     
  2. Takhisis

    Takhisis Jinping, wer fragt uns?

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    50,773
    Location:
    up yours!
    I'll cook. I'm good at frying.
    Nah, move up north. English lasses should definitely be covered up.

    Scotland even has a T-1001.

    CZ-J doesn't count, she's Welsh.
     
  3. Krill

    Krill Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Messages:
    3,332
    Location:
    Stoke-on-Trent, England
    Find me a job north of Glasgow and I'll be there...
     
  4. Arwon

    Arwon

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Messages:
    18,781
    Location:
    Canberra
    You can't get that feel-good local stuff through a national parliament. Traitorfish is right, this is an argument for federalism, not single-member constituencies.
     
  5. BCLG100

    BCLG100 Music Master

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2002
    Messages:
    16,650
    Location:
    Lahndan
    It does, I don't think i've said anywhere in this thread that anyone else is wrong, merely that i welcome the FPTP system currently. Nor did I say that their shouldn't be reform, i just feel that the reform should be the right reform. This means not something which is impulsive just to get (for example) the lib dems onside holding a referrendum for PR right now when we actually have no idea how to implement it. A referendum may be the only answer though, this would at least remove the impression that the Lib Dems are wanting it to be able to have a larger share of the power/ Labour and Tories don't want it to maintain the grip on power.

    But this option is already there, people can run as independents. Perhaps i'm missing your point here but you seem to be implying change for changes sake. I can provide a list of countries which use FPTP as well which shows it is very workable but that doesn't solve the issue I don't think. I don't think with simple PR that regions would be catered for at all, presumably with simple PR that regions would be completely dismissed?

    I've not had the time to read the entire Report you've directed to unfortunatly but reading ~page 52, they note there would still be problems in ensuring that 'top up' members would not actually be representative of the area. I appreciate this is similar to parachuting members in which the big parties do currently but at least for the election themselves people know who it is they're voting for. This seems to imply that voters wont actually choose 'who' they're voting for.

    My apoligies in advance if this is answered later, i've just simply not had the time to read it all. However, as i've said earlier a referendum may be the only option to decide how to proceed, at the very least it would allow the politicians to know just what the public wants. It would be quite interesting to see what would happen, i'd imagine that it would not be a huge turnout but that those voting would be voting more for PR.

    It does talk about the merits however ~p.65 iirc and, as Mise points out doesn't the report focus on Ireland which the report itself notes that nowhere has it been attempted on such a large scale?

    Sure you can, MP's often have clincs with their constituents.
     
  6. Arwon

    Arwon

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Messages:
    18,781
    Location:
    Canberra
    So what? They're still national parties in a national parliament. You want local feelgoodery, look at local government and maybe even state government, if it existed.
     
  7. BCLG100

    BCLG100 Music Master

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2002
    Messages:
    16,650
    Location:
    Lahndan
    What= the principle that what you tell them is being represented on a national level. Rather than grannies on a council.
     
  8. Arwon

    Arwon

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Messages:
    18,781
    Location:
    Canberra
    Well yeah, but that's different to what was being talked about earlier in terms of "getting stuff done locally" and all that stuff. If you want national representation of your local views, you need a member who is local and reflects your views so that there's realistic causation between your vote or non-vote and their fortunes. Under single-member electorates, half the voters don't have that.

    And, like, multi-member electorates mean it's far more likely there's going to be an MP who actually shares and represents your views locally, rather than just dismissing you as the irrelevant minority voter in a safe seat who can't do anything more than just continue to vote against you. I have 2 Greens members in my Australian Capital Territory seat of Molonglo among the 7, I can call either of them with an issue and tell them I'm not voting for them again because of something they've supported or opposed. I can likewise tell my three Labor members that they might get my vote if they support or oppose X. And it's a realistic threat or message because relatively small shifts in the vote can unseat a candidate when there's seven.

    It's much harder to do that with my single federal Labor member, who gets 60%+ of the primary vote simply because he's the ALP dude.
     
  9. BCLG100

    BCLG100 Music Master

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2002
    Messages:
    16,650
    Location:
    Lahndan
    I dont think it was me that was implying the 'getting stuff done locally' thing, there are local councils for that. I was more meaning regional views represented on a national scale. Presumably then it's an issue with voters rather than the system though, the number of people which are quite happy to vote 'tactically' I haven't, nor would i plan to, vote tactically. It's like going to the football and cheering for the referee.
     
  10. Arwon

    Arwon

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Messages:
    18,781
    Location:
    Canberra
    Yeah I can't say I'd ever noticed you before here, unless you were Mise two pages ago you just kinda jumped in halfway through. I am arguing with Mise's earlier views about the value of a single local MP.

    Given where the two of you diverge (you don't believe national MPs can achieve things locally or regionally better than under prop rep), I suggest that in those instances where you and him depart from each other, just go back and study the differences, insert my arguments into the most sensible and intelligent place they should go within, between and amongst the two of you, and then assume I was right.
     
  11. Dachs

    Dachs Hero of the Soviet Union

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    32,588
    Location:
    Moscow
    :lol:
     
  12. lovett

    lovett Deity

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2007
    Messages:
    2,570
    That's a drawback of a mixed member system like that which the report advocates. They ameliorate this somewhat by have the 'top-up' ballot being 'open list'; that means voters don't vote for a party but rather for individuals. They also note that MPs with a tenuous geographical link such as those they propose (notably this link isn't completely destroyed) could usefully enhance the legislative scrutiny role of parliament, which is sadly under-performed.

    Nevertheless, I agree that mixed member systems give a significant degree of power to the party machine, although I'd contend this was no more than that given under FPTP; a 15-20% top-up as in AV+ might even give less power to party officials than 400 safe seats does in FPTP.

    But that's exactly why I support Single Transferable Vote over AV+ or any other form of mixed member system (although I find both far preferable to FPTP). STV would hamstring the ability of a party to 'parachute in' candidates because of the extra competition multi-member constituencies entail. Especially the ability to express a preference between members of the same party and thus intra-party competition.



    It recognizes merits, which FPTP certainly has. Otherwise it would hardly have lasted this long. However I think it fairly clear that the presented evidence shows that its deficiencies far outweigh said merits; certainly the report wholly and unanimously supports 'top-up' members and overwhelmingly decided to dispense with FPTP entirely

    On Ireland a whether its experience is transferable I answered Mise with this:

     

Share This Page