Though of course with the currently proposed “electoral reforms” we may have just missed our last change to ever radically change the shape of of Parliament via the ballot box. Few forms of PR (and so far they’re not even talking about real PR) work in favour of new parties, independents or changing the make up of the government in a radical fashion. So all we may have to look forward to is a permanent game of musical chairs between the current incumbents.

Oh well, tell then we’re still ruled by people who call breaking the law a “breach of the rules” and then let themselves off and I can’t see that changing anytime soon.

Giolla

Bookmark to:

As James Cleverly observes “PR isn’t better it’s just different”, and he’s not wrong. So far most of the forms of PR that have been touted and for which people are demonstrating ensure that whilst the “national” share of votes is reflected in the number of seats they at the same time make it impossible for independent candidates to ever get in, so no more Martin Bells or “save Kiddiminster hospital” candidates. Very small parties will also be no more as they won’t be able to campaign just a single seat and get a toe hold that way, but will need to be able to campaign in numerous places with the hope of getting enough votes over all to maybe scrape a seat. In the meantime slightly larger parties that can do that, such as the BNP or Greens, will at least have a voice and potentially quite a powerful one depending on how those national percentages work out. So depending on how you look at it a mixed bag, either quite poor or very poor. Meanwhile of course we may have some sort of permanent coalition of a couple of large parties ruling over us for ever, terribly democratic that.

The bigger issue to my mind is almost every form of PR breaks the link between the electorate and their representative, you would no longer have an MP representing your area directly and you’ll have no way to get rid of a corrupt MP. the reason being that most forms of PR work on party lists so the party chooses who’ll represent you and their place in the house isn’t dependent on representing you, as you just vote for a party, but in working for their party so as to stay high up on the list of people to fill the party seats. Of course the parties will notionally have to keep to their promises and such so as to keep their share of the vote, or you know they could just tell us how bad the others are and try to scare us into voting against the other guy. In either case the people at the top of the party lists are utterly safe, and the people at the bottom of the lists will be more worried about moving up the list than trying to represent us, as there’s no link between how we vote and if a particular MP gets in or not.

So if you think political parties are the best thing since sliced bread, and really don’t care about having independent candidates or small parties being able to make changes PR is the way to go. If on the other hand you’d rather have some say in who your representative is as an individual you might perhaps want to think about the matter a bit more carefully. There are many forms of “PR” some of which preserve the link, but will we be given that choice and all forms of PR make the larger incumbent parties safer over all and thus more disconnected from the electorate.

As a concrete example consider this the BBC report that nationally “others” (so all the independents and tiny parties) got 1.1% of the vote and one actual seat – in a PR systems that award seats according to percentage of vote those “others” should have 7 seats, but how would we pick which 7 small party/independent candidates got those seats? Lottery? Highest vote in their area or would it be a case that each independents percentage of the vote is counted and so we never have independent candidates again – only candidates beholden to the party machines.

I should also point you towards Charles Crawfords article on the a href=”http://charlescrawford.biz/blog/the-psychology-of-coalitions”>”The Psychology Of Coalitions” where he discusses the likely effects of the horse trading coalitions demands on a political class already obsessed with getting back into power the next time before they even make a decision as to how to run the country this time.

In the interest of fairness it does seem that the STV (Single transferable vote) does address many of my concerns, but that still leaves the problem on some constituencies having more power than others on a per capita basis and as observed by Burning our money none of the options being discussed so far address the fact that unlike the other members of the United Kingdom England alone doesn’t have any devolved representation.

Bookmark to:

Mind I am slightly more optimistic in out look than the people over at the Daily Mash:

As the polling stations open, stunningly ill-informed voters across the country are preparing to support a party manifesto that bears little or no relation to the fantasy world that exists inside their brains.
…

Bookmark to:

They would have us believe that despite the heads of all three firms having been caught with their fingers in the till, and many of their staff following the same example that these are the only people who could possibly do the job. Who knows they may be right, but look at it another way, we know that the three main bidders are corrupt and not doing a very good job, at least if we get in a new team they might not be.

If you took your care to a garage to be fixed and discovered they were over charging you, and that the staff were stealing anything left in your car when it went in, would you take your car back there? Or would you maybe try a different garage which hasn’t ripped you off already? Yes they might do a worse job, they might even rip you off in the same way but there’s only one way you’ll find out and there is the possibility that they’ll be much better, charge less and not steal from you. Would you honestly continue to use a shop or garage that you know is ripping you off, just because well you always go there? Or would you perhaps try somewhere else? And if you’d accept such behaviour in the comparatively small matters of a garage, why accept it from the people asking us to let them run the country?

As Anna Raccoon says the current management of UK PLC are not fit for purpose. The time has surely come that we need to chuck them all out, even if a new “inexpereinced” team makes some mistakes at least we’re not telling the same bunch of crooks and incompetents that we’re happy with their behaviour.

Bookmark to:

(Thanks to Old Holborn)

Bookmark to:

The Times newspaper has been running short pieces by Christian backers of the three big parties in Britain, getting them to say why Jesus might support their favoured political horse. Frankly, the politics of Jesus (to adapt the title of Mennonite theologian John Howard Yoder’s justly famous book) doesn’t work like that. The collusion of overbearing religion and politics killed him as a subversive, but even the grave the empire built could not contain him. Nonetheless, Jonathan Bartley decided to play ball in a good-humoured way, having got the paper at least to allow him to ask, “Would Jesus have voted ‘other’?” Here’s what he came up with…

Would Jesus vote for a smaller party or independent? Would Jesus spoil his ballot paper? Would he have voted at all in a system which is so manifestly unjust and unrepresentative? Here are 10 suggestions to encourage debate about whether Jesus might in fact opt for something other than a vote for the three big three.
…

Bookmark to:

Especially as if it’s anything like round here, no one will have been round to your door to talk to you.

Bookmark to:

Firstly consider these statistics from the independent:

“TWO PARTY DOMINANCE

Votes Cast for parties other than Labour or Conservative

1951 3.2%

2005 32.7%”

So whilst it make take time, how much of that delay is because we keep believing that we can’t change the way things are and that we have to vote for the same parties every time, and with that in mind please take the time to watch the following:

Bookmark to:

Theft Report-A Reminder For May 6th

10 days to go.

10 days left to ensure that this theft can be reversed and we can have all stolen items returned to us.

10 days left to change your minds and avoid voting for LibLabCon.

This is my first ever repeat post but I hope you agree that it is worth repeating as a reminder to all those who will simply vote for more of the same. Or worse. Vote for the Big Three and you condone this theft.

Let’s get our country back under British control.

Here you go:

pre-crime, because the theft will not take place until 00:01 hours, Tuesday 1st December 2009.

It is a notable theft and bears reporting. Many others have tried, and failed, to obtain police action. Politicians have been asked, and in turn, they have ignored our questions, and our documented demands that they cease and desist. Not surprising, when you learn that it is the politicians themselves that will aid and abet in the theft.

What will be taken?

A few small items. Items that we have had in our possession for around a thousand years. Antiques, then? Well, sort of. These particular ancient items are truly priceless. Countless numbers of people have died, have been imprisoned, and had their lives ruined in the obtaining and in the retaining of these precious items. We thought that they were safe, we thought we would keep them forever, but a group of mindless, thoughtless, greedy and inept people, charged with their safekeeping went to great lengths to ensure that the theft will take place.

Item 1.

Habeas corpus ad subjiciendum. Latin for “you may hold the body subject to examination”. This undeniable right protects one from the state. Whilst it is in place, no-one can lock you away without having solid lawful reasons to do so. Today, if you believe that you have been incarcerated and no evidence supports that incarceration, you can demand a Writ of Habeas Corpus from the court. The court will then examine evidence that you should be gaoled, remanded, or sectioned. You might also be interested to learn that once habeas corpus is gone you can be incarcerated for up to eight months without charge. This item will be stolen just after midnight on Monday 30th November 2009.

Item 2.

Courts de jure. Latin for “courts by jury”. Today we have some 70 courts in our land geared for jury trials. On Tuesday morning your right to be judged by a jury of your peers evaporates completely. All magistrates courts are now companies with limited liability. They are, for want of a better term, places of business. Justice is not dispensed. A negotiation takes place. Crown courts will now become de facto courts. Same stage, same actors, same anticipated outcome. You will part with money, or your freedom, based on the whim or the mood, of one man or one woman. This item will be stolen just after midnight on Monday 30th November 2009.

Item 3.

Innocent until proven guilty. On Tuesday morning we start playing a whole new game whereby you, the accused, are guilty until you can prove your innocence. Our age old method under Common Law is dumped without ceremony and we revert instead to a mix of Napoleonic and Roman Law. Instead of having to convince 12 good men and true (15 in Scotland) that you are innocent, you now have to prove to one man or one woman that you are not guilty. This item will be stolen just after midnight on Monday 30th November 2009.

Item 4.

Loss of sovereignty. We are an ancient civilisation. People inhabited this land thousands of years before the Egyptians issued the tenders for pyramid building. Countless lives have been lost defending our little island. It had been a mecca for those wanting to live unfettered lives. Until now. Those immigration gates were flung wide and we invited in that Trojan horse, not filled with soldiers but with people intent on taking, taking, taking for themselves. Hundreds of thousands, millions, arrived under Labours watch, not to better themselves per se, but to help themselves to benefits we pay for. As I have previously stated on this blog, all are welcome. If they are prepared to work. The plan, masterminded by those fools in parliament, appears now to have been a deliberate act to dilute us, to weaken us, to take away inalienable rights, and give the immigrants more rights than naturalised Britons. Under the EU our sovereignty is dead and buried. No more English, no more Scots, no more Irish, no more Welsh. We are all european now.  This item will be stolen just after midnight on Monday 30th November 2009.

 Item 5.

Democracy. From the Greek demokratia-power to the people. The first democratically elected parliament was De Montforts in England in 1265. We shared this method of rule with others, and it spread. Many authoritarian systems have been toppled only to have democracy established. On Tuesday morning we give away this unique method of rule for an oligarchy. Mandarins in Europe are not elected. They are selected. No previous experience is required. Which is handy if you are a (well connected) imbecile. Fat salary, fat pension, fat chance of actually having to work for a living like the proles. Arguably, because of their vastly diminished responsibilities, we have no need for a parliament, no need of the traitorous monarch, and certainly no need to pay 646 goons and their back-room staff billions every year. Brussels will rule absolutely. They will waste our money with unimagined skill. Bye bye democracy. It was nice while it lasted. This item will be stolen just after midnight on Monday 30th November 2009.

I have to stop. This is far too depressing. I had another 15 or 20 items lined up that I had researched earlier today.

The theft of any one of the five items above shocks me to the core. I never thought that our own MPs would terrify me more than al Qaeda, but that day has arrived.

I have tried to avoid saying this, but I predict a riot. I predict running battles on the streets of Britain Euro Regions 1-8. I predict many deaths and much bloodshed once the sheeple awake to the nightmare I have envisaged for the last five or six years. The day has come and the thefts are planned. The loss of these items will, I fear, reverberate down the years. It is our undoing.

Legally, I could not have said any of this after midnight on Monday. To criticise the EU becomes a crime then*.

What have we allowed to happen?

And, much more importantly, what will we do about it?

If you have any suggestions, get them in quickly. Tuesday morning cometh fast, and by then it will be too late.

CR.

* Several people have asked for a link. Here it is.

Bookmark to: