Vocal Voices

Two large polls, one by Survation (15,029) and one by YouGov (18,761), and both using the highly regarded, for its accuracy, multilevel regression and post-stratification (MRP) process predict a Tory wipeout at the next General Election.

Labour could get between 403 to 458 seats and Conservatives only 98 to 155 seats. The SNP would fail to be the largest party in Scotland by some way and the LibDems could get something like 40 to 60 seats.

Landslides like those predicted are not good for democracy IMHO but unfortunately the pollsters do not provide overall percentages for the parties so we cannot tell what the results might be under PR V FPTP.

That's if anybody bothers to vote
They are all crooks

saundra wrote:That's if anybody bothers to vote
They are all crooks

A lot of people would agree with you Saundra.
I may vote outside the mainstream parties, but for the first time in my life I might not bother to vote.

Saundra and Cromwell outline why I think such predicted landslides are dangerous.

Over generations the majority party has usually had enough seats to put through new laws, but those new laws have had to be tempered in some way to be acceptable because their majority was not so large. Go too extreme and there will be defections or abstentions, and then there are by-elections. Laws can be voted down.

However, give a party an unassailable majority and we have an elected dictatorship. I am uncomfortable with that whichever party is in power. People may look and think 'Why bother? Sod it' they then walk away and the landslide becomes confirmed.

Where i live it has been a safe Labour seat and will never change.

But in any election, eithet local for councils or for MPs, the actual number of people who vote is usually less thasn 50%.

So in a constitiuency with about 70,000 voter on the electoroal roll, an MP can get about 20,00 and still get elected.

And this is called democrocy.

Likewise in my area Cruiser. It is a Labour stronghold and the same candidate has been re-elected for a number of years. It makes no difference who I vote for but I always vote, however disillusioned I may be. I do have the satisfaction of making my choice, however, albeit insignificant.

The average voter turnout in general elections for 100 years has been about 73%. Only once, in 2001, did it drop below 60% (59.4%) so, yes, elections are democratic. People who do not vote get no say and only have themselves to blame.

Many of us find ourselves in constituencies where one party gets into power all the time. It's a consequence of FPTP. If only somebody could come up with a fairer system, eh? One where all votes are equal. Hmm, now what might that be?

One thing I would like to stop is people making a lifelong career out of becoming an MP. I would restrict them to a limited number of terms in office (say 5) and no more than three consecutively. Parliament needs to be refreshed continually - new faces and new thinking.

I would go further WM. No representation in parliament unless the person has done meaningful work in the economy. Not civil servant but actual work out in the economy. Then I'd give them no more than 4 terms. It is possibly 20 years after all.

Once it no longer becomes possible to make a career out of it the people who choose it would change. Also by the time some people have made minister they would only have a few years left.

That would work for me.