Where I live its a Conservative safe seat. The same MP has had the seat since 1997. He doesn't even live in the area, is invisible and rarely gets involved in local issues.
Yet, if nobody voted I suspect he would still keep his seat.
This has to be wrong, its providing no choice at all.
How come our system does not have one vote for the party and then one for the person ?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
The blame for no electoral reform lies at the hands of the Tories.
They made the Lib Dems water down their referendum on PR, at the start of the coalition, to a vote on AV and it was subsequently trashed. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
 |
By *er himWoman
over a year ago
Essex |
It about time that the only people that can stand for election should be those that have lived in the area, as there primary home, of at least 7 years prior to election. Parliament would then truly represent the country instead of the party friends being put up in safe seats. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It about time that the only people that can stand for election should be those that have lived in the area, as there primary home, of at least 7 years prior to election. Parliament would then truly represent the country instead of the party friends being put up in safe seats."
But most people vote by party, not individual candidate.
People have the choice to vote for independent candidates, almost all of whom will live in their local area, but they don't get elected. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The blame for no electoral reform lies at the hands of the Tories.
"
Really? Not Labour too? Labour could easily have combined with the LDs and replaced the proposal with a fairer system, but they didn't want to risk their Scottish block-vote. Which is ironic now...
OP: we're in the same boat, but every vote is counted, every vote matters and every vote sends a message.
Mr ddc |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The blame for no electoral reform lies at the hands of the Tories.
Really? Not Labour too? Labour could easily have combined with the LDs and replaced the proposal with a fairer system, but they didn't want to risk their Scottish block-vote. Which is ironic now...
"
Do the opposition get to decide the specifics of referenda? I think not. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *rsIdiotWoman
over a year ago
Bedworth |
"It about time that the only people that can stand for election should be those that have lived in the area, as there primary home, of at least 7 years prior to election. Parliament would then truly represent the country instead of the party friends being put up in safe seats."
Totally agree. At the last election I had made up my mind who to vote for prior to the day. On the morning of the election I saw the labour candidate for the seat on the news campaigning for extra votes. He stated that he was visiting the constituency for the very first time but had our best interests at heart. After a small amount of research I discovered that he'd lost his seat last time and was hotly tipped for a cabinet position, hence why he was standing in such a safe seat.
This angered me so much that when I went to vote, I chose to vote for the candidate who was most likely to challenge him instead of the original candidate I had been going to vote for.
Unfortunately, he won by a huge margin and has never been seen in his constituency since |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The blame for no electoral reform lies at the hands of the Tories.
Really? Not Labour too? Labour could easily have combined with the LDs and replaced the proposal with a fairer system, but they didn't want to risk their Scottish block-vote. Which is ironic now...
Do the opposition get to decide the specifics of referenda? I think not. "
Whoever brings the most votes to every bill decides what ultimately becomes law. Labour and Libs successfully came together to prevent the boundary changes when it suited them... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The blame for no electoral reform lies at the hands of the Tories.
Really? Not Labour too? Labour could easily have combined with the LDs and replaced the proposal with a fairer system, but they didn't want to risk their Scottish block-vote. Which is ironic now...
Do the opposition get to decide the specifics of referenda? I think not.
Whoever brings the most votes to every bill decides what ultimately becomes law. Labour and Libs successfully came together to prevent the boundary changes when it suited them..."
That was a Commons vote, how is that the same as a referendum?
A national referendum can only be called by the government, not the opposition. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The blame for no electoral reform lies at the hands of the Tories.
Really? Not Labour too? Labour could easily have combined with the LDs and replaced the proposal with a fairer system, but they didn't want to risk their Scottish block-vote. Which is ironic now...
Do the opposition get to decide the specifics of referenda? I think not.
Whoever brings the most votes to every bill decides what ultimately becomes law. Labour and Libs successfully came together to prevent the boundary changes when it suited them...
That was a Commons vote, how is that the same as a referendum?
A national referendum can only be called by the government, not the opposition. "
A referendum can only be held after an Act of Parliament. The government has no power of veto if the opposition successfully bring forward amendments to a Bill.
Or of course, Tony Blair could have fulfilled the commitment in his 1997 manifesto to hold a referendum... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Or of course, Tony Blair could have fulfilled the commitment in his 1997 manifesto to hold a referendum..."
Yet the best chance we had was in 2011, and the Tories shat on it because they stood to lose the most and subsequently the Lib Dems refused the boundary changes as pay back.
Think of the seats UKIP could have had at this election, well every cloud has a silver lining. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Or of course, Tony Blair could have fulfilled the commitment in his 1997 manifesto to hold a referendum...
Yet the best chance we had was in 2011, and the Tories shat on it because they stood to lose the most and subsequently the Lib Dems refused the boundary changes as pay back.
Think of the seats UKIP could have had at this election, well every cloud has a silver lining. "
Tony Blair had a much bigger majority. Wasn't it the first 'cast-iron commitment' in his manifesto that was quietly shelved?
But yes, as one of the few who liked the coalition, some of the current options are scary! The sad thing is, there is a heck of a lot of consensus in the middle ground that is frittered away on party political nonsense.
Still, I'm starting to feel a little guilty about hijacking the OP's thread now
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
Expected to be one of the highest turnouts ever, according to those preparing for the counts