buctootim

Quite a good article here - in the Telegraph of all places. Interesting comments below it too. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/election-2010/7612832/General-Election-2010-is-first-past-the-post-on-its-last-legs.html

Ken Clarke or Adair Turner.

Undeniably it is more complicated to count the votes than FTP, but its not difficult to understand how to vote.

There are at least 30 systems more fair than FPTP. Personally I favour one of the STV variants. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_transferable_vote

Given the frequency with which you've heard, I surprised you havent grasped the issue yet. Its most likely a contractual rather than editorial problem. Circulating the offending programme will likely lead to someone getting sued.

As you know, there are lots of fairer and more democratic systems, without breaking the constituency link. If the Tories, Labour and LDs had all got an equal 33.3% of the votes Labour would have had far more seats than the Tories and both would have had far more than the LDs. Just because no system is perfect doesnt mean you stick with the worst option.

People on here have seen it, Steve Grant for one - and guess what - there is nothing in it to fuel any conspiracy / coverup rumour. I have no idea why the programme was withdrawn - but since the editorial content appears innocuous its more likely it was because of some quality or contractual issue.

lol. You do realise that the point of democracy is to have a parliament which reflects the votes cast?

AV would only be a marginal improvement imo because it still disproprotionately benefits the large parties. STV would be much more representative without promoting extremism - because the fringe parties would pick up comparatively few second and third preference votes.

Speak only when there is something to announce is a good rule in my book - otherwise you get into the invidious position of having to repsond to every rumour on every forum, website, newspaper and radio.

Ayes to the right.

Ta, but what was wrong with the content? Printers technical effup or decision by club to withdraw due to editorial issues?

Why? whats he done?

Particularly since Blair promised a referendum on PR and Brown reportedly was part of the rebellion against it, forcing Blair to backtrack. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/blair-plans-to-ditch-promise-on-electoral-reform-690255.html http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/183879.stm

Bugger - got NC and AP mixed up into one strange individual in my mind

Based purely on the state of the team now, and second half of the season performaces I think AP has done a very good job. No-one really knows what else has gone on though - if anything (maybe the rumours are bull****). The rumours would only make sense if AP had given categorical assurances he hasnt delivered on or his professionalism is seriously in doubt for some other unknown (to us) reason.

I thought it was a very good post too. See Alpine, people hate your (usual) lack of balance, not you!

Dont think it does say that TG. Its just one analyst saying that in his view its possible that the LDs will object to nuclear.

Agree. Its not like its a choice between one or the other. They can do both simultaneously.

Depends how you look at it. Without administration we wouldnt have Liebherr, a top team, very good manager and a bright future.

There is a major difference between a government not offering a referendum on an issue, as has been the case in the past - and a government offering a referendum but the opposition MPs voting it down. That would be seen as flying in the face of the public being given a choice and following self interest.

Amazing isnt it? NASA have the technology to fly to the moon, send probes to saturn, but can only operate the smudge icon on photoshop, when an average idiot could have doctored it seamlessly. Someone is pulling your plonker op and it isnt the US government.

Agree about solar. Its next to useless in the UK with the current standard of technology. Offshore wind (and maybe wave) can and will provide 30% of our electricity over the next decades. Nuclear will have to play an important part in the supply also. Nuclear isnt ideal though. The price of uranium has shot up due to demand and limited supply and it isnt very flexible - very hard to switch nuclear off when demand is low and boot it up when demand is high.

Im not sure thats true. All Labour would have to promise is a referendum. The combined seats of Labour, LDs, Green and UKIP give a majority over the Tories. It would be hard for any MP to vote against a referendum, their electorate would want the chance to vote.

Depends which one you wake up with!!