Whitey Grandad Posted 11 October, 2014 Share Posted 11 October, 2014 They should do it out of a sense of duty. It should not be a career choice. If it is a career they make decisions based on what is good for them not the people they represent. There is never a shortage of candidates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sour Mash Posted 11 October, 2014 Share Posted 11 October, 2014 They should do it out of a sense of duty. It should not be a career choice. If it is a career they make decisions based on what is good for them not the people they represent. What does that even mean? Easy for you to say as you're not giving up a well paid job for a "sense of duty". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29595529 Farage will be involved in one of the 3 leaders debates Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29595529 Farage will be involved in one of the 3 leaders debates I'm not a fan of those. We're supposed to be picking someone who can run the country, not someone who comes across well on TV. These debates are one of the reasons that we ended up with Nick Clegg and all his cronies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KelvinsRightGlove Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29595529 Farage will be involved in one of the 3 leaders debates He does seem to get a disproportionate amount of attention/coverage. That's for sure. I'd argue there are other who should be invited to be involved too. Obviously my dislike for UKIP/Farage is well known. I'm not saying don't involve him at all, but it seems unfair to skew things so in his balance. The Greens got more votes and MEPs in the Euro Elections than the Lib Dems. Up until last week the Greens had more MPs than UKIP - they now have the same amount. Yet they get next to no coverage, and you see far less of Caroline Lucas than of Farage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KelvinsRightGlove Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 Heck there's what 5/6 SNP MPs in Westminster? Why should they not get a voice? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moonraker Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 I'm not a fan of those. We're supposed to be picking someone who can run the country, not someone who comes across well on TV. These debates are one of the reasons that we ended up with Nick Clegg and all his cronies. And theres me thinking its because they were elected, in a first past the post system they got most votes, thats how it works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 And theres me thinking its because they were elected, in a first past the post system they got most votes, thats how it works. But those votes are swayed by one appearance on the TV. Sad but true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Gotsmanov Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 What does that even mean? Easy for you to say as you're not giving up a well paid job for a "sense of duty". There is a balance and at the moment the current mob show that the balance has gone the wrong way and we have these dreadful manufactured politicians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Gotsmanov Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 Heck there's what 5/6 SNP MPs in Westminster? Why should they not get a voice? They do but Up North Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KelvinsRightGlove Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 They do but Up North UKIP has one MP down South. What's the difference? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moonraker Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 But those votes are swayed by one appearance on the TV. Sad but true. So what do you suggest ban politicians from appearing during an election, now that is a good idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Gotsmanov Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 He does seem to get a disproportionate amount of attention/coverage. That's for sure. I'd argue there are other who should be invited to be involved too. Obviously my dislike for UKIP/Farage is well known. I'm not saying don't involve him at all, but it seems unfair to skew things so in his balance. The Greens got more votes and MEPs in the Euro Elections than the Lib Dems. Up until last week the Greens had more MPs than UKIP - they now have the same amount. Yet they get next to no coverage, and you see far less of Caroline Lucas than of Farage. UKIP won the Euro elections and that entitles them to eat at the top table. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Gotsmanov Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 UKIP has one MP down South. What's the difference? The SNP do not field candidates out of Scotland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KelvinsRightGlove Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 UKIP won the Euro elections and that entitles them to eat at the top table. Look, I'm not saying they shouldn't have a voice - but there are others that should get a voice too. As I said, Greens outperformed Lib Dems at the Euro Election. Why should they not get a voice too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Gotsmanov Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 Look, I'm not saying they shouldn't have a voice - but there are others that should get a voice too. As I said, Greens outperformed Lib Dems at the Euro Election. Why should they not get a voice too? Because they are part of the government Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KelvinsRightGlove Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 The SNP do not field candidates out of Scotland. So, they still stand in the Westminster Parliament. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Gotsmanov Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 So, they still stand in the Westminster Parliament. Why are they going to take part in a National debate when they only contest regional ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KelvinsRightGlove Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 Why are they going to take part in a National debate when they only contest regional ones. Because the outcome still affects them, and the constituents that vote for them. They have more seats in Westminster than Farage/UKIP - they have the right to have a voice. EDIT: Also, general elections are a National Debate. That's why they stand in those as well as Scottish Elections. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Gotsmanov Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 Because the outcome still affects them, and the constituents that vote for them. They have more seats in Westminster than Farage/UKIP - they have the right to have a voice. Their voice is regional and not national that is why their TV coverage North of the Border reflects that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 So what do you suggest ban politicians from appearing during an election, now that is a good idea. There is supposed to be a strict balance of coverage. Sticking a couple of figureheads on a freak show for a couple of hours is not rational debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 (edited) But those votes are swayed by one appearance on the TV. Sad but true. Better to be swayed by first hand viewing of what politicians actually say and how they act than mediated through the prism of whatever newspaper they read wants them to think. Edited 13 October, 2014 by buctootim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 I'm rather looking forward to it. However, The Greens should get the same platform as they also have an MP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KelvinsRightGlove Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 I'm rather looking forward to it. However, The Greens should get the same platform as they also have an MP. So do Alliance, and Respect. Farage isn't even in the HoP FFS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadoldgit Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 Sad state of afairs in British politics when UKIP start to get this much coverage. Look back though history at some of the great politicians we have had in the past and compare them with the muppets we have nowadays. It is a shame you cant register a protest vote on the ballot form. I dont vote now but all that does is let in more nutters. We should have a right to say we are unhappy with all politicians and have that recorded in the ballot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintbletch Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 There is supposed to be a strict balance of coverage. Sticking a couple of figureheads on a freak show for a couple of hours is not rational debate. There's something in this Whitey, but it sort of presupposes that the rest of the population is glued to Question Time, Sunday Politics, The Times, Radio 4, etc. If they're not, then politicians are not reaching their electorate, and the electorate is completely ignorant of the parties that want to represent them. Our politicians and press have to find a way to get through. I originally wasn't a big fan as it seems to dumb-down the debate, and also risks rolling up a potential lifetime of political analysis into a series of X-Factor-style game shows with a very big prize. But I just don't see any alternative to reaching younger/less engaged voters. It's relatively new here, and it's an ongoing process so we surely have to credit the electorate with enough intelligence to be able to learn from what they've seen in previous campagins? Clegg's personal ratings across the debates he's involved in will tell us if we are learning I guess, and I'd expect Farage to get a big, positive bounce this time that will probably even out next time round. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 Do not believe debates should be part of our political process .Ours is not a presidential system, you vote for a local MP and then the prime minister is the leader with most MP's . It is not a national vote but a series of local votes which combined together give us a national result. People bemoan the " Westminster bubble" and how politicians don't understand local people and then call for the Westminster leaders to debate each other in a studio near Westminster. Call me old fashioned by how about local candidates debating each other in town halls, community centres or even ale houses. Local people could get off their fat arses , pull themselves away from the TV and go and find out what their local candidates actually think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KelvinsRightGlove Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 Do not believe debates should be part of our political process .Ours is not a presidential system, you vote for a local MP and then the prime minister is the leader with most MP's . It is not a national vote but a series of local votes which combined together give us a national result. People bemoan the " Westminster bubble" and how politicians don't understand local people and then call for the Westminster leaders to debate each other in a studio near Westminster. Call me old fashioned by how about local candidates debating each other in town halls, community centres or even ale houses. Local people could get off their fat arses , pull themselves away from the TV and go and find out what their local candidates actually think. I know you & I have had our disagreements, but I really think you make a very good point here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingdomCome Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 There's something in this Whitey, but it sort of presupposes that the rest of the population is glued to Question Time, Sunday Politics, The Times, Radio 4, etc. Rational debate on Question Time? We must be watching different programmes "I like good things and I hate bad things" *rapturous applause* Do not believe debates should be part of our political process .Ours is not a presidential system, you vote for a local MP and then the prime minister is the leader with most MP's . It is not a national vote but a series of local votes which combined together give us a national result. People bemoan the " Westminster bubble" and how politicians don't understand local people and then call for the Westminster leaders to debate each other in a studio near Westminster. Call me old fashioned by how about local candidates debating each other in town halls, community centres or even ale houses. Local people could get off their fat arses , pull themselves away from the TV and go and find out what their local candidates actually think. Agree with this 100%, our system is not the same as the US, no need to try and shoehorn a quirk of the presidential system into ours. There is a plethora of information available about your local candidate and the party they run for in just about every format, if you're uninformed there is one person to blame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadoldgit Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 Do not believe debates should be part of our political process .Ours is not a presidential system, you vote for a local MP and then the prime minister is the leader with most MP's . It is not a national vote but a series of local votes which combined together give us a national result. People bemoan the " Westminster bubble" and how politicians don't understand local people and then call for the Westminster leaders to debate each other in a studio near Westminster. Call me old fashioned by how about local candidates debating each other in town halls, community centres or even ale houses. Local people could get off their fat arses , pull themselves away from the TV and go and find out what their local candidates actually think. I wonder how many people know who their local MP is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 Do not believe debates should be part of our political process .Ours is not a presidential system, you vote for a local MP and then the prime minister is the leader with most MP's . It is not a national vote but a series of local votes which combined together give us a national result. People bemoan the " Westminster bubble" and how politicians don't understand local people and then call for the Westminster leaders to debate each other in a studio near Westminster. Call me old fashioned by how about local candidates debating each other in town halls, community centres or even ale houses. Local people could get off their fat arses , pull themselves away from the TV and go and find out what their local candidates actually think. I wonder how many people know who their local MP is? Unfortunately SOG thats the issue. What Lord D describes is exactly what you should have in a healthy democracy - one where people make informed choices based on real policies. We don't have that currently and perhaps never really did. Many, perhaps most, people vote for the wrong party based on their views. Party leader debates are a dumbing down of politics - but a dumbed down way of reaching people is better than not reaching them at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halo Stickman Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 I wonder how many people know who their local MP is? Only 22 percent according to this 2013 survey. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22555659 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 Do not believe debates should be part of our political process .Ours is not a presidential system, you vote for a local MP and then the prime minister is the leader with most MP's . It is not a national vote but a series of local votes which combined together give us a national result. People bemoan the " Westminster bubble" and how politicians don't understand local people and then call for the Westminster leaders to debate each other in a studio near Westminster. Call me old fashioned by how about local candidates debating each other in town halls, community centres or even ale houses. Local people could get off their fat arses , pull themselves away from the TV and go and find out what their local candidates actually think. Post of the year right there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 Post of the year right there I'm agreeing with Trousers and Lord D! Lawks a mercy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 13 October, 2014 Author Share Posted 13 October, 2014 I'm agreeing with Trousers and Lord D! Lawks a mercy! Theoretically it's a good idea. Only really works if candidates are local, and not being selected because they are golden children or because a foreign nation invests millions in getting sympathetic candidates selected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 Do not believe debates should be part of our political process .Ours is not a presidential system, you vote for a local MP and then the prime minister is the leader with most MP's . It is not a national vote but a series of local votes which combined together give us a national result. People bemoan the " Westminster bubble" and how politicians don't understand local people and then call for the Westminster leaders to debate each other in a studio near Westminster. Call me old fashioned by how about local candidates debating each other in town halls, community centres or even ale houses. Local people could get off their fat arses , pull themselves away from the TV and go and find out what their local candidates actually think. That would rather depend on whether local candidates were just that, locals, or as often happens, preferred party types parachuted in from Smith Sq or Millbank. Genuine local candidates may have something to say, pretty sure that the party minions will not bar the agreed party line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 Do not believe debates should be part of our political process .Ours is not a presidential system, you vote for a local MP and then the prime minister is the leader with most MP's . It is not a national vote but a series of local votes which combined together give us a national result. People bemoan the " Westminster bubble" and how politicians don't understand local people and then call for the Westminster leaders to debate each other in a studio near Westminster. Call me old fashioned by how about local candidates debating each other in town halls, community centres or even ale houses. Local people could get off their fat arses , pull themselves away from the TV and go and find out what their local candidates actually think. You've put it far better than I could. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 Glad Farage has got on one of them but he and the Greens should be on all of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 SNP? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 SNP? To be fair they could do one debate involving UKIP, one with Greens and one with SNP. Looking forward to watching Farage make mincemeat out of the others, he will win a load of votes on the back of these, especially with muppets like Glegg and Milliband as opposition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 (edited) SNP? 90% of national TV viewers can't vote for the SNP so what would be the point of them going to national TV to persuade the audience to vote for them? Would be a bit like someone from the SNP knocking on my front door in Hampshire and asking if I'm going to vote for them. IMO of course Edit: what the SNP should consider doing is raising funds to field candidates in certain seats in England...now, that would be quite clever.... Edited 13 October, 2014 by trousers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 To be fair they could do one debate involving UKIP, one with Greens and one with SNP. Looking forward to watching Farage make mincemeat out of the others, he will win a load of votes on the back of these, especially with muppets like Glegg and Milliband as opposition. But SNP dont bother using their seats in London???? now they say it is unfair??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 13 October, 2014 Author Share Posted 13 October, 2014 I would like to see politicians being paid more and banned from getting paid by other interests. How do you deal with the former politician on unending, unjustifiable and unlikely sums while operating on the boards of big corporates post poltical career? Tony Blair is a great example. On a separate note, his elevation to envoy for peace in the Middle East is in the running for biggest unanswered f××k you of all time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ericb Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 To be fair they could do one debate involving UKIP, one with Greens and one with SNP. Looking forward to watching Farage make mincemeat out of the others, he will win a load of votes on the back of these, especially with muppets like Glegg and Milliband as opposition. What worries me the most is that a referendum to leave europe could be won by those who make 13 year old "jokes" on names, without taking into account the terrible impact it would have on our economy, because a few people are tugging at emotional heart strings that are often not based in reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sour Mash Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 What worries me the most is that a referendum to leave europe could be won by those who make 13 year old "jokes" on names, without taking into account the terrible impact it would have on our economy, because a few people are tugging at emotional heart strings that are often not based in reality. Why would it have a terrible impact on our economy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandwichsaint Posted 13 October, 2014 Share Posted 13 October, 2014 Do not believe debates should be part of our political process .Ours is not a presidential system, you vote for a local MP and then the prime minister is the leader with most MP's . It is not a national vote but a series of local votes which combined together give us a national result. People bemoan the " Westminster bubble" and how politicians don't understand local people and then call for the Westminster leaders to debate each other in a studio near Westminster. Call me old fashioned by how about local candidates debating each other in town halls, community centres or even ale houses. Local people could get off their fat arses , pull themselves away from the TV and go and find out what their local candidates actually think. VFT has nailed it right there, very few of the candidates are 'local', most are parachuted in from central casting (for all parties) and are only after your vote to secure their place on the Westminster gravy train. A large number have no connection to the local area they are standing in and most don't appear to have an original thought in their heads, being content to either trot out the party line or more commonly to rubbish their opponents in a mud-slinging contest. Incidentally this is nothing new, I remember in 1979 Labour bringing down a young 20-something big shot, glitzy lawyer from Liverpool to stand in East Kent, Cherie somebody or other I think it was; she had no connection with the area and flopped spectacularly, or maybe we just weren't ready for Cherie Booth/Blair at that time? Shudder to think what this time will bring, we have Farage standing in our constituency (Thanet South) which should mean saturation media coverage, the Tories have lost a popular standing MP for family health reasons. Labour and the Tories have held the constituency about half and half historically though boundary changes make direct comparisons difficult though in similar vein to the national picture Labour appear to be a busted flush locally with very limited organisation or man power, not sure they even have a candidate yet (for next May!). I would expect the Lib Dems to be toast here after their performance since the last election, though they do have strong and active local supporters, as they seem to do pretty much everywhere, at least in the South of England. I guess they could pick up some votes here and elsewhere (protest, protest-votes?) through virtue of not being any of UKIP/Con/Lab, there doesn't seem to be much space on the ballot paper for any sort of modern/progressive/European point of view and the Lying Dems could surprise a few and maybe hang onto more seats than people are predicting. Can't see past a very solid Farage majority, people round here are predominantly white, small-town, small-minded and very much represent the left-behinds compared to their richer, better educated and more metropolitan city cousins. Farage will hoover votes from older right wing Euro-sceptic tories, retired people, and white working class voters who are totally disconnected from Labour. Nige might be a lot of things but he's not stupid, he will have done his homework carefully and will have found the constituency that best fits his demographic. Guess the only consolation now is that I will be able to genuinely say I didn't vote for NF. See what I did there? I won't vote Lib/Lab/Con, it is a wasted vote in this constituency and nationally too, the only policies that would appeal to me would be the Greens or an independent left field anti-war type candidate. My recipe for broken democracy and to get some credibility back into the system? 1 PR is a no-brainer for me, the next Government will be elected on the swing votes of probably 10% of voters in fewer than a 100 constituencies. Under the current system all votes are clearly not equal and large numbers of the voting public are never represented. FPTP encourages negative 'tactical voting', everybody should be able to vote positively for who they want to. 2 Fewer and bigger constituencies, probably multi-member constituencies, combine every five existing constituencies and streamline that down to 3 MPs. 3 Pay MPs more - but stop all expenses, completely including subsidised restaurants and bars etc. Tier the pay to cover travel costs and accom for those that need it. Effectively make each MP-ship into a mini-franchise which they hold for 5 years, pay them a fixed sum per year and they can organise themselves and pay what staff they need from their budget. They do a decent job and provide value for money they will be elected next time, a poor job and constituents can kick them out mid-term. 4 Introduce a residency qualification for all MPs, people seeking election should either have been born in that constituency, or have lived in it for at least 10 years of their life, or have lived in it continuously for the previous say 4 years. With an average constituency of c70,000 voters it is not unreasonable to expect every constituency to produce it's own representatives. 5 Lower the voting age to 16, spectacularly successful in Scotland recently and would bring some new thinking and might also encourage younger people into a life of citizenship. 6 Devo Max for Scotland,Wales, NI and England and a return to local Govt/local tax raising powers (in fact let's not reduce those Westminster MPs from 3/5ths of their current number, let's reduce them to 2/5ths and invest some of the financial and human savings in building up strong local structures). 7 Euro referundum with a straight IN/OUT proposition and the outcome binding for say 25 years and then get on with it! Happen to think it would be 60/40 Yes but it would be interesting to see what sort of a turnout that vote could raise! Those are some of the things that would get me interested in politics and voting again, but unfortunately bitter experience tells you that whoever you vote for the Government gets in, and then they just do what ever big business tell them to. Go Nige! you mold breaker, you hero, you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintbletch Posted 14 October, 2014 Share Posted 14 October, 2014 Do not believe debates should be part of our political process .Ours is not a presidential system, you vote for a local MP and then the prime minister is the leader with most MP's . It is not a national vote but a series of local votes which combined together give us a national result. People bemoan the " Westminster bubble" and how politicians don't understand local people and then call for the Westminster leaders to debate each other in a studio near Westminster. Call me old fashioned by how about local candidates debating each other in town halls, community centres or even ale houses. Local people could get off their fat arses , pull themselves away from the TV and go and find out what their local candidates actually think. I can't fault the logic Lord Duckhunter, but I feel that it is the adoption of this position that has left us with some ridiculously low electoral turnouts and a pretty disengaged electorate. Our politicians haven't helped in doing all they can to engender cynicism and distrust from 'illegal' wars to expense scandals. Looking at engagement and turnout, you'd have to say that our electoral system is broken or at least pretty badly bent out of shape. I agree wholeheartedly with the democratic process, and completely support the concept that if we're not happy with our lot, then it is up to us as individuals to do the research, reach a position and exercise suffrage - or even stand ourselves. It shoulds be better. It should be as you suggest above. But right now, it isn't. My argument is that we should do all we can to positively change this, and I feel that for all their obvious faults, TV debates engage people in a way that osmosis doesn't. During the Scottish referendum, my kids and I (as well as my son's Italian girlfriend) sat and watched one of the debates. I tried to help by explaining the details of the positions as I saw them, and in answering their questions. This worked well for them in gaining a better understanding of the issues at hand. I'd readily concede that this might not be the normal way these debates are consumed, and I'd also say that Darling's "performance" in the second debate risked overly-influencing voters in a way that should be left to the issues alone, but then I look at the result and realise that the Scot's didn't rely upon Darling's dithering alone to form their opinion. Agree with this 100%, our system is not the same as the US, no need to try and shoehorn a quirk of the presidential system into ours. There is a plethora of information available about your local candidate and the party they run for in just about every format, if you're uninformed there is one person to blame. Was it the politician who claimed for a duck house on his expenses? Forgive the flippancy KingdomCome, and you are of course correct in the strictest sense, but consider that for some the decision to be "uninformed" may have been a positive one caused by a deep distrust of politicians and the political process. What is more dangerous I wonder, allowing an 18 year old with a ballot paper in their hand to place an X somewhere at random, or giving them an idea of where the politicians stand on things that might affect them first? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintbletch Posted 14 October, 2014 Share Posted 14 October, 2014 VFT has nailed it right there, very few of the candidates are 'local', most are parachuted in from central casting (for all parties) and are only after your vote to secure their place on the Westminster gravy train. A large number have no connection to the local area they are standing in and most don't appear to have an original thought in their heads, being content to either trot out the party line or more commonly to rubbish their opponents in a mud-slinging contest. Incidentally this is nothing new, I remember in 1979 Labour bringing down a young 20-something big shot, glitzy lawyer from Liverpool to stand in East Kent, Cherie somebody or other I think it was; she had no connection with the area and flopped spectacularly, or maybe we just weren't ready for Cherie Booth/Blair at that time? Shudder to think what this time will bring, we have Farage standing in our constituency (Thanet South) which should mean saturation media coverage, the Tories have lost a popular standing MP for family health reasons. Labour and the Tories have held the constituency about half and half historically though boundary changes make direct comparisons difficult though in similar vein to the national picture Labour appear to be a busted flush locally with very limited organisation or man power, not sure they even have a candidate yet (for next May!). I would expect the Lib Dems to be toast here after their performance since the last election, though they do have strong and active local supporters, as they seem to do pretty much everywhere, at least in the South of England. I guess they could pick up some votes here and elsewhere (protest, protest-votes?) through virtue of not being any of UKIP/Con/Lab, there doesn't seem to be much space on the ballot paper for any sort of modern/progressive/European point of view and the Lying Dems could surprise a few and maybe hang onto more seats than people are predicting. Can't see past a very solid Farage majority, people round here are predominantly white, small-town, small-minded and very much represent the left-behinds compared to their richer, better educated and more metropolitan city cousins. Farage will hoover votes from older right wing Euro-sceptic tories, retired people, and white working class voters who are totally disconnected from Labour. Nige might be a lot of things but he's not stupid, he will have done his homework carefully and will have found the constituency that best fits his demographic. Guess the only consolation now is that I will be able to genuinely say I didn't vote for NF. See what I did there? I won't vote Lib/Lab/Con, it is a wasted vote in this constituency and nationally too, the only policies that would appeal to me would be the Greens or an independent left field anti-war type candidate. My recipe for broken democracy and to get some credibility back into the system? 1 PR is a no-brainer for me, the next Government will be elected on the swing votes of probably 10% of voters in fewer than a 100 constituencies. Under the current system all votes are clearly not equal and large numbers of the voting public are never represented. FPTP encourages negative 'tactical voting', everybody should be able to vote positively for who they want to. 2 Fewer and bigger constituencies, probably multi-member constituencies, combine every five existing constituencies and streamline that down to 3 MPs. 3 Pay MPs more - but stop all expenses, completely including subsidised restaurants and bars etc. Tier the pay to cover travel costs and accom for those that need it. Effectively make each MP-ship into a mini-franchise which they hold for 5 years, pay them a fixed sum per year and they can organise themselves and pay what staff they need from their budget. They do a decent job and provide value for money they will be elected next time, a poor job and constituents can kick them out mid-term. 4 Introduce a residency qualification for all MPs, people seeking election should either have been born in that constituency, or have lived in it for at least 10 years of their life, or have lived in it continuously for the previous say 4 years. With an average constituency of c70,000 voters it is not unreasonable to expect every constituency to produce it's own representatives. 5 Lower the voting age to 16, spectacularly successful in Scotland recently and would bring some new thinking and might also encourage younger people into a life of citizenship. 6 Devo Max for Scotland,Wales, NI and England and a return to local Govt/local tax raising powers (in fact let's not reduce those Westminster MPs from 3/5ths of their current number, let's reduce them to 2/5ths and invest some of the financial and human savings in building up strong local structures). 7 Euro referundum with a straight IN/OUT proposition and the outcome binding for say 25 years and then get on with it! Happen to think it would be 60/40 Yes but it would be interesting to see what sort of a turnout that vote could raise! Those are some of the things that would get me interested in politics and voting again, but unfortunately bitter experience tells you that whoever you vote for the Government gets in, and then they just do what ever big business tell them to. Go Nige! you mold breaker, you hero, you! Great post, sandwichsaint. You've managed to summarise my position on a number of these issues too, along with some nice ideas on how to 'fix' the problem. Having sat through the Eastleigh by-election where UKIP made it a #1 target and the Lib Dems did everything they could to defend the seat, I don't envy you the experience you're about to go through in Thanet South. NF? Nice! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KelvinsRightGlove Posted 14 October, 2014 Share Posted 14 October, 2014 How do you deal with the former politician on unending, unjustifiable and unlikely sums while operating on the boards of big corporates post poltical career? Tony Blair is a great example. On a separate note, his elevation to envoy for peace in the Middle East is in the running for biggest unanswered f××k you of all time. Desperately trying to find it now, but saw someone post on FB yesterday an article about how the there are current politicians (can't remember if they were lords/MPs or a mix) on the majority (sorry I very briefly skimmed through and lost it before I read it, so can't remember the exact number) of the top 50 UK companies boards/exec level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moonraker Posted 14 October, 2014 Share Posted 14 October, 2014 Do not believe debates should be part of our political process .Ours is not a presidential system, you vote for a local MP and then the prime minister is the leader with most MP's . It is not a national vote but a series of local votes which combined together give us a national result. People bemoan the " Westminster bubble" and how politicians don't understand local people and then call for the Westminster leaders to debate each other in a studio near Westminster. Call me old fashioned by how about local candidates debating each other in town halls, community centres or even ale houses. Local people could get off their fat arses , pull themselves away from the TV and go and find out what their local candidates actually think. Says it all, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now