Brexit matters

[birchesgreen]

Whatever your viewpoint, from 2300 last night, your vote became more powerful.

Yes but still barely measurable.

 

[najaB]

Whatever your viewpoint, from 2300 last night, your vote became more powerful.

Last year my vote played a role in shaping the lives of over 400 million people, now it plays a role in shaping the lives of 65 million. Brexit maths for you.

 

[alex397]

Whatever your viewpoint, from 2300 last night, your vote became more powerful.

Not quite sure how leaving the EU has improved our voting system. Have we got rid of First Past The Post then?

 

[Bungle158]

Not quite sure how leaving the EU has improved our voting system. Have we got rid of First Past The Post then?

First past the post imposed an 80 seat Tory majority on the UK. It appears though, that the popular vote went to a mix of parties opposed to or not supporting Brexit. Until the UK has a properly applied proportional voting system, l think that votes will become less, rather than more powerful.

 

[Journeyman]

Whatever your viewpoint, from 2300 last night, your vote became more powerful.

How do you make that out? The UK voting system makes your vote meaningless unless you live in a marginal constituency, we now can't vote in European elections, we had no say in the way the Brexit process was managed, and the next election is in 2024.

We're pretty powerless.

 

[21C101]

First past the post imposed an 80 seat Tory majority on the UK. It appears though, that the popular vote went to a mix of parties opposed to or not supporting Brexit. Until the UK has a properly applied proportional voting system, l think that votes will become less, rather than more powerful.

First past the post gives the government the power to get major reforms done.

Had we had proportional representation in 1945, Labour would not have had a majority and a free at the point of use National Health Service would not exist

(with proportional representation in 1945, a Liberal - Conservative coalition,with Churchill (himself a former Liberal) as PM would though have had a majority.

Be careful what you wish for. You might get it one day......

 

[Journeyman]

First past the post gives the government the power to get major reforms done.

Had we had proportional representation in 1945, Labour would not have had a majority and a free at the point of use National Health Service would not exist

(with proportional representation in 1945, a Liberal - Conservative coalition,with Churchill (himself a former Liberal) as PM would though have had a majority.

Be careful what you wish for. You might get it one day......

You're really scraping the bottom of the barrel here. Have you any idea how unpopular the current government is?

 

[21C101]

You're really scraping the bottom of the barrel here. Have you any idea how unpopular the current government is?

So unpopular it still manages to lead mid term opinion polls.

 

[ComUtoR]

You're really scraping the bottom of the barrel here. Have you any idea how unpopular the current government is?

Government approval

Do you approve or disapprove of the Government’s record to date?

yougov.co.uk

Feel free to choose a specific demographic to suit.

 

[RT4038]

You're really scraping the bottom of the barrel here. Have you any idea how unpopular the current government is?

Have you?

 

[21C101]

Government approval

Do you approve or disapprove of the Government’s record to date?

yougov.co.uk

Feel free to choose a specific demographic to suit.

Yougov are not the only opinion polling company. The most recent poll, a Survation poll, has the tories ahead of Labour 39% to 38%.

At this stage in the electoral cycle, the opposition should be well ahead if they are to have any chance of defeating the government in the next election.

2025 General Election Polls - Election Polling

Opinion polling for the next UK general election in 2025. Analysis of which party will win Election 2025.

www.electionpolling.co.uk

 

[Journeyman]

Yougov are not the only opinion polling company. The most recent poll, a Survation poll, has the tories ahead of Labour 39% to 38%.

At this stage in the electoral cycle, the opposition should be well ahead if they are to have any chance of defeating the government in the next election.

2025 General Election Polls - Election Polling

Opinion polling for the next UK general election in 2025. Analysis of which party will win Election 2025.

www.electionpolling.co.uk

The fact that a government can get an absolutely stonking majority on 39% of the vote proves what a travesty our electoral system is. 61% of people don't count in that. It proves my point.

 

[nlogax]

Point of note; it's entirely probable that politicians from across all parties are unpopular, especially at this moment in time. 39% of voters is just 39% of voters. Stonking majorites aren't a thing of the present.

 

[Journeyman]

Point of note; it's entirely probable that politicians from across all parties are unpopular, especially at this moment in time. 39% of voters is just 39% of voters. Stonking majorites aren't a thing of the present.

I have to be honest and say that come the next election I can vote in - Scottish Parliament in my case - I'm tempted just to draw a big cock and balls on my ballot paper.

 

[21C101]

The fact that a government can get an absolutely stonking majority on 39% of the vote proves what a travesty our electoral system is. 61% of people don't count in that. It proves my point.

Greece changed its electoral system a few years back so that the winning party gets 50 extra seats (in a 300 seat house) virtually guaranteeing whichever party gets the highest number of votes a stonking majority; because they were fed up with the ineffective, unstable coalitions that proportional representation generally resulted in.

Point of note; it's entirely probable that politicians from across all parties are unpopular, especially at this moment in time. 39% of voters is just 39% of voters. Stonking majorites aren't a thing of the present.

An option to have a box with "none of the above" with the election rerun and all candidates in it disbarred from the rerun if it "won" would be a great reform.

 

[Journeyman]

Greece changed its electoral system a few years back so that the winning party gets 50 extra seats (in a 300 seat house) virtually guaranteeing whichever party gets the highest number of votes a stonking majority; because they were fed up with the ineffective, unstable coalitions that proportional representation generally resulted in.


An option to have a box with "none of the above" with the election rerun and all candidates in it disbarred from the rerun if it "won" would be a great reform.

It's just as well Theresa May was so "strong and stable" then...

 

[jon0844]

Was watching the ‘victory speech’ from Mark Francois earlier today (I’d be interested to know why he mysteriously disappeared for so many months - I wonder where he went? Hmmm). Anyway, I find it rather offensive how he was using war-like language, such as calling it the ‘battle for Brexit’ and saying we should ‘lower our spears’. How insulting for those who have actually fought in real wars. Francois seems to live in some kind of war fantasy. I’m surprised he isn’t a member of UKIP rather than the Conservatives.
Same goes for Farage and all the rest talking about this like it is a war. They are not patriots, they are traitors.

Wasn't he off for a bit getting therapy? I am sure I saw the word therapist mentioned.

 

[birchesgreen]

Maybe he was just off doing something with Dangermouse.

 

[jon0844]

Meanwhile, as of 23.00 last night, Electric Pulse Trawling was prohibited in UK waters by DEFRA.

Why did we wait so long to do this? The EU is banning it too, but we were allowed to implement it whenever we wanted - which could have been a long time ago. Why didn't we?

Likewise, the 'tampon tax'. The EU is doing that too, but some member states went ahead and did it already - before we did. Ireland for one. I think perhaps also Germany. Oh, it seems our Government voted against it previously. Which Government? Oh, the Tories.

It's almost as if the UK Government deliberately waited until the Brexit deadline so as to look like we did something that wasn't possible as members of the EU.

And now Grant Shapps is proudly boasting we don't need an International Drivers Licence. We didn't need one last week either. Or the week before that. Or...

 

[Journeyman]

And now Grant Shapps is proudly boasting we don't need an International Drivers Licence. We didn't need one last week either. Or the week before that. Or...

It's really pathetic that the best anyone can come up with is "things we haven't lost" rather than "things we've actually gained".

 

[Senex]

It's really pathetic that the best anyone can come up with is "things we haven't lost" rather than "things we've actually gained".

But not really surprising when for most of us there won't be any identifiable tangible gains.

 

[Journeyman]

But not really surprising when for most of us there won't be any identifiable tangible gains.

...but plenty of losses.

 

[Beemax]

Intetesting that you have to go to a railway enthusiasts' site to get a relatively sensible discussion about Brexit. Maybe the Russian trolls haven't found us yet.

 

[JamesT]

First past the post gives the government the power to get major reforms done.

Had we had proportional representation in 1945, Labour would not have had a majority and a free at the point of use National Health Service would not exist

(with proportional representation in 1945, a Liberal - Conservative coalition,with Churchill (himself a former Liberal) as PM would though have had a majority.

Be careful what you wish for. You might get it one day......

All three major parties in 1945 committed to a National Health Service. The Conservative manifesto included the following which sounds very much like free at point of use:

The health services of the country will be made available to all citizens. Everyone will contribute to the cost, and no one will be denied the attention, the treatment or the appliances he requires because he cannot afford them. We propose to create a comprehensive health service covering the whole range of medical treatment from the general practitioner to the specialist, and from the hospital to convalescence and rehabilitation

The major difference was that Labour went for a centralised system whereas the other two parties were proposing building on the existing local provision.
Over time this has been mythologised as only Labour were responsible for the NHS.

 

[Typhoon]

How do you make that out? The UK voting system makes your vote meaningless unless you live in a marginal constituency, we now can't vote in European elections, we had no say in the way the Brexit process was managed, and the next election is in 2024.

We're pretty powerless.

Exactly. My MP is Conservative, every town councillor is Conservative, our county councillors are Conservative. All have healthy majorities, even the ones who are completely anonymous. The only time anyone else was elected in the time I have lived here, it was UKIP. I quite often vote for joke candidates if they are standing because my vote is pointless. At least in the European elections, because it was a PR list, my vote counted as it might mean that my party of choice might get two representatives rather than one. Very little chance but at least some. 500 yards away, a marginal, my vote would count big time!

 

[ainsworth74]

First past the post gives the government the power to get major reforms done.

I wonder how other countries that do have various forms of proportional representation cope? Presumably they're fixed in aspic unable to ever get anything done?

Yougov are not the only opinion polling company. The most recent poll, a Survation poll, has the tories ahead of Labour 39% to 38%.

So 61% of those polled preferred a different party (or had no opinion if that was an option)? Hardly a ringing endorsement (of either party!). That it is possible for a government, of any colour, to get a majority of 80 seats whilst only winning 43.6% of the popular vote is crackers. Just as the 2005 election where Labour won a majority of 66 on just 35.2% of the popular vote was equally a crackers result. It's a nonsense that parties can fail to win the majority of those that vote and yet gain unassailable majorities allowing them to enact policies which did not get the backing of the majority of voters.

It reeks of the same issues that the US has with the electoral college awarding an election to a candidate who lost the popular vote.

An option to have a box with "none of the above" with the election rerun and all candidates in it disbarred from the rerun if it "won" would be a great reform.

Ah ha! At last something we agree on!!

 

[jon0844]

I wonder how other countries that do have various forms of proportional representation cope? Presumably they're fixed in aspic unable to ever get anything done?



So 61% of those polled preferred a different party (or had no opinion if that was an option)? Hardly a ringing endorsement (of either party!). That it is possible for a government, of any colour, to get a majority of 80 seats whilst only winning 43.6% of the popular vote is crackers. Just as the 2005 election where Labour won a majority of 66 on just 35.2% of the popular vote was equally a crackers result. It's a nonsense that parties can fail to win the majority of those that vote and yet gain unassailable majorities allowing them to enact policies which did not get the backing of the majority of voters.

It reeks of the same issues that the US has with the electoral college awarding an election to a candidate who lost the popular vote.



Ah ha! At last something we agree on!!

Our voting system, and that of the US, clearly sucks as bad as an obsolete vacuum cleaner.

 

[37424]

I wonder how other countries that do have various forms of proportional representation cope? Presumably they're fixed in aspic unable to ever get anything done?



So 61% of those polled preferred a different party (or had no opinion if that was an option)? Hardly a ringing endorsement (of either party!). That it is possible for a government, of any colour, to get a majority of 80 seats whilst only winning 43.6% of the popular vote is crackers. Just as the 2005 election where Labour won a majority of 66 on just 35.2% of the popular vote was equally a crackers result. It's a nonsense that parties can fail to win the majority of those that vote and yet gain unassailable majorities allowing them to enact policies which did not get the backing of the majority of voters.

It reeks of the same issues that the US has with the electoral college awarding an election to a candidate who lost the popular vote.



Ah ha! At last something we agree on!!

I'm not convinced Prop rep would really be much better or more representative

We had Mays government paralysed over Brexit because she didn't have the numbers, so then we got a huge protest vote for the Brexit party in the Euro elections which the Tories tuck as a que for a Hard Brexit. Under prop rep you can still get a situation where the largest party can be frozen out of government by a collection of the smaller parties, along with weeks of negotiating as to who forms the next government, and falling out when they don't agree.

If we went down this route the Tory party would either split or some of them would join the Brexit party, would the joys of a Tory/Brexit Government be any better Ok some might say we have that already with the ERG. On the Left I would expect Labour to split between the moderates and the Corbynites we could end with some Left/Centre Government made up of any concoction of the 2 Labour Parties, Lib Dems, Greens, SNP etc.

Would it really be a whole lot better especially in terms of actually getting things done or really be even that much more representative?

 

[21C101]

All three major parties in 1945 committed to a National Health Service. The Conservative manifesto included the following which sounds very much like free at point of use

They (and Labour) were planning to extend National Insurance cover to cover workers families (and pensioners too).

This would have been an insurance based scheme only covering those covered by National Insurance, with hospitals charging for treatment and your heath insurance paying if you had it (so National Insurance for most).

Free at the point of use instead of insurance based was very much Bevans doing and was controversial even within Labour. The (central) state owning all the hospitals and employing the staff was also
Labours desire (as you allude to).

The tories (and many hospitals) wanted the National Insurance cover to be means tested with those on higher incomes expected to make their own private insurance arrangements

 

[jon0844]

The tories (and many hospitals) wanted the National Insurance cover to be means tested with those on higher incomes expected to make their own private insurance arrangements

Now they have a nice majority and a desire to do a deal with the USA, who are of course much bigger than us, maybe they'll get their way now.