i think that AV wasnt elected because it was simply too complicated for most folk.PR would be a much better choice IMO,i know its a national emphasis but at the end of the day we are governed nationally and under the current system we may be able to elect a 'local' MP (i use the term lightly seeing as many are put in areas simply because they are guaranteed the vote),however these local mp's have very little real power on matters that count as most funding,legislation etc etc is done from the commons where they ultimately have the power to do what they want. having said this,we do live in a supposed democracy and many of the left wingers i know are now crying out for PR but they wernt when labour was in power,i personally have wanted PR since the early 80's when i first covered politics while at mining tech.
Who suffers if they do this. Low paid workers, zero hours contractors... Not your average Tory voter. They wouldn't give a fcuck. Vote out and we end up being fcucked over royally by a Tory government.
^^^ths^^^ The Tory government that would follow when Dave and his mates were pushed out would make th current lot look left wing.
Interestingly 68% is about the percentage that didn't vote Tory. The AV vote was an absolute farce with Clegg out thought and outmanoeuvred.
I'm not sure that Clegg was outmanouvered...his lust for a share of power just clouded his judgment. As for the benefits of PR...just looking at the last election results , The Tories could have formed a coalition with UKIP The English Democrats and some minor fringe parties that didn't manage enough votes to win a single constituency...that's the main problem with PR , it can give an inflated amount of power to those who really aren't supported other than by cranks.
Tory "grandees" like Major, Heseltine and Clarke have never put this country first, they're pro-Europe and pro-Federalism, they have connections with the Bilderberg group and ultimately want a World Government, I wouldn't trust them at all.
Cheers for posting, an interesting article. Ultimately, as on increasingly most things, I've found myself arriving at agreement with Caroline Lucas on the EU. The argument to leave just isn't strong enough for me. It's an argument that is fractured beyond belief between people who have polar opposite visions of a non-EU Britain. The only area I can see that there is no debate is on the economy - we would be worse off if we left. There's too much consensus on the side of remain. Personally I think the economy is completely structured wrong, but I have no more faith in an independent Britain rejecting free market capitalism that the EU. Democratically, if I was being offered complete electoral reform as per my earlier post it might just swing it for me. But I'm not. And I'm not going to be. In fact what I will end up with is a Britain without Scotland resulting in a Tory party firmly entrenched in Westminster through the flaws in our electoral system, without any electoral check on their power and the gradual destruction of the unions. Socially I like being a European. I like the diversity migration brings (and also see it is an economic necessity with an ageing population). I like the opportunities the ability to migrate brings me. I like the ease of travel to the continent. I like the reciprocal healthcare benefits I've enjoyed. I love the European Convention on Human Rights. It is one of Britain's finest achievements. In fact I struggle to think of many EU positions I disagree with (certainly in principle, if not implementation). That all said, spending time listening to your nuanced and complex arguments tempt me. But then I turn on the telly and 9 out of 10 people trying to convince me to leave are objectionable, have an outdated view on the world and Britain's importance, and have a whole range of views that are abhorrent to me. My utopian vision of a non-EU Britain is not going to happen, and the reality is a very scary prospect. I may be wrong but my view is the vote will be to remain. The British are generally little 'c' conservative. The argument for Scottish independence was far stronger (IMO) and despite the polls suggesting it was close it was comfortable in the end. Added to which on the whole younger people (who generally are less likely to vote) want to remain, and will turn out to vote on this issue. High turnout will be fatal to the leave camp.
Let's hope your wrong because socially I'm English and am getting very uncomfortable with migration and all it brings , why not move to mainland Europe . Hth
Do you live in an area where there is a high level of migrants? Theres only one thing for certain in this whole farce. The areas with the highest votes to leave will be areas that have suffered/welcomed large numbers of migrants. If the remain vote wins then watch the far right start to gather momentum in the uk. it already is within a number of Eu countries.
Talked of dishonesty and deceit...but failed to mention such things as Downing Street's Remain campaign letter allegedly from the various heads and former heads of the Armed Forces suggesting that leaving would be a security disaster...several came out and said that they hadn't signed...wouldn't have signed without pressure..or had never seen the letter at all...so Mr Major despite his trembling index finger and posture of outrage was being rather selective. He is not a stupid man , therefore I can only conclude either his short term memory is very poor or he's also prepared to play his part in the establishment deceit.
My ward is slightly lower than the national average for people identifying as white British. But it is tourist city so there are high levels of migrant workers and of course a huge number of foreign visitors in the city at any given time. Its also a university city with very high numbers of Chinese residents. I don't think that is certain at all. So somewhere like rural North Yorkshire will vote to remain and London will vote to leave? By the way I don't for a second claim that migration doesn't bring challenges, and there has been a significant failure to manage those challenges.