Saturday, 24 April 2010

How to come last and still win.

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Election/HowManyMPs

An illustrated demonstration of how to cheat people out of a democratic result. If you get 28% of the votes and come last in the popular vote, you can stay on as Prime Minister, and Johnson,Milliband, Mandelsson, Darling, et al can continue to draw their perks! Nice work if you can get it And if you come top of the popular vote, you can have half of the number of seats that the looser got!! Sheer lunacy.

Wednesday, 21 April 2010

Electoral Reform

This rag-bag of political opportunists known as Nu Labour, do not deserve another period in Government. On another Blog, I read “ Lets make sure that everyone knows what we have achieved since coming to power.”

We must be careful what we ask for.

*The Banking System bail out at our expense and the higher taxes to pay for it.
*M P’s expenses scandal.
* Blair, Mandellson and Brown’s betrayal of the Labour Party and the destruction of its
traditional links with the Trades Union movement.
* Retention of the John Lewis List.
*Attempting to exclude M P’s from the Freedom of Information Act.
*Illegal war in Iraq.
*Unquestioned support for the American adventure in Afghanistan.
* Provision for our service personnel of obsolete or inadequate equipment.
* Extension of detention without charge provisions

Yes, we must be careful. However, as a direct result of the outrageous electoral system in this Country, we may well be presented with the situation where Brown and his lightweight non-entity Cabinet, remain the largest party in the Commons with less than 30% of the votes cast. We would then be faced with the prospect of another indeterminate period of Brown, Darling, Mandellson, Adonis, Johnson and the Brother’s Milliband leading us to even more disastrous escapades at home and abroad.
The case for electoral reform is compelling. There is no excuse or logic to the proposition that in the 21st Century the fortunes of a Great Nation can be left to a party in Government elected on a minority vote.
I wrote the following text in response to a letter criticising those who will not vote to retain the present Government and believe that the “modernisation” of the Labour was good for the Country and democracy.


“…………………In a nutshell. This is the reason that I left the (Nu)Labour Party. The same unprincipled one size fits all cynicism that should be consigned to the dustbin of history along with the "Gang of Four". No wonder people are turning away from politics in their droves and fewer people turn out to vote now than ever before. "You are all the same" has never been more true.
This was the same argument that we had with the right of the party back when Labour was clerly an alternative. You may not agree with the politics, but at least principle was more important than opportunism and populist rhetoric.
Blair, Mandellson and Brown destroyed the Labour Party and have all but destroyed its traditional links with the Trades Union movement. You would do well to recall that the TUC provided the first Labour MP's and its Constitution contained cross references to the Labour Party Constitution. (Now of course conveniently deleted by the Blair/Brown/Mandellson cabal).
Well you can keep your ragbag of Nu Labour and its opportunistic "flexible" principles. I will continue to argue for what I actually believe in.
Some day it may dawn on you (and others of Nu Labour), that We must do things, not because they are popular, but because they are right.”

Friday, 9 April 2010

So, the wives are out supporting their ‘men’!

Contribution from Guest Blogger Sandra Yates.



So, the wives are out supporting their ‘men’!
What an insult to most reasonably intelligent women to think that a pregnant wife who buys her clothes at Top Shop and Marks and Spencer will bolster the female vote! But no, sorry! That is not why Samantha Cameron (I refuse to join the ranks of those who have dubbed her Sam Cam, Glam Cam or any other (S)Cam!) is parading herself around visiting the underprivileged, it is purely coincidence that she chooses to do it now during the election campaign!
However I do have sympathy for Sarah Brown. She seems totally out of her depth,so dutifully following her ‘man’ around. Although, that said, I do believe she is doing it for the right reasons. She doesn’t seem to have the luxury of shopping at Top Shop or Marks and Spencer’s though does she? More Oxfam or Help the aged maybe?
Now, what of Mrs. Clegg? Elegant, beautiful and a lawyer! She does seem to have the balance right. Supportive but ‘not in your face’. Clever tactics? Or, a genuine respect for the intelligence of the voting public?
We are not voting for the wives or the younger and / or better looking candidate or the one that tells the most plausible lie. We are voting for the person who can most quickly and efficiently get society as a whole back on track- or we should be!
There is a lot of talk about ‘affordable housing’ but this is only for those who can somehow scrape together a deposit to buy a home. And, on immigration, no one should deny someone sanctuary or even the right to live and work in this country but there should be more stringent rules and regulations. Crime should be tackled with stiffer sentences and penalties. And as for the child benefit system, what a nice little earner that is! But, of course, that in itself is not the only thing that is bleeding the coffers dry is it? MP’s expenses (have we forgotten already?) Defence, funding two wars we shouldn’t have got involved in in the first place. The Olympic village, (no, apologies again, it will bring in jobs and revenue. Yeah right!) It’s funny you know, there is always money in the pot for all manner of things but not for some of the important things like the NHS for instance. I could go on but you get the picture.
It all sounds very simple doesn’t it? Of course I know it is not that simple but I am not a politician in charge of the country. You would think someone who is would have the wit and the will to implement these changes .They can’t even talk a good talk any more! So for goodness sake don’t continue to be fooled any longer. They are not ‘one of us’, They do not live as the majority of us live, despite their inane efforts to convince us otherwise. This is an election campaign, they all put forward the same lies at this time, visiting homeless shelters, the disabled, hospitals etc. etc. etc. and of course, not forgetting ‘the ignored’. Did they not know they were there before? And if they did why has it taken so long for someone to find a solution?

Election 2010

The General Election will be on Thursday May 6th. On Friday May 7th the British people will wake up to what will be a new , fresh Parliament. Or will it?
To a great extent it will be the same old faces, saying the same old things and behaving in the same old way. Many of those MP’s who have survived the great “Expenses Scandal”, (albeit that some but not all may have repaid a part their dubious ill gotten gains) will be returned to the House knowing that they have managed to hang on for another Parliament.
During the course of the next 6 weeks, the media and an assortment of political “pundits”, will put forward the proposition that this election is all about the economy, or the health service, or education, or law and order, or public service cuts, or public service non cuts, or counter terrorism measures or the Green agenda. To an extent of course this is true, but where there is no discernable difference between the parties except in the question of degree, the argument is essentially academic.
Paradoxically, the campaign promises to be the most negative and nasty campaign in recent political history. Each party rubbishing the people and arguments proposed by the other. An alliance of Nu-Labour and Tories attacking the Liberals and within hours an new alliance of Tories and Liberals attacking Nu-Labour and all other possible combinations of the three. The prospect of almost 6 weeks of these charades is equally as absurd as it is demeaning. For many years, the public have become more and more disillusioned with Politics and politicians generally in this country. This has been reflected in less people actually bothering to vote in the General election than ever before. There is no reason to believe that this election will be any different than those which have gone before.
The reasons for this set of circumstances is plainly obvious. The Labour Party had abandoned its historical roots, it’s principles and any claim to represent working people in this country. In adopting the label of “Nu Labour” and rushing off to gain control of the “Centre Ground” in British politics, the differences between the political parties has become blurred as each party seeks to portray themselves as all things to all people, the “one size fits all” scenario. It is little wonder that people are turning away from politics as their cynicism gains momentum.
The Conservatives and Liberal Democrats, competing with Nu Labour in this frantic morass of mud slinging, hope that their performances will somehow deter the voting public from raising questions about issues which they would prefer not to be drawn on.
For example, what actions will be taken to stamp out the corrupt practices of second homes, second (and more) jobs outside the Houses of Parliament, consultancies, lobbying, the “noses in the trough” syndrome. What will be done to redress the scandalous situation where our service personnel have none of the standard of equipment which we should expect them to have, in addition to vehicles, helicopters and other weapons. Why should the British tax payer pay billions and billions of Pounds into the Banking system to rescue the banks from the ineptitude of their senior management, without taking full control to ensure that the Banks function in the interests of society rather than the interests of shareholders and other financial institutions. Why should those same taxpayers then have to foot the bill in higher taxes, National Insurance charges and higher VAT, in order for the same inept banking management to remain in control of their incompetent organisations.
The much publicised “Leaders Debate” to be televised on three evenings prior to election day, should provide some insight into the political differences, if any, between the Party leaders. Let us hope that the planted questions do not produce just more mud slinging.