Rigged Elections?.

[Lonnie]

Yes, this was taken from Richard Littlejohns column in THE DAILY MAIL, but I checked the figures on two differnt sites online before posting it.

Labour won the last General Election with 35% of the cast votes,

The Tories have a lead of approximately 38%.

We are told that if they get a 40% lead, and open up a nine point advantage over Labour, they can expect a hung parliament.

Fair or not?.

Your thoughts on this, and please, I know there's one or two on here that like to slate this paper, and me for reading it, can you just keep the comments to the question?. Thanks.

[jno]

In the 1951 election the Tories got 48% of the vote and Labour got 48.8% - but the Tories got 321 seats against Labour's 295. Did Littlejohn mention this? It was under the same electoral system as at present.

[Gef]

Total votes cast has nothing to do with it. It's all to do with seats. If you don't like it then join a party which advocates proportional representation.

[undercovers]

where's the rigging - thats just the voting system that the ul uses, its not a very popular system when you are not in power (e.g. when you can't do anything about it) but when you are in power it would seem a bit odd to maybe threaten your own position by changing the system... it will change eventually and Proportional Representation is used in scotland and for the welsh assembly so fingers crossed for a fairer system in the future

[Lonnie]

jno, Yes, I agree implicitly with what you say, but i'm talking about now, in 1951, I was two years old, and I didn't go that far back in research, although I did after reading your answer. Fair point.

Gef and undercovers, thanks for your comments also.

[jno]

Lonnie, I was really making the same point as the other posts: the system isn't rigged (unlike, say, the gerrymandering that sometimes accompanies boundary redrawing in the USA) but it can be unfair, and 1951 was a striking example of this. But as undercovers says, no party is going to change the system that got them into power, and when it removes them from power again it's too late.

Nonetheless, now - with Labour suspecting they'll lose the next election - might be an interesting time for them to try some electoral reform.

[Loosehead]

In a first past the post system like ours percentages and total votes are irrelevant but they are often used by the media to back up some point or other or to try and predict outcomes but they have no direct correlation with the outcome.

As stated above PR is often favoured by those in opposition but I don't think the Tories would want it. Essentially it does produce what you might call a fairer result but it also produces total paralysis. Ask yourself this, if the Libdems ever won power would they then change the system to their beloved PR? Nope thought so!

The system we have is far from perfect but it's probably as good as it gets.

[Lonnie]

I agree that the system we have, is probably the best we can hope for, a bit like Democracy itself, its not perfect, and open to manipulation, but its the best there is.

I just have a problem with this goverment, and the way they do thing, and again yes, I know that other goverments, Labour and Tories have done some despicable things, I just think that this goverment is the worst and most crooked we've had, post war. but thats my opnion.

[Loosehead]

Yes Lonnie they are the worst in living memory but electorate put them there, they managed to get middle England to support New Labour, that's what put them there. Hopefully the party will be over come the next election

[Lonnie]

Hi Loosehead, I know this is going on a bit now, but actually, it was the Scottish electorate that put them there, if things were equal, following Devolution, for good or bad, Michael Howerd would be our Prime minister now.

[kempie]

Here are some statistics from the 1997 General Election to highlight the disparity of the 'first past the post' system of voting:

UK voting

(New) Labour - 43.2% vote / 63.4% seats
Conservative - 30.7% vote / 25.0% seats
Lib Democrat - 16.8% vote / 7.0% seats

England voting

(New) Labour - 43.5% vote / 62.0% seats
Conservative - 33.7% vote / 31.2% seats
Lib Democrat - 18.0% vote / 6.4% seats

Scotland voting

(New) Labour - 45.6% vote / 77.8% seats
Conservative - 17.5% vote / 0.0% seats
Lib Democrat - 13.0% vote / 13.9% seats

Wales voting

(New) Labour - 54.7% vote / 85.0% seats
Conservative - 19.6% vote / 0.0% seats
Lib Democrat - 12.3% vote / 5.0% seats

[jno]

New Zealand switched from Westminster-style voting to PR a few years ago. Forming governments is harder - and perhaps it should be - but they're not at all paralysed.

[PhilBy]

Whilst respecting you opinion Lonnie may I just remind you of few names from the past, they may be beyond living memory of some but only if they are still attending school.....

David Mellor
Tim Yeo
David Ashby
Hartley Booth
Tim Smith
Neil Hamilton
Jonathan Aitken
David Willetts
Sir Nicholas Scott
Lord Archer
Baroness "I was only batting for Britain" Thatcher

The last one of course being in refference to her reply when asked how her son and the companies he represented always seemed to do rather well when as Prime Minister she touted for business from overseas ......... Mark (her son) managed to leave Harrow public school in 1971 with just three O-levels, did not go to university and failed his accountancy exams three times, but has atill gone on to now have an estimated wealth of �60,000,000 (That's Sixty Million)!! .............. Makes ya proud to be British doesn't it!?

[Lonnie]

Thanks for all your replies guys, most interesting, and mine eyes have been opened a bit more by them.

[kev100]

I've just been told by this worthless banker Blair that I should work until I die and never expect to see a pension despite the fact that I have paid my dues all my life whilst the number 1. most worthless individual that ever lived that has contributed nothing, and who has never done a days work in his life has 60 million.

For christs sake people wake up and smell the coffee

[Lonnie]

Hi kev, your so right, but there are some, and I don't blame them, who like to steer the middle line, and bring up similarities with previous Tory goverments, however, I don't think there's a previous goverment who is hellbent on destroying this country. But there you go.

[tell-me-more]

Barely 1 in 5 of the population supported Labour at the last election, and yet they still hold all the power. Outrageously unfair.

[tell-me-more]

The advice to join a party which advocates PR is nonsensical. For a start, there are at least two such parties (The Green Party and The Liberal Democrats) meaning that the vote would be divided and therefore, in all likelihood, it would continue not to be represented. Even if The Conservative Party had also been in favour of PR at the last election, Labour would still have held power with 35% of the vote and the majority voice would have gone unheard.

Only electoral reform will solve the problem.

[Lonnie]

I'm not advocating PR or any other type ove voting system, I just hate this goverment with with every fibre of my being, no other goverment has been so openly sleazily, crooked, and gives the appearance of hating and trying to destroy the country the are supposed to be governing,

Whether anyone likes it or not, those are my feelings and views.

Thanks everyone for your input.

[PhilBy]

The point I am trying to make is that no other Goverment has ever been put under the media microscope as this lot.... I really do not give a stuff about politicians. I trust them as far as I can spit, but for every accusation I see posted here about this lot, I remember worse happening under the last lot....

[tell-me-more]

That's an excellent point I think Philby. Only this government has had to deal with 24 hour news on half a dozen different channels, and with that space to fill, it inevitably gets filled no matter how little news there is, and then a simple game of croquet gets elevated to near war-crime status.