10 February 2010

A few more tory lies

I'm developing a bit of a theme here - this isn't a partisan blog, and Brown is behaving like an overgrown 2-year-old, but he's not the one opposing reform for the sake of it, and lying about it

The Tories have an opinion on electoral reform but what are they actually lying about? I hear you ask

Take this from Dominic Grieve:

The current system delivered "clear, clean results" and allowed voters to "get rid of" MPs they did not want.

Have you ever 'got rid' of an MP you don't want?

The usual arrogant claptrap from the Tories - they keep most of their MPs through ridiculous safe seats where they face no scrutiny at all and with the first past the post system it is virtually impossible to defeat the biggest minority vote - this, in the Tories' minds (and Labour's btw), is a fair system and means people actually want those MPs...when most people don't actually know the name of their MP or PPC

I'll give you my own local example - all over East Anglia Tory MPs like mine hold majorities of a few thousand, few, if any, have a 50% majority but they win with a bedrock of support - the fact that 60% do not want the Tory is ignored, how is that electing the 'most popular' and indeed how can 'you get rid of' an MP when all the opposition votes are split - are you seriously telling me that since 1950 whatever Tory has held the seat has been wanted?

Alternative vote will (sorry, 'would') be a slightly better, less negative system as it will force a two-horse race, the Tories are right that it will cause a 'least unpopular' system, but it's a lie to suggest we have a 'most popular' system now, especially when they seem to support reality in choosing governments (ie. an unfair system for a distinct government change) but don't support that at constituency level

Their view is a slap in the face to all of us in the majority who don't want their hand-picked chums representing us


  1. I think that FPtP would be greatly enhanced if each party in each seat held a primary or a caucus. That way people could vote for the candidate first, then the party.

    Bad MP's in safe party seats could potentially be turfed out.

  2. I'd go along with Daniel on this one, Tarquin, that really would be the most positive thing that could happen.

    AV and PR merely lumber us with weak government where nothing is actually achieved because we would also have been lumbered with MP's belonging to parties that we don't want or need who constantly disagree with each other - just ask the people of N. Ireland what they think of PR.