I'm no great fan of the Tories, but  with the current precarious state of the economy, I shudder at the thought of a Lib Lab pact unleashing another round of profligacy

like spending millions every day in Libya ontop of all our other militarty comminttments. And Dont mention Trident!

And we have to pay for the Royal honeymoom

---

They won't need 40% once they've finished gerrymandering the boundaries, I'm afraid Peter.

It is not "gerrymandering", it is resolving the present unfair imbalance in favour of Labour - even the LDs agree with that.

Saint has pointed out several times how and why that is wrong, MM. The fact you simply ignore him every time and continue to spout this nonsense is shameful.

Dear Supercilious Nick, it is a valid point of view and not nonsense or shameful at all. The Boundaries Commission is independent of political influence and will do its job impartially. What on earth is "undemocratic" about equalising constituencies?

Labour resent the reduction in their current advantage of course.

On reflection - how completely and utterly absurd to call my comment "shameful" - talk about getting on your high horse!

---

They won't need 40% once they've finished gerrymandering the boundaries, I'm afraid Peter.

It is not "gerrymandering", it is resolving the present unfair imbalance in favour of Labour - even the LDs agree with that.

Saint has pointed out several times how and why that is wrong, MM. The fact you simply ignore him every time and continue to spout this nonsense is shameful.

Dear Supercilious Nick, it is a valid point of view and not nonsense or shameful at all. The Boundaries Commission is independent of political influence and will do its job impartially. What on earth is "undemocratic" about equalising constituencies?

Labour resent the reduction in their current advantage of course.

On reflection - how completely and utterly absurd to call my comment "shameful" - talk about getting on your high horse!

NIce try, MM, but the fact is every time I've seen Saint explain why there is no advantage to Labour under the present system that is not simply to do with who gets their vote out and margins of victory, etc, you never even acknowledge what he's written. It's all well and good if you respond to his points with arguments, but you don't. You just ignore it and repeat your line. If I'm on my high horse, you're a little kid with his fingers in his ears shouting "LA LA LA LA can't hear you".

 

Good morning.

---

They won't need 40% once they've finished gerrymandering the boundaries, I'm afraid Peter.

It is not "gerrymandering", it is resolving the present unfair imbalance in favour of Labour - even the LDs agree with that.

Saint has pointed out several times how and why that is wrong, MM. The fact you simply ignore him every time and continue to spout this nonsense is shameful.

Dear Supercilious Nick, it is a valid point of view and not nonsense or shameful at all. The Boundaries Commission is independent of political influence and will do its job impartially. What on earth is "undemocratic" about equalising constituencies?

Labour resent the reduction in their current advantage of course.

On reflection - how completely and utterly absurd to call my comment "shameful" - talk about getting on your high horse!

NIce try, MM, but the fact is every time I've seen Saint explain why there is no advantage to Labour under the present system that is not simply to do with who gets their vote out and margins of victory, etc, you never even acknowledge what he's written. It's all well and good if you respond to his points with arguments, but you don't. You just ignore it and repeat your line. If I'm on my high horse, you're a little kid with his fingers in his ears shouting "LA LA LA LA can't hear you".

 

Good morning.

Of course, you will dismiss this because it is from the Telegraph (2008) but it seems to sum up the current imbalance quite succinctly:

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/geraldwarner/5207388/Britains_electoral_system_unfairly_gerrymandered_in_favour_of_Labour/

"In his piece on David Cameron’s road to Number 10, Iain Martin touches on a crucial issue: “The geography and the electoral map are against the Tories: they need a 10-point lead on polling day to get an overall majority of one seat”. He cites research from YouGov pollster Peter Kellner showing that if Labour and the Tories were to gain an equal share of the vote at the next election, Labour would get 80 more seats. continues...."

---

I think I've read that before when someone linked it. Of course the main problem with that article is that it simply states headline/overall figures without looking at HOW those figures are reached: where are the problems? why is this so?

SAINT - if you're there - fancy repeating what you always do?

The fact is it has a lot more to do with getting your vote out, the geographical location of support bases, and which party wins in more marginal and more "easy" seats (http://www.leftfootforward.org/2010/07/electoral-reformers-should-oppose-the-coalitions-gerrymandering/ ). None of these issues is addressed by the simplistic telegraph blog, I'm afraid.

 

---

NIce try, MM, but the fact is every time I've seen Saint explain why there is no advantage to Labour under the present system that is not simply to do with who gets their vote out and margins of victory, etc, you never even acknowledge what he's written. It's all well and good if you respond to his points with arguments, but you don't. You just ignore it and repeat your line. If I'm on my high horse, you're a little kid with his fingers in his ears shouting "LA LA LA LA can't hear you".

 

Good morning.

About as apt a desciption of MM's posting style that I have seen

NIce try, MM, but the fact is every time I've seen Saint explain why there is no advantage to Labour under the present system that is not simply to do with who gets their vote out and margins of victory, etc, you never even acknowledge what he's written. It's all well and good if you respond to his points with arguments, but you don't. You just ignore it and repeat your line. If I'm on my high horse, you're a little kid with his fingers in his ears shouting "LA LA LA LA can't hear you".

 

Good morning.

About as apt a desciption of MM's posting style that I have seen

I have yet to see a convincing argument as to why constituency sizes should not be equalised.

Edicius, you are a member of the left wing club on here, so no surprise you agree with Nick and Brogdale on everything.

---

I'm no great fan of the Tories, but  with the current precarious state of the economy, I shudder at the thought of a Lib Lab pact unleashing another round of profligacy

like spending millions every day in Libya ontop of all our other militarty comminttments. And Dont mention Trident!

And we have to pay for the Royal honeymoom

Quite!

---

Of course, in principle no-one can argue with equal size constituencies. But in reality it is impossible to achieve. The population in urban areas fluctuates all the time with rapid movement of populations and many poorer people tend not to be on the register take time to register themselves after moving.

Anyway, regarding the future, if the govt survives till 2015 the Tories will win an overall majority under the new boundaries and the economy will probably be in better shape by then in spite of govt. efforts to curtail growth. The media will also continue to provide slavish support and Murdoch would have got his sky deal. The lib dems will be wiped out. The only hope IMO of stopping more than 10 years of Tory rule would be for the Libs to find a backbone and pull out in the next year. That would help restore some of their credibility as a party and an early election would be fought under existing boundaries. But I fear Maunder and most others here will be delighted with the way things turn out. The Tories and big business will have many more years to wreck the country and make it even more unequal and unfair.

---

Of course, in principle no-one can argue with equal size constituencies. But in reality it is impossible to achieve. The population in urban areas fluctuates all the time with rapid movement of populations and many poorer people tend not to be on the register take time to register themselves after moving. Anyway, regarding the future, if the govt survives till 2015 the Tories will win an overall majority under the new boundaries and the economy will probably be in better shape by then in spite of govt. efforts to curtail growth. The media will also continue to provide slavish support and Murdoch would have got his sky deal. The lib dems will be wiped out. The only hope IMO of stopping more than 10 years of Tory rule would be for the Libs to find a backbone and pull out in the next year. That would help restore some of their credibility as a party and an early election would be fought under existing boundaries. But I fear Maunder and most others here will be delighted with the way things turn out. The Tories and big business will have many more years to wreck the country and make it even more unequal and unfair.

Much as I despise generally everything the Tories stand for and very much share your fears for the future, I don't see the Labour Party being any kind of shining armour-clad knight. Especially when it comes to the issue of halting the omnipotence of big business.

---

Of course, in principle no-one can argue with equal size constituencies. But in reality it is impossible to achieve. The population in urban areas fluctuates all the time with rapid movement of populations and many poorer people tend not to be on the register take time to register themselves after moving. Anyway, regarding the future, if the govt survives till 2015 the Tories will win an overall majority under the new boundaries and the economy will probably be in better shape by then in spite of govt. efforts to curtail growth. The media will also continue to provide slavish support and Murdoch would have got his sky deal. The lib dems will be wiped out. The only hope IMO of stopping more than 10 years of Tory rule would be for the Libs to find a backbone and pull out in the next year. That would help restore some of their credibility as a party and an early election would be fought under existing boundaries. But I fear Maunder and most others here will be delighted with the way things turn out. The Tories and big business will have many more years to wreck the country and make it even more unequal and unfair.

Wake up - smell the roses - what a load of utter tosh!!!!

That comment is from someone who clearly can not see the wood for the trees and is based upon a pre-concieved ideology without any reference to the facts or realities of the situation.

Who has wrecked the country cus it sure wasn't the Tories - they had been out of power for 13 years!!!!!

Unequal and unfair - lets look at all the ludicrous legislation and beaurocracy that has arisen in 13 years - the mess the economy is in, public debt etc etc etc....

Just Grrrrr.......

 

 

---

Who has wrecked the country

The global banking fraternity.

Feel free to throw bricks at Labour - I've no problem with that - but Labour didn't wreck the economy. Running a fiscal deficit in a period of sustained growth was a mistake and put the UK economy in a marginally worse position than it might have been. But the shitstorm would have rained down on us (and every other developed nation) no matter which colour rosette the party in government wore and no matter how tight a ship they'd have been running.

---

Who has wrecked the country

The global banking fraternity.

Feel free to throw bricks at Labour - I've no problem with that - but Labour didn't wreck the economy. Running a fiscal deficit in a period of sustained growth was a mistake and put the UK economy in a marginally worse position than it might have been. But the shitstorm would have rained down on us (and every other developed nation) no matter which colour rosette the party in government wore and no matter how tight a ship they'd have been running.

That was not bricks at Labour - just a clarification of facts.....

---

Who has wrecked the country

The global banking fraternity.

Feel free to throw bricks at Labour - I've no problem with that - but Labour didn't wreck the economy. Running a fiscal deficit in a period of sustained growth was a mistake and put the UK economy in a marginally worse position than it might have been. But the shitstorm would have rained down on us (and every other developed nation) no matter which colour rosette the party in government wore and no matter how tight a ship they'd have been running.

That was not bricks at Labour - just a clarification of facts.....

Distortion of facts, rather.

---

Who has wrecked the country

The global banking fraternity.

Feel free to throw bricks at Labour - I've no problem with that - but Labour didn't wreck the economy. Running a fiscal deficit in a period of sustained growth was a mistake and put the UK economy in a marginally worse position than it might have been. But the shitstorm would have rained down on us (and every other developed nation) no matter which colour rosette the party in government wore and no matter how tight a ship they'd have been running.

That was not bricks at Labour - just a clarification of facts.....

Distortion of facts, rather.

In fact, no facts at all; just the usual unsubstantiated opinion that most of the tory fan boys on here spout. Who knows, one day they may discover the joy of evidence based argument?

Until then...more blah, blah blah...what I read in the 'Fail'/torygraph/Excess....

Who has wrecked the country

The global banking fraternity.

Feel free to throw bricks at Labour - I've no problem with that - but Labour didn't wreck the economy. Running a fiscal deficit in a period of sustained growth was a mistake and put the UK economy in a marginally worse position than it might have been. But the shitstorm would have rained down on us (and every other developed nation) no matter which colour rosette the party in government wore and no matter how tight a ship they'd have been running.

That was not bricks at Labour - just a clarification of facts.....

Distortion of facts, rather.

In fact, no facts at all; just the usual unsubstantiated opinion that most of the tory fan boys on here spout. Who knows, one day they may discover the joy of evidence based argument?

Until then...more blah, blah blah...what I read in the 'Fail'/torygraph/Excess....

And what makes you think that I am a "Tory Fan Boy"? You have absolutely no idea where my political allegience does or does not lie...

---

Who has wrecked the country

The global banking fraternity.

Feel free to throw bricks at Labour - I've no problem with that - but Labour didn't wreck the economy. Running a fiscal deficit in a period of sustained growth was a mistake and put the UK economy in a marginally worse position than it might have been. But the shitstorm would have rained down on us (and every other developed nation) no matter which colour rosette the party in government wore and no matter how tight a ship they'd have been running.

That was not bricks at Labour - just a clarification of facts.....

Distortion of facts, rather.

In fact, no facts at all; just the usual unsubstantiated opinion that most of the tory fan boys on here spout. Who knows, one day they may discover the joy of evidence based argument?

Until then...more blah, blah blah...what I read in the 'Fail'/torygraph/Excess....

And what makes you think that I am a "Tory Fan Boy"? You have absolutely no idea where my political allegience does or does not lie...

Yeah, yeah...whatever....(as they say in my neck of the woods)

Of course, in principle no-one can argue with equal size constituencies. But in reality it is impossible to achieve. The population in urban areas fluctuates all the time with rapid movement of populations and many poorer people tend not to be on the register take time to register themselves after moving. Anyway, regarding the future, if the govt survives till 2015 the Tories will win an overall majority under the new boundaries and the economy will probably be in better shape by then in spite of govt. efforts to curtail growth. The media will also continue to provide slavish support and Murdoch would have got his sky deal. The lib dems will be wiped out. The only hope IMO of stopping more than 10 years of Tory rule would be for the Libs to find a backbone and pull out in the next year. That would help restore some of their credibility as a party and an early election would be fought under existing boundaries. But I fear Maunder and most others here will be delighted with the way things turn out. The Tories and big business will have many more years to wreck the country and make it even more unequal and unfair.

Since you mention me, I shall respond. Firstly, it would be absolute political suicide for the Lib Dems to pull the plug on the Coalition and they know that. There may be a few high profile resignations from the Government and even one or two defections, but the Coalition will survive that.

Secondly, it is a bit rich to talk about the "Tories wrecking the country", given the wreckage left by Labour - not simply the unsustainable, structural Budget Deficit caused by Brown's reckless spending during the good years, but the fact that state education at secondary level is still goddam awful and not fit for purpose, plus the open borders of the Labour years which changed the culture and demographics of whole regions, against the will of the settled majority!

---

But I fear Maunder and most others here will be delighted with the way things turn out. The Tories and big business will have many more years to fix the country and make it even more equal and fairer.

I smell your fear and it smells wonderful!!

---

Hi Maunder. Did Labour also cause the recessions and debt problems experienced by many countries around the world? One of the great triumphs of the Tory govt. and the ruling business and media elite has been to hoodwink most voters into putting all the blame on brown. Yes, they did run a structural deficit but it was manageable until the banking crisis struck. This is not the time to get into another debt debate but again voters have been conned by the media establishment into believing the argument that we must slash public services and help for the poor and less fortunate in order to balance the books, at the same time as ignoring the billions lost to tax avoidance by big business, the billions spent on maintaining so many nukes and all the billions wasted on foreign wars. The Tories have done a superb propaganda job. Endless stories in the Sun about single mums, immigrants and benefit "scroungers" whilst the likes of Philip Green get away with tax avoidance and Barclays gets away with paying a fraction of what they owe to HMRC. The Big fish look after themselves and manipulate the little people into fighting one another. Thatchers legacy is nearly complete. Society is gone. The working classes are divided, no one trusts anyone else whilst the ruling elites are free to get richer and richer. Sorry, rant over!

---