London protests (riots)

[Joshwain]

So I've just finished watching a rather disappointing film on Netflix (Layer Cake) to find from Twitter that hours ago, there were violent anti-austerity protests in London, aimed at the 'new' government. Now unless you've also been on Twitter/Facebook, it's likely you haven't heard a word about it as the mainstream broadcasting media outlets seem to be keeping quiet about it.

What do we reckon - is it to prevent mass hysteria or is it censorship gone too far with Sky and the BBC just being political puppets?

 

[Keith W]

I read about it lunchtime on my mobile via the..... BBC app

Seriously, the news has been there for all to find and read - maybe some should do that instead hyping up hysteria & conspiracy

 

[Bobsyeruncle]

On the Sky app too

 

[dinners]

Just Nicola Sturgeon and 56 other folk 'using' the Forth Bridge on the news here in Scotland.

Only joking - I saw plenty on BBC / SKY and elsewhere.

 

[Joshwain]

Maybe it's just me that's behind, then I've jumped on the conspiracy bandwagon offered on Twitter.

They have reason to protest though, 63% of voters didn't want the Tories!

 

[POAH]

been the same sort of result for the last 3 elections has it not with around 2/3 of the electorate not voting for the Party in power.

 

[Joshwain]

I'm not sure to be honest, I was a first time voter

If it has been then surely the system needs to change? Like I know UKIP are complete you know what's but was it 6 million voted for them and they didn't get a single seat? That's hardly democratic!

Edit: 3 million, sorry

 

[POAH]

one seat but that's then way the cookie crumbles. if they got lots of seats they wouldn't be complaining would they.

 

[Joshwain]

The rest of us would though, at least if it was UKIP!

 

[MWHCVT]

Maybe it's just me that's behind, then I've jumped on the conspiracy bandwagon offered on Twitter.

They have reason to protest though, 63% of voters didn't want the Tories!

Or another way to look at it is that in more 50% of the seats the most popular candidate way a Tory...More people wanted a Tory than wanted any other particular party

As a party they polled more of the vote than any other party

 

[cambsno]

I'm not sure to be honest, I was a first time voter

If it has been then surely the system needs to change? Like I know UKIP are complete you know what's but was it 6 million voted for them and they didn't get a single seat? That's hardly democratic!

Edit: 3 million, sorry

They got one!

 

[cambsno]

So I've just finished watching a rather disappointing film on Netflix (Layer Cake) to find from Twitter that hours ago, there were violent anti-austerity protests in London, aimed at the 'new' government. Now unless you've also been on Twitter/Facebook, it's likely you haven't heard a word about it as the mainstream broadcasting media outlets seem to be keeping quiet about it.

What do we reckon - is it to prevent mass hysteria or is it censorship gone too far with Sky and the BBC just being political puppets?

Been on the news, but you know what, they should not give it much publicity. The scum involved wrote graffiti on a WW2 memorial, today of all days. The least amount of airtime these idiots get the better.

 

[dinners]

I'm not sure to be honest, I was a first time voter

If it has been then surely the system needs to change? Like I know UKIP are complete you know what's but was it 6 million voted for them and they didn't get a single seat? That's hardly democratic!

Edit: 3 million, sorry

one seat but that's then way the cookie crumbles. if they got lots of seats they wouldn't be complaining would they.

Apologies if this is over basic Joshwain but as POAH says - that's the way the cookie crumbles.


Imagine if there were just 3 constituencies consisting of a 1000 voters in each and the choice was orange or brown

1 votes 501 orange to 499 brown
2 votes 501 orange to 499 brown
3 votes 1 orange to 999 brown

Orange wins 2 seats to brown's 1 although orange had just 1003 votes compared to brown's 1997 votes

That's in simple terms. Factor in a) the sheer number of constituencies and b) how much the different constituencies vary in terms of the number of voters and you begin to see why 'number of votes' doesn't always = seats gained.

It's a whole other subject and more suited to the election thread than this particular new s discussion however this is why a lot of the electorate cast a 'tactical' vote based on how they feel they can at least have some influence on the result.

 

[dinners]

Been on the news, but you know what, they should not give it much publicity. The scum involved wrote graffiti on a WW2 memorial, today of all days. The least amount of airtime these idiots get the better.

I did wonder when I saw another news article about WW2 hecklers whether it was connected and just idiots.

 

[viv1969]

Been on the news, but you know what, they should not give it much publicity. The scum involved wrote graffiti on a WW2 memorial, today of all days. The least amount of airtime these idiots get the better.

Scum at any time...agreed.
But why today of all days?

 

[dejongj]

Austerity? Really? What austerity? Have they seen what the vast majority wants in the country? Last time I looked it is a democracy. The Tories received about 20% more votes than the next party. It is a fair win. Don't like the rules, fine, its a democracy go and lobby to get the rules changed. But don't just throw a tantrum.

 

[sphexx]

Scum at any time...agreed.
But why today of all days?

70th anniversary VE Day, I expect.

 

[viv1969]

70th anniversary VE Day, I expect.

That was Friday.

 

[Steep]

Don't like the rules, fine, its a democracy go and lobby to get the rules changed. But don't just throw a tantrum.

I don't condone the violent approach but can understand the frustration that leads to it. It's all very well to say lobby for change but the system has suited both major parties up to now and no amount of lobbying would have changed it. Things are changing though, the rise of multiple smaller parties will drive the change to a fairer voting system, dragging the dinosaur parties kicking and screaming along.

 

[dejongj]

The interesting thing is that even with one or more of the alternative systems there would still be a Tory majority. In this particular election it wouldn't have made significant difference to them. But yes it would for the smaller parties like lib dem and ukip and snp.

What I don't get is why now? Not just because of the rememberance, but what is there actually in the Tory manifesto that is so bad and so concerning regarding austerity measures? It seems to me that it was just a nice excuse for a night out. I bet most wouldn't even know what is in their manifesto...

 

[viv1969]

The interesting thing is that even with one or more of the alternative systems there would still be a Tory majority. In this particular election it wouldn't have made significant difference to them. But yes it would for the smaller parties like lib dem and ukip and snp.

What I don't get is why now? Not just because of the rememberance, but what is there actually in the Tory manifesto that is so bad and so concerning regarding austerity measures? It seems to me that it was just a nice excuse for a night out. I bet most wouldn't even know what is in their manifesto...

I agree...a good excuse for people with nothing better to do to go out on the streets and baa like sheep.

 

[cambsno]

I don't condone the violent approach but can understand the frustration that leads to it. It's all very well to say lobby for change but the system has suited both major parties up to now and no amount of lobbying would have changed it. Things are changing though, the rise of multiple smaller parties will drive the change to a fairer voting system, dragging the dinosaur parties kicking and screaming along.

At the risk of repeating myself we did have vote a few years ago. While current system may suit labour and Tory parties, remember that these are made up of people. Will your core Tory or labour voter want A different system, of course not. Will this be so relevant next time? If the referendum sees us out of the EU then ukip will die out, but if we vote to stay they will massively decline too.

Weird how the U.S. Have just 2 parties! What is rest of Europe like?

 

[decigallen]

The interesting thing is that even with one or more of the alternative systems there would still be a Tory majority. In this particular election it wouldn't have made significant difference to them. But yes it would for the smaller parties like lib dem and ukip and snp.

What I don't get is why now? Not just because of the rememberance, but what is there actually in the Tory manifesto that is so bad and so concerning regarding austerity measures? It seems to me that it was just a nice excuse for a night out. I bet most wouldn't even know what is in their manifesto...

You can't say that with complete certainty as the system of voting would invariably affect HOW people vote and possibly even affect voting turnout. Tactical voting happens because of FPTP. PR would result in smaller parties probably getting more votes as it would not have the stigma of being a 'wasted' vote. The Greens and UKIP would pick up a lot of ground because of that. PR would've most likely resulted in a hung parliament, not a Tory majority.

The Tories election promises should be taken with a pinch of salt given that so many pledges of 2010 were turned completely on their head, with the opposite coming into affect. Austerity is one part of it. The Human rights Bill ambiguity, EU uncertainty, NHS restructuring, social welfare cuts, the thatcher-esque 'right to buy' plans are plenty of reasons to be worried.

I should add that a lot of the budget and welfare cuts won't harm me (and might possibly benefit me) but I find them to be socially repugnant and counter to human decency and social justice.

 

[gramps]

So I've just finished watching a rather disappointing film on Netflix (Layer Cake) to find from Twitter that hours ago, there were violent anti-austerity protests in London, aimed at the 'new' government. Now unless you've also been on Twitter/Facebook, it's likely you haven't heard a word about it as the mainstream broadcasting media outlets seem to be keeping quiet about it.

What do we reckon - is it to prevent mass hysteria or is it censorship gone too far with Sky and the BBC just being political puppets?

Haven't seen it or looked for it but what is it, a few disgruntled people kicking off because they didn't get what they wanted?
Hardly breaking news in this day and age if you ask me

 

[sphexx]

That was Friday.

True, but there were commemorations on Saturday and there is churchy stuff today.

 

[dejongj]

You can't say that with complete certainty as the system of voting would invariably affect HOW people vote and possibly even affect voting turnout. Tactical voting happens because of FPTP. PR would result in smaller parties probably getting more votes as it would not have the stigma of being a 'wasted' vote. The Greens and UKIP would pick up a lot of ground because of that. PR would've most likely resulted in a hung parliament, not a Tory majority.

The Tories election promises should be taken with a pinch of salt given that so many pledges of 2010 were turned completely on their head, with the opposite coming into affect. Austerity is one part of it. The Human rights Bill ambiguity, EU uncertainty, NHS restructuring, social welfare cuts, the thatcher-esque 'right to buy' plans are plenty of reasons to be worried.

I should add that a lot of the budget and welfare cuts won't harm me (and might possibly benefit me) but I find them to be socially repugnant and counter to human decency and social justice.

I agree, there is no such thing as complete certainty unless it happens...However based on the absolute outcomes it is rather clear and obvious. Maybe it is just me who doesn't like playing games....Perhaps if people just voted for who they actually wanted and believed in opposed to trying to be tactical about it without any certainty they may get what they want....It is the common theme, if you don't vote for who you want you won't get them....

I think the 2010 pledges were different than now, firstly labour left a serious mess with that infamous note of no money left. Five year on we still are bothered by it, but I feel it can no longer be used as an excuse as they know the ins/outs now. Secondly it was a coalition which means compromise, again there is not that to hide behind either.

So if there is a serious deviation from any manifesto promises then they will be in serious trouble. I honestly don't get why the NHS always gets brought up or social welfare cuts...What is there actually in the manifesto that is so concerning? Likewise a referendum is promised, there is nothing more promised on what that would mean or how it would be acted upon. It just seems nothing more than scare mongering to me without any substance.

 

[cambsno]

You can't say that with complete certainty as the system of voting would invariably affect HOW people vote and possibly even affect voting turnout. Tactical voting happens because of FPTP. PR would result in smaller parties probably getting more votes as it would not have the stigma of being a 'wasted' vote. The Greens and UKIP would pick up a lot of ground because of that. PR would've most likely resulted in a hung parliament, not a Tory majority.

The Tories election promises should be taken with a pinch of salt given that so many pledges of 2010 were turned completely on their head, with the opposite coming into affect. Austerity is one part of it. The Human rights Bill ambiguity, EU uncertainty, NHS restructuring, social welfare cuts, the thatcher-esque 'right to buy' plans are plenty of reasons to be worried.

I should add that a lot of the budget and welfare cuts won't harm me (and might possibly benefit me) but I find them to be socially repugnant and counter to human decency and social justice.

On the other hand some people may have made a protest vote as they were in a safe seat, maybe some of the Ukip voters just wanted to send a message out. Who knows.

I really don't see that the 2010 policies were turned on head. A good government has to react to the times. The deficit was bigger than thought so some policy had to adapt. They were also in coalition so the very nature means compromise had to be sought. Had labour and snp got in, there would have been many broken promises as one wanted trident and one didn't.

Welfare has to be addressed, even labour acknowledged that. The German model is much better, higher payments but for a restricted time. The eu part is simply giving the people a say in our future and linked to human rights bill which is in need of reform. Nothing wrong with a vote on something that affects us all.

 

[srichards]

There was a referendum on AV to replace first past the post in 2011. It was rejected.

First past the post means a party has to appeal to more people to get anywhere. This naturally reduces the chances of extremists getting a look in. It's a natural moderating force. I think this is a good idea.

 

[mex]

Is there any shock that the protests were not aired? Rupert Murdoch, Viscount Rothermere, Richard Desmond and the Barclay bros. would'nt want that shown now would they?

 

[dejongj]

What do you mean it wasn't aired? It was. Its all over the news. Fortunately there are also more important matters opposed to giving that bunch of vandalising loosers prime time.

 

[decigallen]

On the other hand some people may have made a protest vote as they were in a safe seat, maybe some of the Ukip voters just wanted to send a message out. Who knows.

I really don't see that the 2010 policies were turned on head. A good government has to react to the times. The deficit was bigger than thought so some policy had to adapt. They were also in coalition so the very nature means compromise had to be sought. Had labour and snp got in, there would have been many broken promises as one wanted trident and one didn't.

Welfare has to be addressed, even labour acknowledged that. The German model is much better, higher payments but for a restricted time. The eu part is simply giving the people a say in our future and linked to human rights bill which is in need of reform. Nothing wrong with a vote on something that affects us all.

Promised no frontline reductions. Cut nearly 6k NHS nurses, 7k hospital beds, a third of ambulance stations, over 5k firefighters and 7k police officers....

Promised to keep VAT at 17.5%. Raised it to 20%

Promised no topdown restructuring of the NHS. Overseen the biggest topdown restructuring of the NHS in it's history.

Promised to keep the EMA. Abolished it less than a year after forming a coalition.

Promised to back and improve sure start. 566 sure start centres closed and over half of those remaining were cut back.

Promised not to change the Future Jobs Fund. Abolished it.

Promised that bank bonuses would stop being paid on the back of taxpayer guarantees. Failed to do this AND Osbourne tried (and failed) to take legal action against the EU commission over it's plan to cap such payments!

Promised to protect winter fuel allowance. Cut it by up to 25% in 2011.

Promised to cut immigration to the levels of the 1990s. It has risen 39% since 2010.

Promised to cut ministers pay by 5% and freeze it for 5 years. After cutting it they outsourced future decisions to a quasi-independent body that then gave MPs a 11% payrise.

Promised to reduce emissions and build a greener economy. Cut green spending and Cameron was embarrassed by a leak that had him referring to green energy as 'all the green crap.' Furthurmore they backed shale gas as an alternative to cleaner, green energy.

Promised 'near-total transparency' of the political and governing elite. Then delted all the party's promises and commitments made between 2000 and 2010 from their website.

 

[Yv]

Just as an aside, there was lots of people raising the questions as to why the pre-election opinion polls didn't show the Tory [slim] majority they actually got - well your answer is right there in those protests - many people are too concerned about the loud & shouty section of the left [section, not all of it] to publicly voice why they think voting right is actually better.

However, for some balance, I actually saw a tweet this morning that was probably one of the most sensible and NOT whinging I have seen from the left side of the divide [I should point out I haven't been looking hard either, twitter is awash with sulking left leaners and it gets way too wearing to read it all, I just caught this one, retweeted by someone I follow, as I glanced at twitter for cricket stuff], from Tessa Jowell in response to someone saying Labour shouldn't be trying to win back those that changed to Tory. "Rubbish. Labour wins when we appeal to everybody. Country rejected us, should be no-one we don't seek to win back"

 

[shapeshifter]

Change the way votes count. Link :https://www.change.org/p/david-came...des-md-action_alert-reason_msg&fb_ref=Default

4 Million votes and 1 seat out of 650. 1.5 Million votes and 56 seats out of 650.That's not a fair democratic system.

 

[dejongj]

Change the way votes count. Link :https://www.change.org/p/david-came...des-md-action_alert-reason_msg&fb_ref=Default

4 Million votes and 1 seat out of 650. 1.5 Million votes and 56 seats out of 650.That's not a fair democratic system.

So when you had the opportunity to change the majority of people didn't want to change. Surely that is democracy at work?

 

[Dave *]

Change the way votes count. Link :https://www.change.org/p/david-came...des-md-action_alert-reason_msg&fb_ref=Default

4 Million votes and 1 seat out of 650. 1.5 Million votes and 56 seats out of 650.That's not a fair democratic system.

Why do so many UKIP supporters struggle with maths? Hasn't this point been explained (many times)?

 

[shapeshifter]

So when you had the opportunity to change the majority of people didn't want to change. Surely that is democracy at work?

Do it now and see what happens.Your talking about 4 yrs ago things change.Petition going up by at least 50 votes a minute

 

[shapeshifter]

Why do so many UKIP supporters struggle with maths? Hasn't this point been explained (many times)?

No one is struggling with maths at all.I don't want the present system because it is not democratic for someone (however) to get 4 million votes 12% of the votes cast and only have one seat in the HOC to represent those 4,000000 people.Yet 1.5 million people have 56 seats in the HOC.If you are happy with the present system then so be it.It is nothing to do with struggling with maths quite the oposite I might suggest.

 

[srichards]

The other methods break the link between the person you vote for and who you get. Then you end up voting for a party and not always knowing which MP you could get. With FPTP you have the opportunity to vote for someone from another party because they are a good MP and work hard for their constituents regardless of their constituents beliefs. With FPTP it's clear. Whoever gets the most votes gets the job. If they do a bad job for the local constituents they often lose their seat. It seems perfectly democratic and reasonable to do this.

If you can't get the most votes in any constituency then you just aren't good enough. Rework the policies or find a decent candidate so that you do.

 

[Steep]

No one is struggling with maths at all.I don't want the present system because it is not democratic for someone (however) to get 4 million votes 12% of the votes cast and only have one seat in the HOC to represent those 4,000000 people.Yet 1.5 million people have 56 seats in the HOC.If you are happy with the present system then so be it.It is nothing to do with struggling with maths quite the oposite I might suggest.

You keep on quoting UKIPs 4mill versus SNPs 1.4 mill votes as if there's a direct comparison, there's not. UKIPs vote in Scotland was about 44,000, compare that to the 1.43 million.

There's a page on Channel 4 news site http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/factcheck-parliament-proportional-representation/20893 which shows what the result would have been under PR, UKIP get 83 seats which is fair to them, the Tories get much less and would have needed a coalition or partnership to govern. The SNP get less too, a price we'd have to pay for PR but still way more than we've ever had before.

 

[dejongj]

Do it now and see what happens.Your talking about 4 yrs ago things change.Petition going up by at least 50 votes a minute

Absolutely nothing will happen now. There is no mandate voted in to changed it. It won't happen for the next election either. The best you can hope for it that it will be part of the next winners manifesto and then perhaps in ten years time it will change. In reality nothing much would have changed anyway to this election. It will be much better to focus on having credible candidates and policy.