Well yeah, but it also shows how much people have really cared about it in the past. We shouldn't be using an electoral system that systemically holds third parties back from forming/growing, yet here we are.
Have you gone full anti-EU now then?
The Independent Group for Change | Have decided to disband after ten months
- Thread starter Giant Midget
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Have you gone full anti-EU now then?
Oh aye, I think I remember the bit of Labour's manifesto where it talked about leaving the EU to save the environment now you mention it.
No, it won't. That's well beyond the limits of the country's abilities. It requires international cooperation and in the era of Trump the opposite is happening.
No. I'm just sort of resigned to what has happened*, and fail to believe that devoting time and energy to making sure the UK stays in the situation it is currently in is a worthwhile endeavour. "If only we could stay in the EU and then 2020 could look just like 2018 and 2017!"
* e.g. Unless Article 50 is rescinded in the next 34 days any People's Vote will have to be won on the basis of re-entry to the EU - I don't think the People's Vote people have even bothered to consider what this campaign would look like. As was mentioned earlier, it will likely require far more concessions than our previous membership did.
It's about political bandwidth, and public attention. We are fussing over a crack in the windscreen whilst we are driving the wrong way down the motorway at 80mph.
Sure, but how does that excuse Corbyn? He's hardly led on the issue or attempted to shift public attention to it and if you're going to argue that he has then he's been more insipid than in his opposition to Brexit.
Besides, I can see no realistic way in which leaving the EU won't be used as justification for stripping environmental protections. In fact, almost inarguably I would say, staying in the EU is almost certainly the best thing we could do for the environment in the very short term. Sure, it's doing little more than maintaining the (ruinous) status quo, and we should demand politicians everywhere do more, but it's better than deciding that the status quo goes too far and rolling back any progress made.
I think its all informal and without any hard and fast rule so people can get upset or ignore as it suits.
The point was that when it suited Corbyn/Labour to ignore this thinking re Birmingham council ,he did so. Which pops the self righteous balloon some what. ( I don't know if its true though because I don't follow the workings of Birmingham Council, I just thought someone on here might know the case and give us an insight)
Translation: We'll do anything to stop brexit apart from risking our own seats.
it gets even better, the little they've actually said on brexit so far is identical to what Corbyns been saying for months
Councillors are still elected and stand for election as the selected party candidate of particular wards. I can't see the difference in principle. Switching party as a councilor is still switching party and not standing for re-election is still not standing for re-election afterwards.
Again I don't know the specific case but the person being criticised for not standing for re-election post resigning is citing Corbyn as a hypocrite on the basis he didn't call for the councilor to stand for re-election after benefiting from the switch. He is the MP for Dudley so should know more about the details regarding Birmingham council though.
Or it could be a bullshit excuse.
MPs have left both major British political parties with the intention of forming a new party of the ''centre''(It would become the second centrist party in Britain) because apparently politics has lost its way. Now I'm sure that has been pretty much what every liberal poster on here has been saying since 2016. I would thought these posters(And actually liberals in general)would be at least somewhat interesting in what could be the potential policies of this party, how they will push for a second referendum, the alliance they will have to make etc. Yet what are they all talking about - a Corbyn tweet from over half a decade ago.
Last edited:
Is there another bit when she drops the single market part that she says in this clip?
Not really. She said we should never have ruled out membership of the single market, Corbyn ruled that out a while back. Pretty major difference right there.
I can see both sides of it. I agree that in principle it's the same basic situation, but in reality there are contextual factors that make the comparison between an MP defecting and a councillor defecting very different things. I doubt either Corbyn or Austin thought about these things as much as we have to be honest. Austin's grasping for a reason for excuse himself and have a go at Corbyn, whilst Corbyn wont have thought twice about the councillor because it's not really part of his job. I wouldn't expect Corbyn to go out of his way to lay down the law to a defecting councillor in the same way I wouldn't expect a policeman to come into a classroom and tell the kids off for talking over the teacher.
We have local elections in May. I bet as Labour leader he is involved in them.
I will park this point until then.
I do get what you are saying but elections do cost money and running a by-election because one councillor changed allegiances appears over the top to me. Seems there are about 100 councillors in Birmingham council and approximately 20,000 across the UK. I don't think many would want a local by-election for a councillor (I honestly can't remember ever caring enough about the local councils to vote in them tbh) if they changed whereas a shift of 1 MP on a national level out of just 650 of them makes quite a significant difference really.
Well councillors only vote on local issues so the chance there is 1 in a hundred (Birmingham)
Vs the 1 in 650 in parliament
It's funny how the criticism levied at MPs leaving the Labour Party (in part) because of Corbyn can't be applied to Corbyn, even though he was elected on New Labour policies and (ironically) by Tony Blair's mandate. Definitely isn't relevant at all!!!!
It’s worse. Corbyn was elected an MP in a Labour govt. Their manifesto was a set of promises that got them into power. The last labour manifesto didn’t get labour elected so nobody is bound by it.
Last edited:
1. By staying as a Labour MP his local party members always had the opportunity of deselecting him - admittedly this was very difficult prior to 2018 but there was a process in place. He was answerable to those local party members
2. So MPs that are not part of the majority party just get a free pass once elected? Yeah you stood on a particular policy platform, but you didn't win so just do whatever.
The Centre Ground: Where Politics Goes to Die!
how is proportional representation going to help independent mps? they'll get fewer than 1/650 total votes nationally
That's a huge message to Corbyn... Admit there is a problem or sack me basically
I imagine they'd be a party in such elections.
they only agree on one thing: a second referendum, even ukip pretended to have more than one policy as a party
by the time pr gets passed brexit will be over and they'll just a dozen people who dislike corbyn - and why wouldn't voters inclined that way just vote tory?
The whole point is that under PR, new parties would have an easier time of getting electoral representation. So you wouldn't need this particular spectacle in order to try and form one in a short space of time.
And per the latest Opinium poll, 27% of current Labour voters say they don't want either Corbyn or May as PM (8% don't know). So it's not a black and white split between loving Jez and not.
how are people who don't agree with eachother going to form a party? are they going to have chuka and soubry suddenly stop disagreeing about the economy?
what else do this lot agree on?
How violent is their disagreement, exactly? Because they've been hanging around each other for people's vote stuff for a while and don't seem to have fallen out.
Parties tend to be able to hold together when they have disagreements, as long as they don't hate each other. Which seems to be more of a problem with the two main parties.
PR would massively help independent MPs.
PR doesn't have to be nationwide. In fact, I'd be dead against that.
The Single Transferable Vote (STV) where 4-5 constituencies are combined into a super-constituency would give the right mix between local and proportional.
Take a look at my back yard of Kent
It's not a particularly easy job to divide up the Counties. Most of the population are in the larger towns: Maidstone-Aylesford, Margate-Ramsgate, Rochester-Gillingham-Chatham-Rainham, Ashford, Tunbridge Wells, Sittingbourne, etc
You could divide it up 100 ways, I've made a couple of attempts at dividing it up in a logical way
But anyone living on a border is always going to disagree.
In cities, it's obviously easier. You can probably easily think up ways to group London's constituencies together
Whereas out in the sticks, it's a little more difficult.
But anyway going back to my Kent groupings, for the 2017 General Election in Ashford-Maidstone-Aylesford-Faversham, we could have had something like this:
Conservative Candidates (4 candidates):
- Damien Green
- Helen Grant
- Helen Whately
- Tracey Crouch
Labour Candidates (3 candidates):
- Sally Gathern
- Michael Desmond
- Vince Maple
Lib Dems (2 candidates):
- Emily Fermor
- David S. Naghi
Other (1 candidate)
- Mandy Rossi (Green)
- Gerald O'Brien (UKIP)
- John-Wesley Gibson (Christian Peoples)
- Yolande Kenward (Independent)
Based on people's first preference, we'd probably end up with something like this:-
Con - 57.5
Lab - 27.5
Lib Dem - 7.5
UKIP - 4
Green - 2.5
- Damien Green (Con) - 35% (passed)
- Vince Maple (Lab) - 20.01% (passed)
- Helen Whately (Con) - 10% +10.01%
- Tracey Crouch (Con) - 7.5% +2.5%
- Emily Fermor (Lib) - 5%
- Helen Grant (Con) - 5% +2.5%
- Sally Gathern (Lab) - 5%
- Gerald O'Brien (UKIP) - 4%
- David S. Naghi (Lib) - 2.5%
- Michael Desmond (Lab) - 2.5%
- Mandy Rossi (Green) - 2.5%
- John-Wesley Gibson (Christian Peoples) - 0.5%
- Yolande Kenward (Independent) - 0.4%
Damien Green and Vince Maple have reached the 20% +1 vote requirement. So they are elected as the first two MPs. Their remaining votes above the 20% margin are reallocated to the peoples 2nd choices. (There are a few different ways do to this, so let's not get hung up on this at the moment).
Most of Damien's Green's extra votes go to Helen Whately and Tracey Crouch, although some goes to other candidates. Vince Maple (Labour) doesn't have many votes spare after he is elected.
- Helen Whately (Con) - 20.01% (passed)
- Tracey Crouch (Con) - 10%
- Emily Fermor (Lib) - 5%
- Helen Grant (Con) - 7.5%
- Sally Gathern (Lab) - 5%
- Gerald O'Brien (UKIP) - 4%
- David S. Naghi (Lib) - 2.5%
- Michael Desmond (Lab) - 2.5%
- Mandy Rossi (Green) - 2.5%
- John-Wesley Gibson (Christian Peoples) - 0.5%
- Yolande Kenward (Independent) - 0.4%
Helen Whatley has reached the required threshold. 3/4 candidates have now been elected and no one has been elimated yet.
- Tracey Crouch (Con) - 10% +0.25%
- Emily Fermor (Lib) - 5% +0.2% +1.25% +2.5%
- Helen Grant (Con) - 7.5%
- Sally Gathern (Lab) - 5% +0.2% +1.25% +2.5%
- Gerald O'Brien (UKIP) - 4% + 0.25%
- David S. Naghi (Lib) - 2.5% (eliminated)
- Michael Desmond (Lab) - 2.5% (eliminated)
- Mandy Rossi (Green) - 2.5% (eliminated)
- John-Wesley Gibson (Christian Peoples) - 0.5% (eliminated)
- Yolande Kenward (Independent) - 0.4% (eliminated)
The bottom candidates are limited with the lowest ranked person first. Their votes are then re-allocated to voters second choice.
- Tracey Crouch (Con) - 10.25% + 2%
- Emily Fermor (Lib) - 8.95% +0.4%
- Sally Gathern (Lab) - 8.95% +0.1%
- Helen Grant (Con) - 7.5% +2%
- Gerald O'Brien (UKIP) - 4.25% (elminated)
Thankfully even in this reality UKIP haven't managed to get an MP elected in this super constituency. Unfortunately, it's looking like the Tories will be taking the final seat. Labour and the Lib Dems combined only have around 18.5%, and not all Lib Dem voters will have listed Labour candidates as their next choices anyway.
- Tracey Crouch (Con) - 12.25% +8%
- Emily Fermor (Lib) - 9.35% +1%
- Sally Gathern (Lab) - 9.05% +0.5%
- Helen Grant (Con) - 9.5% (eliminated)
Helen Grant is eliminated (sounds of cheers everywhere). Not all the voters next choices go to the last remaining candidate (Tracey Crouch) but enough to get her across the line.
MPs elected in the Ashford-Maidstone district (4 seats); Conservative (3), Labour (1)
Alright - I've done a fantastically terrible job of explaining how an independent candidate can get elected under PR. But then there are no strong indie candidates in this area.
If there was a strong candidate capable of taking ~10% of the vote, once the other parties start running out of candidates the votes start swinging towards him/her. Who would the Labour voters prefer, an Independent or a Tory? Who would the Greens and UKIP and the Lib Dems prefer.
the strong Independent candidate can pick up votes from all the other parties once their candidates are eliminated - if he/she has a similar outlook to them.
An ex-Labour TIG could easily pick up a seat in a strong Labour area. An ex-Tory TIG could pick up a seat in a strong Tory area. etc
how is a party going to function when half are pro austerity and half are against it? one interview they're saying we'll do this to the economy the next something wholly different? the electorate might be stupid af but they're not that stupid
All of them
they would lose in that system too, for the same reason they'd lose in fptp, their support isn't localised enough to win enough votes in a cluster of constituencies
no they wouldn't, the tories got ripped for having a shit manifesto that wasn't fully costed, let alone going in without one
And it got them 40+% of the vote.
I mean don't get me wrong, TIG are obviously a bunch of clowns, but there's fairly little evidence to suggest that the electorate at the large actually care about it. I mean, feck, 52% of people voted for a magic bus.
yeah but they had a magic bus and some agreement of what to put on the side of the magic bus, there's no such consensus here