Snap General Election called

[Son of Mathonwy]

I think there's a reasonable chance that it might tone down the crazies somewhat. Right now, the Tories have an 80 78 64 52 seat majority, which was voted for by a lot of very sensible voters, but has been controlled by the bat-shit loony fringe for a chunk of the last 5 years, because that was who had wrested control of the party. Same with the fringe leading us from "Of course we're not going to leave the single market" to "Brexit means Brexit".

The "Big Tents" thing that we have going on right now means that anyone can claim that the will of the people was X and that they have an electoral mandate for it, despite that never really having been on the ballot paper.

I don't think I'd go full PR - I'd be in favour of the Kiwi MMP system, as that seems to strike a good balance between having a local MP while still driving a broadly proportionate result.

Puja

I'm not familiar with the Kiwi method, but I do agree that some local accountability is important, especially as local democracy is on its arse totally, and often the only recourse is to go to your MP (who tend to ignore most petitioners unless they are party donors).

I was just reminded of the importance of having a local MP recently by a friend of mine who lives in Nottingham and had to go to Nadia Whittome about a repair on a lift in the housing they're living in (they are disabled and live on the fourth floor, so it was kinda important) - 6 months of trying with the building management sorted in 48 hours by her getting involved. I've always been impressed with her as an MP from the outside.

The Kiwi method is really cool*. You have X seats for an area, of which half are constituency MPs that are elected with FPtP as per normal. The other half are then filled up from the lists that the parties provide, in order to make the whole number of X seats proportionate.

So say you have 20% Con, 45% Lab, 12% Lib Dem, 14% Reform, 9% Green in the South West and let's fictionally say that there's 100 MPs allocated to that area. So 50 of them are FPtP, which might mean 33 Labour MPs, 12 Lib Dem, 4 Cons, 1 Green. The other 50 would then be handed out so that we get the 20/44/9/14/7 split, so that's 16 Cons, 12 Lab, 0 Lib Dem, 14 Reform, 8 Green.

Puja


*Okay, so I'm a nerd, but it's still clever.

Agreed, the Kiwi system is about the best currently in operation (to the best of my knowledge). NB it is a form of PR.

My preferred system (not in operation anywhere) would be the Kiwi system except that the 'top-up' MPs are chosen from the party's losing candidates in other seats, and selected in descending order of vote share in their constituencies. That way, you get a reasonable amount of legitimacy for all the MPs and you avoid unpalatable Mandelson types, or mates of the party leaders getting put at the top of the list.

[Which Tyler]

The Kiwi method is really cool*. You have X seats for an area, of which half are constituency MPs that are elected with FPtP as per normal. The other half are then filled up from the lists that the parties provide, in order to make the whole number of X seats proportionate.

So say you have 20% Con, 45% Lab, 12% Lib Dem, 14% Reform, 9% Green in the South West and let's fictionally say that there's 100 MPs allocated to that area. So 50 of them are FPtP, which might mean 33 Labour MPs, 12 Lib Dem, 4 Cons, 1 Green. The other 50 would then be handed out so that we get the 20/44/9/14/7 split, so that's 16 Cons, 12 Lab, 0 Lib Dem, 14 Reform, 8 Green.

Agreed, the Kiwi system is about the best currently in operation (to the best of my knowledge). NB it is a form of PR.

My preferred system (not in operation anywhere) would be the Kiwi system except that the 'top-up' MPs are chosen from the party's losing candidates in other seats, and selected in descending order of vote share in their constituencies. That way, you get a reasonable amount of legitimacy for all the MPs and you avoid unpalatable Mandelson types, or mates of the party leaders getting put at the top of the list.

Gotta say - that sounds like an excellent proposal.

[Sandydragon]

The Kiwi method is really cool*. You have X seats for an area, of which half are constituency MPs that are elected with FPtP as per normal. The other half are then filled up from the lists that the parties provide, in order to make the whole number of X seats proportionate.

So say you have 20% Con, 45% Lab, 12% Lib Dem, 14% Reform, 9% Green in the South West and let's fictionally say that there's 100 MPs allocated to that area. So 50 of them are FPtP, which might mean 33 Labour MPs, 12 Lib Dem, 4 Cons, 1 Green. The other 50 would then be handed out so that we get the 20/44/9/14/7 split, so that's 16 Cons, 12 Lab, 0 Lib Dem, 14 Reform, 8 Green.

Agreed, the Kiwi system is about the best currently in operation (to the best of my knowledge). NB it is a form of PR.

My preferred system (not in operation anywhere) would be the Kiwi system except that the 'top-up' MPs are chosen from the party's losing candidates in other seats, and selected in descending order of vote share in their constituencies. That way, you get a reasonable amount of legitimacy for all the MPs and you avoid unpalatable Mandelson types, or mates of the party leaders getting put at the top of the list.

Gotta say - that sounds like an excellent proposal.

I like that. My big issue with a list is that it will inevitably be full of party people who would be unwelcome to many voters. If we went this this idea then the top up candidates would have been selected to contest a seat in the area and should be more interested in representing that area. It would reduce the chance of 2 types of MP, those with local responsibilities and those who can just swan about and be lazy. This way those who didnt have a direct seat could have some regional attachment and thus responsibility for helping with the constituents.

Thats 2 days on the trot we have all agreed on politics. I sense the internet might break

[Son of Mathonwy]

Agreed, the Kiwi system is about the best currently in operation (to the best of my knowledge). NB it is a form of PR.

My preferred system (not in operation anywhere) would be the Kiwi system except that the 'top-up' MPs are chosen from the party's losing candidates in other seats, and selected in descending order of vote share in their constituencies. That way, you get a reasonable amount of legitimacy for all the MPs and you avoid unpalatable Mandelson types, or mates of the party leaders getting put at the top of the list.

Gotta say - that sounds like an excellent proposal.

I like that. My big issue with a list is that it will inevitably be full of party people who would be unwelcome to many voters. If we went this this idea then the top up candidates would have been selected to contest a seat in the area and should be more interested in representing that area. It would reduce the chance of 2 types of MP, those with local responsibilities and those who can just swan about and be lazy. This way those who didnt have a direct seat could have some regional attachment and thus responsibility for helping with the constituents.

Thats 2 days on the trot we have all agreed on politics. I sense the internet might break

It gets a little messy if we give local responsibilities to the top-up MPs.
As it stands, if we did that, the system would give us some seats with a single MP and some with two (or more) MPs. On the face of it that would mean some constituencies being overrepresented, which is not ideal.

Alternatively a slightly different version of the system would have a fixed number of MPs so all of the party's MPs are chosen in descending order of vote share in their constituencies. However to get the proportional result some parties would not get all their winning candidates into parliament (ie their relatively less popular winning candidates) (eg the SNP) whereas some would get their most popular losing candidates elected (eg LibDems, Greens, Reform). So it might be messy and no doubt some people would claim it was 'not fair'. And a number of the candidates would represent a constituency they didn't stand in, which is far from ideal.

Or we just accept that some MPs have local responsibilities, and some don't. Maybe we find a way to allocate other kinds of parliamentary work to the top-up MPs so they are kept busy (or don't pay them so much?). This might be the safest way to go.

But whichever version is used it's vastly better that FPTP.

[Which Tyler]

It gets a little messy if we give local responsibilities to the top-up MPs.

Define "local"
We're already split between national, regional, county, town and parish councils.
From the above example, half the MP would be constituency (more-or-less town council level) whilst the other half would be regional. Without giving it a huge amount of thought, they could easily have regional-level local responsibility - or stand in at the more local level for any MP appointed to cabinet who may (should) not have time to do too much on the local level at the same time (and other issues with cabinet ministers acting on behalf of random constituent #7)

Admission of bias for all to see:
I've long advocated strong, devolved parliaments at the regional level, more or less equivalent in authority to the Scottish Parliament, with a central government to determine national policy and limits on the regional governments, made up with nominations from the regional parliaments. I know it's a whole new(ish) level of bureaucracy, but mostly (far from entirely) as a redistribution.

[Which Tyler]

May election as good as confirmed.
Laurence Robertson (my absentee MP) has started advertising on social media and even done a radio interview - unheard of outside of election season.

About the only thing he's got to boast about is a desire to prevent smuggling in of poor breed-stock puppys and kittens, but that's what he's running with.
Even then, I suspect it's because "smuggling living beings in from the continent = bad", as his voting record on animal welfare is pretty poor IIRC.

Given that, of course, it's always worth reminding people that actions speak louder than words - you can look up your own MP's record here: https://www.theyworkforyou.com/

[Sandydragon]

May election as good as confirmed.
Laurence Robertson (my absentee MP) has started advertising on social media and even done a radio interview - unheard of outside of election season.

About the only thing he's got to boast about is a desire to prevent smuggling in of poor breed-stock puppys and kittens, but that's what he's running with.
Even then, I suspect it's because "smuggling living beings in from the continent = bad", as his voting record on animal welfare is pretty poor IIRC.

Given that, of course, it's always worth reminding people that actions speak louder than words - you can look up your own MP's record here: https://www.theyworkforyou.com/

Maybe, but if 2nd May is no longer available then its a big risk to hold a GE after what is likely to be a disastrous set of local elections. Borderline bonkers in fact.

[Which Tyler]

If my maths (and recollection of procedure) is correct, then a May 2nd election would need to be called on or before March 26th.

That "If" is pretty big, however

[Sandydragon]

You're right, there is still a possibility that Sunak might go for May 2nd. This surprisingly helpful website gives the detail

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/re ... /cbp-9921/

I think it would be a shock, many commentators are looking for later in the year to allow for something to turn up that might affect the polls. But, I suspect that after 2nd May's drubbing in the local elections, Tory MPs will almost certainly submit their letters to the 1922 and that number only has to reach 53 or so to trigger a contest, at which point Sunak can't call an election (or it puts the king in a very difficult position if asked to dissolve parliament).

Since Sunak isn't going to have to worry about life post-election, the argument that they are hanging on for another 6 months of paychecks doesn't work, although no doubt that many of his colleagues will be pressurising him to hang on for as long as possible. If he's interested in saving as many Conservative seats as possible then its really hard to tell whether to go early or later. Except for campaigning over Christmas which will piss everyone off, any date in the year is now as good/bad as another given that the budget has happened and nothing has changed. It might be that Labour implode under a certain issue, but Israel/Gaza hasn't brought them to that level, I'm not sure what actually would.

For Sunak, maybe the big issue is whether he can continue to hold on that long?

[Sandydragon]

I suppose the other consideration is this awful Rwanda Bill. It will surely pass at some point despite the Lord's rear guard action and become law. Will it result in flights to Rwanda for the tiny percentage of asylum seekers sent there? Will the effective deportation of c300 people out of the tens of thousands crossing the channel or waiting for the results of their case assessment be something Sunak can crow about and point to action being taken? It seems ludicrous but it might be something to fire up the right-wing base who might have felt lethargic about voting.

Of course a decent summer could see crossings increase as the weather improves which would destroy any government narrative that it was being tough on immigration, but I can't see what else this government is trying to achieve at the moment.

[Puja]

I suppose the other consideration is this awful Rwanda Bill. It will surely pass at some point despite the Lord's rear guard action and become law. Will it result in flights to Rwanda for the tiny percentage of asylum seekers sent there? Will the effective deportation of c300 people out of the tens of thousands crossing the channel or waiting for the results of their case assessment be something Sunak can crow about and point to action being taken? It seems ludicrous but it might be something to fire up the right-wing base who might have felt lethargic about voting.

Of course a decent summer could see crossings increase as the weather improves which would destroy any government narrative that it was being tough on immigration, but I can't see what else this government is trying to achieve at the moment.

I think the other hope is for a drop in interest rates - the Bank of England is being recalcitrant on it right now, but if inflation continues to fall, they will eventually be forced to loosen the purse strings. At that point, Sunak can point and say, "See, I fixed the economy that we broke like I promised!" and hope to get a bounce that way.

October seems like a difficult time though - half the political attention will be focussed on the USA's impending existential election between Weekend At Bernies and Birth Of A Nation/Triumph of the Will. No idea whose advantage that would work to though.

Puja

[Sandydragon]

I suppose the other consideration is this awful Rwanda Bill. It will surely pass at some point despite the Lord's rear guard action and become law. Will it result in flights to Rwanda for the tiny percentage of asylum seekers sent there? Will the effective deportation of c300 people out of the tens of thousands crossing the channel or waiting for the results of their case assessment be something Sunak can crow about and point to action being taken? It seems ludicrous but it might be something to fire up the right-wing base who might have felt lethargic about voting.

Of course a decent summer could see crossings increase as the weather improves which would destroy any government narrative that it was being tough on immigration, but I can't see what else this government is trying to achieve at the moment.

I think the other hope is for a drop in interest rates - the Bank of England is being recalcitrant on it right now, but if inflation continues to fall, they will eventually be forced to loosen the purse strings. At that point, Sunak can point and say, "See, I fixed the economy that we broke like I promised!" and hope to get a bounce that way.

October seems like a difficult time though - half the political attention will be focussed on the USA's impending existential election between Weekend At Bernies and Birth Of A Nation/Triumph of the Will. No idea whose advantage that would work to though.

Puja

Totally agree. A slightly improved economy might help, but I do feel that it will be hard for sunak to avoid the blame for it tanking in the first place. But arguably it could keep 10-20 seats.

The us election is intriguing. I think that most brits would consider trump to be insane, or just unfit for office, so probably hoping for a democrat win. I’m not sure how that would play out in our election other than by the association between the Tory right and the likes of Bannon etc. probably not a big enough issue to affect our election to any significant degree, other than the slit attention of the media.

[Sandydragon]

I suppose the other consideration is this awful Rwanda Bill. It will surely pass at some point despite the Lord's rear guard action and become law. Will it result in flights to Rwanda for the tiny percentage of asylum seekers sent there? Will the effective deportation of c300 people out of the tens of thousands crossing the channel or waiting for the results of their case assessment be something Sunak can crow about and point to action being taken? It seems ludicrous but it might be something to fire up the right-wing base who might have felt lethargic about voting.

Of course a decent summer could see crossings increase as the weather improves which would destroy any government narrative that it was being tough on immigration, but I can't see what else this government is trying to achieve at the moment.

I think the other hope is for a drop in interest rates - the Bank of England is being recalcitrant on it right now, but if inflation continues to fall, they will eventually be forced to loosen the purse strings. At that point, Sunak can point and say, "See, I fixed the economy that we broke like I promised!" and hope to get a bounce that way.

October seems like a difficult time though - half the political attention will be focussed on the USA's impending existential election between Weekend At Bernies and Birth Of A Nation/Triumph of the Will. No idea whose advantage that would work to though.

Puja

Totally agree. A slightly improved economy might help, but I do feel that it will be hard for sunak to avoid the blame for it tanking in the first place. But arguably it could keep 10-20 seats.

The us election is intriguing. I think that most brits would consider trump to be insane, or just unfit for office, so probably hoping for a democrat win. I’m not sure how that would play out in our election other than by the association between the Tory right and the likes of Bannon etc. probably not a big enough issue to affect our election to any significant degree, other than the slit attention of the media.

On cue, Andrea Leadsom pops up to tell us all that the cost of living crisis is over as inflation has fallen so far. One suspects that most people wont agree with that given that interest rates havent yet filtered down to mortgages plus prices are still significantly higher than they were prior to Truss and Kwartangs experiments which is still causing many people problems.

[Which Tyler]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-68776913
Good to know that price pressures are easing.
Not quite sure how that marries up with a 4.4% increase on sales leading to a 260% increase in profits, or the ever increasing use of food banks (no figures available for the same timeframe).

It's almost like supermarkets (and other businesses) are creating inflation through price gouging, rather than reluctantly increasing prices as their costs go up through inflation.



In other news, and more related to an upcoming election (thread title, though this seems to have evolved into a generic UK politics)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68773704
A new law to make assault of shop workers illegal - as opposed to the existing law where assault of anyone, including shop workers, is already illegal...
Unfortunately, this really does seem to be the best that this government can come up with.

[Puja]

In other news, and more related to an upcoming election (thread title, though this seems to have evolved into a generic UK politics)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68773704
A new law to make assault of shop workers illegal - as opposed to the existing law where assault of anyone, including shop workers, is already illegal...
Unfortunately, this really does seem to be the best that this government can come up with.

"Creating a new specific offence of assault against shop workers is already Labour policy." Of course it is. Both from the aspect of it being a useless populist gimmick and the aspect of the Conservatives suddenly being keen to bring it into law.

Puja

[Which Tyler]

Along with their other principle legislative policy, of labour's NomDom tax status thing (but don't with enough warning to allow Mrs Sunak to put her money through the loophole).

Are people still wondering why labour was making policy announcements 4 years ago?
For me personally, if something's a good idea, then it's a good idea, whoever came up with it (same with bad ideas) - but to try applying that to real-world politics requires a completely different system of politics - collaborative rather than confrontational. For which, PR (in some form or other, I like the variations on NZ's system that's been suggested here) is the closest we can realistically achieve without abolishing capitalism.

[Son of Mathonwy]

In other news, and more related to an upcoming election (thread title, though this seems to have evolved into a generic UK politics)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68773704
A new law to make assault of shop workers illegal - as opposed to the existing law where assault of anyone, including shop workers, is already illegal...
Unfortunately, this really does seem to be the best that this government can come up with.

"Creating a new specific offence of assault against shop workers is already Labour policy." Of course it is. Both from the aspect of it being a useless populist gimmick and the aspect of the Conservatives suddenly being keen to bring it into law.

Puja

Genius

The new offence will carry a maximum sentence of six months.
. . .

The Sentencing Bill, which is currently going through Parliament, would mean sentences of 12 months or less would be suspended and served in the community, although a prison sentence could be imposed in exceptional circumstances

But seriously, how about enforcing the law you already have? Ie having enough police and court time to deal with assault.

Great to see Labour doing their damnedest to make themselves indistinguishable from the Tories. Badenoch 2029 here we come.

[Donny osmond]

Yup, absolutely no difference between Labour and the Tories, none at all...

Labour lead at 26 points in latest YouGov poll for The Times

CON 19 (-1)
LAB 45 (+2)
LIB DEM 8 (=)
REF UK 15 (-1)
GRN 7 (-1)

[Puja]

Yup, absolutely no difference between Labour and the Tories, none at all...

Labour lead at 26 points in latest YouGov poll for The Times

CON 19 (-1)
LAB 45 (+2)
LIB DEM 8 (=)
REF UK 15 (-1)
GRN 7 (-1)

There's less than I'd like, considering that Wes Streeting wrote a column in the Sun talking about expanding the use of private sector in the NHS to cut waiting lists and saying that they won't let "howls of outrage from middle-class lefties" stop them.

Mind, the one relief is that, if that opinion poll is replicated in a general election, there won't be a risk of Badenoch 2029 because she'll have lost her seat. Reform doing an excellent job of splitting the vote. Plus I'm hoping for the bonus that there will be public outrage at them getting 15% of the vote and 0 MPs which will lead to more pressure for electoral reform.

Puja

[Donny osmond]

Yup, absolutely no difference between Labour and the Tories, none at all...

Labour lead at 26 points in latest YouGov poll for The Times

CON 19 (-1)
LAB 45 (+2)
LIB DEM 8 (=)
REF UK 15 (-1)
GRN 7 (-1)

There's less than I'd like, considering that Wes Streeting wrote a column in the Sun talking about expanding the use of private sector in the NHS to cut waiting lists and saying that they won't let "howls of outrage from middle-class lefties" stop them.

Mind, the one relief is that, if that opinion poll is replicated in a general election, there won't be a risk of Badenoch 2029 because she'll have lost her seat. Reform doing an excellent job of splitting the vote. Plus I'm hoping for the bonus that there will be public outrage at them getting 15% of the vote and 0 MPs which will lead to more pressure for electoral reform.

Puja

Given how entrenched so many peoples votes are, I'd say that particular lead is as big as it's ever going to get.

Completely agree with your 2nd para

[Sandydragon]

Yup, absolutely no difference between Labour and the Tories, none at all...

Labour lead at 26 points in latest YouGov poll for The Times

CON 19 (-1)
LAB 45 (+2)
LIB DEM 8 (=)
REF UK 15 (-1)
GRN 7 (-1)

Only if people discount the potential for coherent government versus total chaos. That’s counting for more than policies at the moment.

[Son of Mathonwy]

Yup, absolutely no difference between Labour and the Tories, none at all...

Labour lead at 26 points in latest YouGov poll for The Times

CON 19 (-1)
LAB 45 (+2)
LIB DEM 8 (=)
REF UK 15 (-1)
GRN 7 (-1)

There's less than I'd like, considering that Wes Streeting wrote a column in the Sun talking about expanding the use of private sector in the NHS to cut waiting lists and saying that they won't let "howls of outrage from middle-class lefties" stop them.

Mind, the one relief is that, if that opinion poll is replicated in a general election, there won't be a risk of Badenoch 2029 because she'll have lost her seat. Reform doing an excellent job of splitting the vote. Plus I'm hoping for the bonus that there will be public outrage at them getting 15% of the vote and 0 MPs which will lead to more pressure for electoral reform.

Puja

Streeting is the classic Tory-lite Blairite.

I can't see a Tory collapse big enough to take Badenoch down in deepest Essex. In 2019 she got 63% of the vote, ahead of the LibDems on 19%. No Tory is going to lose that seat. (Although I'd be delighted to be proved wrong )

Even if Reform don't cut a deal with the Tories, at least half of those claiming they'll vote Reform will slip back to their real party when the chips are down. It won't be as bad (for the Tories) as the polls say today. Although it will be bad.

Yeah, I hope there'll be electoral reform but that's only likely if there's a hung parliament. As always there's no incentive for the outright winner to change the system. And the newspapers are never going to push it (other than the Independent).

[Sandydragon]

The escalating situation in the Middle East may play to the Tories advantage. British military in direct conflict with Iran is an opportunity for a prime minister to look statesmanlike, it might bring a few votes back. I suspect not enough and Starmer is no Corbin when it comes to foreign policy so it won’t be decisive.

[Which Tyler]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... ote-system


Get back to work peasants!

[Son of Mathonwy]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... ote-system


Get back to work peasants!

Hopefully there's not enough time to get this shit into the law. The sooner these bastards are gone the better.