21 replies to this topic

[Wolford6]

The Tories reneged on a promise to back LibDem-proposed changes to the House of Lords.

In retaliation, Clegg has refused to back changes to Parliamentary Constituency Boundaries. This helps labour because the changes would have favoured the Tories.

Look out for Clegg sucking up to Miliband hoping for another Coalition Government after the next election.

Miliband's gormless enough to go along with it.

Closer to home, in Bradford there now won't be the "Moslem" constituency that the proposed boundary changes would have engineered.

[Methven Hornet]

So, in reality, the Tory backbencher's have spat the dummy. Good on Clegg, I just hope he sticks to his word this time as the Tories need to learn that reckless and selfish actions sometimes have consequences - a bit like the way you'd treat young children, really.

I can understand the naivety of the Lib Dems in the early days of the coalition - they were eager for power after so many years in the wilderness - but like I said at the time when you sup with the devil you use a long spoon. All of the constitutional changes - voting reform, constituency boundaries, bringing democracy to the House of Lords - should have been put into one Reform Bill. Late in the day, the Lib Dems have grasped that fact.

Yet again, though, it is proof that Westminster is particularly incapable of fundamentally reforming itself. A democratic second chamber - a fundamental part of any bicameral democratic system - should have been introduced, at the very latest, in the early years of the 20th century. Yet here we are, well into the 21st century, and we still have laws made by appointees, accidents of birth, and bishops. Democracy it ain't.

[gingerjon]

If Clegg does stand his ground then it's a spectacular miscalculation from the Tory backbenches.

The distance they're behind currently on the boundaries as they are sees a comfortable Labour win.

[Wolford6]

Surely, he's got to resign as Deputy PM.

[JohnM]

So, in reality, the Tory backbencher's have spat the dummy. Good on Clegg, I just hope he sticks to his word this time as the Tories need to learn that reckless and selfish actions sometimes have consequences - a bit like the way you'd treat young children, really.

I can understand the naivety of the Lib Dems in the early days of the coalition - they were eager for power after so many years in the wilderness - but like I said at the time when you sup with the devil you use a long spoon. All of the constitutional changes - voting reform, constituency boundaries, bringing democracy to the House of Lords - should have been put into one Reform Bill. Late in the day, the Lib Dems have grasped that fact.

Yet again, though, it is proof that Westminster is particularly incapable of fundamentally reforming itself. A democratic second chamber - a fundamental part of any bicameral democratic system - should have been introduced, at the very latest, in the early years of the 20th century. Yet here we are, well into the 21st century, and we still have laws made by appointees, accidents of birth, and bishops. Democracy it ain't.

Quite agree.

[Griff9of13]

Surely, he's got to resign as Deputy PM.

If he were to do that he'd efecivly pull the plug on the coalition.

[Wolford6]

If he were to do that he'd efecivly pull the plug on the coalition.

... and show an uncharacteristic sign of integrity.

[Griff9of13]

... and show an uncharacteristic sign of integrity.

Nah, he's a politician and a party leader therefore sacrificed any vestiges of integrity that he ever had to get to where he is now.

[Methven Hornet]

Surely, he's got to resign as Deputy PM.

Why? If anything it's Cameron that's having problems with his backbenchers.

[Wiltshire Rhino]

Why? If anything it's Cameron that's having problems with his backbenchers.

I'd rather have backbenchers/MPs who vote for what THEY believe in than ones who just "toe the party line".

Edited by Wiltshire Rhino, 07 August 2012 - 06:27 AM.

[gingerjon]

I'd rather have backbenchers/MPs who vote for what THEY believe in than ones who just "toe the party line".

This has been the most free government in that regard since ... well, pretty much since forever.

And so Camoclegg get told off for lack of leadership.

[Futtocks]

If Clegg does stand his ground then it's a spectacular miscalculation from the Tory backbenches.

Do Amazon sell backbones?

[gingerjon]

Do Amazon sell backbones?

It's okay he's got Simon Hughes to give the Tory backbenchers the straight choice today.

[nadera78]

It's okay he's got Simon Hughes to give the Tory backbenchers the straight choice today.

I like what you did there.

[Methven Hornet]

I'd rather have backbenchers/MPs who vote for what THEY believe in than ones who just "toe the party line".

I'd rather have have an parliament that was democratic, but there you go.

At least we won't get the Tory gerrymandering now.

[JohnM]

Why is levelling the playing field "Gerrymandering"?

Why is removing the built-in bias of the Parliamentary constituencies towards labour "gerrymandering"?

[tonyXIII]

Why is levelling the playing field "Gerrymandering"?

Why is removing the built-in bias of the Parliamentary constituencies towards labour "gerrymandering"?

The outcome might well be fairer, but it is still changing the boundaries to favour your party (from a Tory pov). Therefore, it can (and will) be called gerrymandering. Like I said, the result might be 'fairer', but is still open to the charge of gerrymandering.

[Steve May]

Why is levelling the playing field "Gerrymandering"?

Why is removing the built-in bias of the Parliamentary constituencies towards labour "gerrymandering"?

For the millionth time.....


The reason that the current system slightly favours Labour is that the Labour vote is more concentrated in a smaller number of constituencies. The Tory vote is more spread out. It has nothing, at all, to do with the size of constituencies. There is an Electoral Reform Society paper on this and I put together a post on this forum demonstrating the effect, with worked examples, in the run up to the AV referendum.

Changing the boundaries is an attempt to tilt the electoral system in the Tories favour. It's not correcting anything other than the aberration (in Tory eyes) of four successive failures by the Tories to win an election.

And counting the registered voters rather than actual people in each constituency is open corruption. Nothing more, nothing less.

[gingerjon]

And counting the registered voters rather than actual people in each constituency is open corruption.

I hear this a lot but, without the bluster, can you explain why?

[JohnM]

For the millionth time.....

Hmm...is that same level of accuracy maintained throughout your posts on this topic?

Certainly, the ERS does not pretend to be impartial on this issue, nor, I am sure, would its Council members expect it to be neutral, given their own political stances.