Comments on: For the record…

By: Andrea Gill

Andrea Gill — Wed, 02 Jun 2010 15:15:34 +0000

the book in question was written by a bunch of right wing idealogues with a specific agenda in mind

Funny that at the same time, Vince Cable is often also touted as being at odds with Clegg, Laws etc.

By: James Graham

James Graham — Wed, 02 Jun 2010 12:59:23 +0000

No spam filtering. I don’t think I’m caching either. I’ll have a look.

By: MatGB

MatGB — Wed, 02 Jun 2010 12:56:57 +0000

Well, sort of, the coalition parties do compete in elections in Australia, and a quick reread of the history shows that parties emerge, compete, merge into something else then coalesce again.

Sure, there are two main blocks, but the Nationals/Liberals/Country Liberals and Liberal Nationals exist as separate, competing parties, that normally, but don’t always, form a coalition.

I predict, for example, a significant rise in 1st prefs for UKIP, especially in safe Tory seats, which will probably see them increase membership and take defections, especially when Tory MPs realise they won’t automatically lose their seat if they jump ship.

I also predict a rise in 1st pref support for the Greens.

But, like you say, predictions effectively impossible. We’ll see.

BTW, amd I & you getting spam filtered again? No comments displaying even after a refresh.

By: James Graham

James Graham — Wed, 02 Jun 2010 12:45:42 +0000

It is the worst outcome I can see assuming the party basically stays together, the coalition last five years and the boundary changes aren’t a total stitch up. Generally speaking all predictions are bunk, and this one is no different.

A point about AV: one thing it doesn’t do very well is allow new parties to emerge. The general feeling is that it tends to preserve political systems in aspic. So it is that Australia was a two-party system, introduced AV, and remains a two-party system despite the Democrats’ best efforts. We would expect to remain a 2.5 party system but other parties will continue to struggle to gain a toehold.

If it leads to further reform, all well and good. But it won’t lead to greater pluralism by itself.

By: MatGB

MatGB — Wed, 02 Jun 2010 12:40:56 +0000

As low as 30. So the worst prediction is that we fall to way above where we were pre-1997?

That’s the worst outcome?

Of course, given we have both AV and a major set of boundary changes, which if implemented fully will lose us Scottish MPs, we can’t in any way predict the number of MPs we’ll get, especially given we don’t know how things will pan out.

Regardless, even if the number of first preferences we get collapse, can we really see those we normally squeeze in areas like the SW not giving us 2nd/3rd preferences over the Tories? There’ll be a few partisan Labourites/Greenies who won’t, but overall, I don’t think it’ll hurt us most.

Media narrative is we collapse. A lot of anti-Tory partisans have it as a self fulfilling prophecy. TBH?

I care not. If we get AV, and a promise of further reforms from Labour, then it matters not what happens tot he party, it matters that the voting system allows new parties to emerge more easily.