Election update

Well its election season up here in Scotland and I need to decide who to vote for…probably today, as I’ll be using a postal vote this time (so you could say I’m about to go postal :DD). I’m inclined, I have to say, towards SNP….no, I’m not a raving loony Independence supporter, nor am going to start giving out about the Highland Clearances, or Queen Mary, or Culloden, or William Wallace :##, etc. The fact is the SNP ain’t doing too bad a job, so why break up a good think?……Although every time I hear Alex Salmond talk I’m often reminded of the dog in that Churchill ad ;D. Bottom line, you can still vote SNP and tell Alex to play the Scotland the Brave in his own time if and when an independence referendum comes up.

What worries me about voting Labour or Lib dem is that both of these parties Scottish wings seem to need permission from London to tie their own shoelaces. This undermines the whole point of devolved government. Neither of these parties seem to have worked out that whole the point of the Scottish parliament is that the party in Scotland makes the decisions, rather than waiting on Milbank tower (or downing street) to tell them what to do. The SNP, Greens and (oddly enough) the Scottish Conservatives 8| seem to have worked this one out, hence why I’d be only interested in voting for one of these candidates (while the many socialist candidates up here have also worked this one out, they spend too much time fighting each other to waste ones time with :lalala:). None of the three parties I’ve mentioned above, but the SNP, has any chance of getting elected in my constituency (this is Glasgow, every night after an election we form into gangs to hunt down anyone who voted conservative, any found, who aren’t an Orangeman…or Rangers fan, are tarred, feathered and left at the outskirts of Edinburgh :>>). So given that I’m inclined to vote for the SNP anyway, I may as well. I’ll probably put the Green down for the party list, as I don’t want to give all my support to SNP (like I said, I’m not some raving loony Braveheart watching independence supporter)…but I’m thinking that one over right now.

Which brings us to the AV referendum. Obviously I’ll be voting yes, really it’s a no brainer. The current first past the post (FPtP) system is unfair and has numerous potential flaws. FPtP makes it harder to unseat sitting MP’s, particularly those in “safe” seats like Glasgow (for Labour). The MP’s know that they can pretty much get away with doing anything (or indeed doing nothing) as it would take a massive swing in support to unseat them under FPtP. This leads to a lot of political complacency, something that always needs to be combated in any democracy. Take America, also run under a FPtP system. It’s been warped by this system into a dull two party system :yawn:, where you could barely squeeze a loo roll between the two party’s policies. Many Congressmen in America actually run unopposed, as there’s little point in the Democrat’s, or anyone else for that matter, challenging a Republican incumbent in Texas, or challenging a Democrat in a work class ward of San Francisco.

Also, FPtP leads to negative voting and negative campaigning. The truth is that under FPtP many of us vote against someone, rather than for the candidate we want. For example, imagine you’re a Labour supporter on the left of the party, but you’re local labour candidate is basically an incompetent Yes-man whose little more than a Tory with a red tie on. However, there’s little point in voting for anyone else (we’ll say for sake of argument you like the local lib dem candidate) as you’d be just throwing away your vote. The labour guy is the only one who has half a chance of beating the conservative candidate, who we’ll assume for sake of argument, is some Tory Tosser eurosceptic whom the Daily mail is always complimenting. Obviously in this scenario, you’d probably just have to hold your nose and vote labour 😳 (i.e against the Tory’s) as opposed to voting for someone you liked (the lib dem). And of course we could easily reverse this situation as well (i.e you’re a eurosceptic, but you’re local Tory is pro-eu, but you vote for him anyway just to stop the lib dems or labour).

This negative voting behaviour also encourages negative campaigning, as it’s easier to just spread scare stories about your opponent as opposed to presuade people to vote for you because they like your policies. In the American election recently the vast majority of campaign ads tend to be negative ones. And the candidates often spend more time complaining about the other guy than explaining why voting for them was such a good idea. This seems to be spreading to the UK. We had a pretty quiet campaign up here in Glasgow last election (because the local labour guys were so safe they didn’t even bother campaigning nor did anyone bother trying to unseat them) but more of the election literature I saw was negative than positive (interesting aside, last time, the BNP literature came in the letterbox at the same time as the Tory party stuff….this time the BNP and lib dem stuff came thro at the same time…..am I reading a little too much into this :crazy:). The AV system will dampen down such trends and encourage more competition for seats. It will ensure MP’s have to sing for their supper.

But AV will lead to an eternity of weak, squabbling, coalition governments…
Not it won’t! Firstly, its still possible for a government to form an overall majority under AV if they get enough support. Tony Blair would have won the latter in both of his first two elections, as would the Tory’s under Thatcher. Also on the core policies of government you’ll often find widespread cross party support for most things (e.g staying in the EU, staying out of the Euro, fighting climate change, about 70% of all economic and health policy, going to war with the French if they invade, etc ;D.). Its only the details of how these policies are implemented, or other less urgent issues that usually slows things down, and in a crisis such squabbling can be easily deferred to another day. Up here in Scotland the SNP, despite being a minority government with no formal coalition agreement, has got by okay.

Also generally in any coalition, one party, usually the largest dominates things. The partner gets a few of his key policies tied into the government manifesto, but aside from that, they’re only real power is the ability to effectively veto policy if the bigger party begins to misbehave. Or bring down the government if the larger party starts to abuse its power. The AV will limit the powers of governments charge is actually a good thing rather than a bad thing. The truth is we want to limit the power of governments. There are many occasions where majority governments will drive through legislation that they know is immensely unpopular with the people, and indeed their own party, but by virtue of their majority they can just ignore having to have a democratic debate about the matter and use the whips to enforce party discipline.

Take the Iraq war. Had Labour been in a coalition at the time, its very likely this coalition partner would have dug in the heels and said No! :no: or demanded a more in depth debate both in parliament (the official debate here only lasted a few hours) and in public. A more in depth debate about policy often leads to flaws in the policy being quickly identified, the recent bill on selling off the forests was a good example. In the case of the Iraq war, its probable the sexing up of the Dodgy Dossier would have been exposed. Which not only decreases the chances of Britain going to war, but also means that Congress won’t have voted for it once news travelled across the pond that Bush was telling porkies. In short it is this first past the post system that gave us the Iraq war and 8 years of Bush (and if you’re a Tory 14 years of Tony Blair).

There are indeed situations in Europe where its taken an inordinately long time to form a government or where they have formed weak governments that have collapsed quickly. This is, I would argue, more a matter of internal politics in these countries than anything to do with AV. Take Belgium (please take it away! ;D), the reason they are having problems is that secretly a lot of the people on both sides want to split the country in two and they have an agenda to undermine the powers of the Belgian central government :**:. I can all but guarantee you that if they re-ran the election under FPtP they’d end up right where they are now.

Like I said, AV is a no brainer. The only people campaigning against it are the usual suspects of safe-seat incompetents cumbents :zz: who fear redundancy once people start to realise that politicians have to work for a living. I won’t be surprised if Dave Cameron secretly agrees with AV, but has to campaign against it as his own party would roast him alive if he didn’t.


4 thoughts on “Election update

  1. Hi for me the choice is not too difficult as i am a green woman through and through and always hope it will make a difference. Alex Salmonds office is literally four minutes from my door and when we asked him to see about the ramps in Inverurie he did something about it but i do find it hard to vote SNP as although there are many pros i have too many against.
    I also will be a postal vote.
    Mr Salmond could do with more moves for the disabled etc..Your post was very interesting.


    • Flute,

      Can’t argue with that! My reasons for voting SNP are A) they’re not doing too badly B) they’ve pursued a reasonable environmental policy (compared to other major parties) and C) Labour (who least we forget, are pro-nuclear) are vulnerable in my constituency.

      If they loose a couple of seats in a heartland like Glasgow this might serve to scare the labour party straight. This same thing happened when I was living back in Wales. In one election, everyone in my place of work (a steel mill, a labour heartland) all voted either Greens, lib dem or Welsh Nationalist. Within a few months the Blairite lackey who Millbank had parachuted in, was sent packing. That said, I’m inclined to vote Green in the party list.

      As far as AV is concerned, I think we can both agree its YES on that one. One point I forgot to raise on the blog is how PR/AV, and bringing in minority parties like the Greens allows alternative policies to be put forward. Problem at the moment is policy stagnation, as the big parties have basically run out of ideas. As one Green party member (in Ireland) put it to me, its not the Greens goal to become majority parties in government. The goal is to pressure other parties (in opposition or as minority parties in gov) to adopt more environmental friendly policies and put issues like climate change onto the agenda. Can you name me any major party in the EU these days who doesn’t have some sort of environmental policy?

      Okay, many may not have the best policies (hence why I’m inclined to vote Green for the party list) but contrast that with the situation in America, were it seems to be a choice between Obama (whose pro-nuke’s and promises to only sign orders for Shale gas drilling on recycled paper) and Sarah Palin (Global Warming is a big commie con, drill baby drill! We’re’s his birth Cert/Death Panels, If GW were real god would have mentioned it in the Bible he wrote 4,546.8975 hours ago).


  2. Pingback: Project Fear v’s Project Doom | daryanblog

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s