So General Election 2017...
In my opinion the first thing Theresa May has done right. Our system does not require it, but the country did not elect her party to government for her to take charge. The Prime Minister has enormous power in our system, but no-one could have voted for Theresa May to get the job because she was not leader of the Conservative Party at the last election.
I have to wonder if she made her decision to hold the election on the grounds that 15 or so MPs are at risk of criminal liability for knowingly falsifying election expenses. Her majority is 12.
So now we have a choice.
Support Theresa May's Tories with more than 36.9% of the vote - the proportion that led to David Cameron's victory in 2015 - and we'll get:
Hard Brexit. Throw ourselves out of the European Union, sticking two fingers up at the countries we do nearly half of foreign trade with, saying we want them to have permission - a visa - to cross our borders in future, yet expecting free entry to their countries for ourselves?
Regulations that affect our businesses and lives will often continue to be set by Europe. EASA, the European Air Safety Agency will continue to treat the UK Civil Aviation Authority as a subcommittee, and if we want to fly into their airspace, we will have no choice but to comply. Instead of having a seat on the board - as the CAA does now - if we cannot negotiate a favourable re-entry to European "Open Skies" agreements with the US, our airlines will be unable to enter the United States, as well as having difficulty operating "domestically" within the European Union.
Many other areas of regulation will probably remain the same as now. It seems likely free movement of people will remain, we may pay more to the European Union budget than we do now in order to get a tariff-free agreement. EU trade is worth far more than a few hundred million pounds a week... £240 billion in exports in 2016 in fact.
(I'm not BTW saying the referendum should be ignored. "Leave" won, even if only by 1.8% of those who voted. But I do think as a minimum that Parliament should consider the terms of leaving. If there are grounds to believe the terms are substantially different from those claimed by the "Leave" campaign we should hold a further referendum to ask the British people the question "Leave on the terms stated, or remain a member of the EU"?
The next government should also change the law so the courts are able to deal with blatant lies in future referendums, making it clear there is potential for a jail sentence for claims which the campaigner demonstrably knew to be false at the time they made it. Only for referendums, which are a one-or-the-other choice. It would be nice to have only truth in general elections too, but that's probably unrealistic.)
So, if you want to go back to a grammar school system that writes our children off at the age of 11 - instead of the highly successful comprehensive system where even kids good at one subject can move into a set appropriate to their learning ability. One where the best comprehensives beat even the best fee-paying schools in the country... http://www.tatler.com/news/articles/january-2017/best-state-secondary-schools-uk-2017.
If you want a less fair country where profoundly disabled people have their independence removed by losing their Motability allowance.
If you want those poorly paid enough to claim tax credits to have their benefits capped because they happen to have more than two children - or worse, go into the details of a rape with a benefits officer to gain an exemption from the rule.
If you want the NHS to continue to have its resources degraded, profitable parts cherry-picked into private ownership.
If you want a great future in this country for the lucky few and a miserable decline for the rest, then you know what you must do.
If not, you have to find a way to get the Tory out of your constituency seat. Just 36.9%, that's all Cameron needed to start this disaster ball rolling.
It's too much to hope the next government will also find a way to change the disastrous First Past the Post electoral system, where in most constituencies the winner is the "least not liked" and we never know if the majority who voted for other parties would have preferred the second choice to the winner...
https://www.makevotesmatter.org.uk/the-pr-alliance/
Meantime, there's tactical voting. Not ideal, requiring many to vote for a candidate they don't support, in order to try and achieve the overall result.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/19_yf4RL133fBKscvSbID4eRKwztzY9KSI_2BMaI1bU8/htmlview?sle=true#gid=0
I have to wonder if she made her decision to hold the election on the grounds that 15 or so MPs are at risk of criminal liability for knowingly falsifying election expenses. Her majority is 12.
So now we have a choice.
Support Theresa May's Tories with more than 36.9% of the vote - the proportion that led to David Cameron's victory in 2015 - and we'll get:
Hard Brexit. Throw ourselves out of the European Union, sticking two fingers up at the countries we do nearly half of foreign trade with, saying we want them to have permission - a visa - to cross our borders in future, yet expecting free entry to their countries for ourselves?
Regulations that affect our businesses and lives will often continue to be set by Europe. EASA, the European Air Safety Agency will continue to treat the UK Civil Aviation Authority as a subcommittee, and if we want to fly into their airspace, we will have no choice but to comply. Instead of having a seat on the board - as the CAA does now - if we cannot negotiate a favourable re-entry to European "Open Skies" agreements with the US, our airlines will be unable to enter the United States, as well as having difficulty operating "domestically" within the European Union.
Many other areas of regulation will probably remain the same as now. It seems likely free movement of people will remain, we may pay more to the European Union budget than we do now in order to get a tariff-free agreement. EU trade is worth far more than a few hundred million pounds a week... £240 billion in exports in 2016 in fact.
(I'm not BTW saying the referendum should be ignored. "Leave" won, even if only by 1.8% of those who voted. But I do think as a minimum that Parliament should consider the terms of leaving. If there are grounds to believe the terms are substantially different from those claimed by the "Leave" campaign we should hold a further referendum to ask the British people the question "Leave on the terms stated, or remain a member of the EU"?
The next government should also change the law so the courts are able to deal with blatant lies in future referendums, making it clear there is potential for a jail sentence for claims which the campaigner demonstrably knew to be false at the time they made it. Only for referendums, which are a one-or-the-other choice. It would be nice to have only truth in general elections too, but that's probably unrealistic.)
So, if you want to go back to a grammar school system that writes our children off at the age of 11 - instead of the highly successful comprehensive system where even kids good at one subject can move into a set appropriate to their learning ability. One where the best comprehensives beat even the best fee-paying schools in the country... http://www.tatler.com/news/articles/january-2017/best-state-secondary-schools-uk-2017.
If you want a less fair country where profoundly disabled people have their independence removed by losing their Motability allowance.
If you want those poorly paid enough to claim tax credits to have their benefits capped because they happen to have more than two children - or worse, go into the details of a rape with a benefits officer to gain an exemption from the rule.
If you want the NHS to continue to have its resources degraded, profitable parts cherry-picked into private ownership.
If you want a great future in this country for the lucky few and a miserable decline for the rest, then you know what you must do.
If not, you have to find a way to get the Tory out of your constituency seat. Just 36.9%, that's all Cameron needed to start this disaster ball rolling.
It's too much to hope the next government will also find a way to change the disastrous First Past the Post electoral system, where in most constituencies the winner is the "least not liked" and we never know if the majority who voted for other parties would have preferred the second choice to the winner...
https://www.makevotesmatter.org.uk/the-pr-alliance/
Meantime, there's tactical voting. Not ideal, requiring many to vote for a candidate they don't support, in order to try and achieve the overall result.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/19_yf4RL133fBKscvSbID4eRKwztzY9KSI_2BMaI1bU8/htmlview?sle=true#gid=0
Comments