Brown down
in [UK Motorcycles]
|
From: ogden on 10 May 2010 18:49 steve auvache wrote: > In article <MPG.265292c54d2045d198a2a2(a)news.eternal-september.org>, > ogden <ogden(a)pre.org> writes > > > >And how do you get to the point where the citizenry are given options to > >decide on? Telepathy? Letters to the editor? Divination of tea leaves > >and magic pixie dust? > > Constitutional Reform should be a matter of constant debate, you will > never see me argue against this but it needs to come about as a result > of debate and not be imposed by a minority for short term electoral > gain. To steal an idea from the communists: the revolution is never > really over. > > Sensible debate but off the manifesto and not a part of the power > broking process simply to form a government with a single minority group > guaranteed a place at the top table. > > There is (has been since before I were nowt burro lad in short trousers) > a groundswell of opinion that reform is necessary so, assuming we are a > majority, let Us the voters decide what is needed at our own pace, don't > force it on us like they did over Europe. And you and I both know that while those in power have vested interests which motivates them to prevent any such reform, the opportunity can't be wasted when it arises. Constant debate is great. We've had a hundred years of it and the fruit of that debate - qualified and quantified electoral systems and long- term policies held by the parties to the debate - means that when the moment for action comes we don't have to make something up on the spot. This may be that moment. If it is, I hope it isn't squandered. -- ogden | gsxr1000 | rgv250
From: Champ on 10 May 2010 18:56 On Mon, 10 May 2010 22:10:43 +0100, ogden <ogden(a)pre.org> wrote: >> I really must read up on the various PR systems, and why AV doesn't >> count. >Spent 10 minutes on the Electoral Reform Society's web site. They have a >section that briefly describes the various systems with pros and cons. I will. But not tonight. -- Champ We declare that the splendor of the world has been enriched by a new beauty: the beauty of speed. ZX10R | Hayabusa | GPz750turbo neal at champ dot org dot uk
From: steve auvache on 10 May 2010 19:01 In article <MPG.26529dbaef01fec598a2a5(a)news.eternal-september.org>, ogden <ogden(a)pre.org> writes > >This may be that moment. If it is, I hope it isn't squandered. I rather fear it is. I think that it came as something of a surprise for Clegg to find his overall parliamentary party position slightly diminished and no clear leader from the other two with whom to ally. I think he believed the polls and was completely unprepared for the result we gave. What I see of Clegg now is not a statesman doing his bit conscientiously for the good of the country but some git in a limbo giving it lip service for his own survival. I am actually impressed with the Tories and how they have reacted. Not so Labour who seem to be just sitting there waiting for the rest to crash and burn so they can step in over the bodies of the fallen. -- steve auvache VN750 Third gear has scope. SR250 The SpazzTrakka (Improved).
From: ogden on 10 May 2010 19:16 steve auvache wrote: > What I see of Clegg now is not a statesman doing his bit conscientiously > for the good of the country but some git in a limbo giving it lip > service for his own survival. Maybe. Internal communications are full of references to "long term national interest", "sustainable agreement" and "the four key principles of the manifesto". And that's the key - any coalition agreement may, ultimately, have to be approved by representatives of the party membership whose views are currently being canvassed. Hardly surprising that electoral reform is firmly on the agenda. -- ogden | gsxr1000 | rgv250
From: Salad Dodger on 10 May 2010 20:50
On Mon, 10 May 2010 21:35:04 +0100, Champ <news(a)champ.org.uk> wrote: >On Mon, 10 May 2010 19:57:45 +0100, steve auvache ><dont_spam(a)thecow.me.uk> wrote: >> >>At least 75% of the voting electorate did not for a party offering PR > >er, Steve...Labour were offering electoral reform befoe the election. Yeah, it was a manifesto commitment in 1997. |