The Importance of 5th May

On the 5th of May UK voters have a choice.

Despite what people say - the choice is really quite simple.

We can leave the system as it is and forgo the right to debate and question how our MPs are elected and how they claim to represent us. If we lose this chance, we won't get another for years...perhaps ever. Many politicians want to keep things the way they are. No surprise there.

OR we can change the system so that people begin to realise the power their vote has. They will become more involved in local politics and in evaluating the alternatives. They will be encouraged to vote and to see the effect it has.

It seems to me that the current system is rather like running a restaurant where everyone has to eat what is 'the most popular item' on the menu. Well you all have one vote...so everyone eats chips.

The alternative being proposed is not proportional. It is a variant of the first past the post system that we already have. In this case you choose from the range available and you put them in order of preference.

So I'd like B then A and (if I must) I'd go for D but I'll never vote for E or C. Quite a complex reflection of the voter's preferences and requiring some thought from the voter. A good thing I would think.

I'm sure it will take some time for us to get used to it, but also the political parties will also take time to understand them (you can bet they'll be working out the system even now). But at least they can't count on a "winner takes all" system. There will be no such thing as a safe seat.

You can read the arguments at http://www.no2av.org/ and at http://www.yestofairervotes.org.

But don't try looking for www.yes2av.org ... the people at the no campaign thought it fair they should buy that URL and link it to their own website.

Cuts...feels like we're on the brink

The budget has made me wonder if the Tories really understand the economy. Or, for that matter whether anyone (especially me) does.
There is no doubt that, ideologically, it's easier for them to cut Government and public sector spending. So when George Osborne says he had no choice he's just plain wrong.
There are always choices about what to cut expenditure and where to increase income. An increase in the top rate of tax and even another tax band would have been seen as fair and would have affected fewer people. By definition, the people paying such tax are fewer in number than those below the threshold.
So, the only conclusion you can draw is that it wasn't 'politically desirable'.
The other mistake is to believe that cuts in public expenditure are somehoe free. There will be job losses and an increase in unemployment. There will be an increase in benefit claims. Do these figures stack up?
And if unemployment ends up costing more than the preceding savings - how would this Chancellor balance the books? More cuts?

Incidentally, am I the only one who thinks Osbourne looks like he should be a pantomime dame? When he speaks he also reminded me of someone else and I couldn't quite think who...
I think it may be Piers Fletcher-Dervish, the hapless Tory MP sidekick of Rik Mayall's Alan B'stard.  Time for Marks and Gran to return?

What the heck happened? And the test of real 'interests'.

Actually I'm not going to go on about the result, though it's certainly a shock and 'oh' kind of turn up for the books.
But I have to say, the really annoying thiing is the (so called) markets' reaction.
I'd venture to say that whatever the results, markets would have been slightly down. Not because there was any news to react to but because the big speculators had already taken positions that it was in their interests for the markets to decline.
It's notable that someone's "fat fingers" also wiped billions off stock for a few minutes (making one speculator a cool £350,000 in a matter of seconds) before the correction was made.
It also annoys me that 'business leaders' continually say a) "What business needs is stability" to which they now add b)"and a clear way out of this financial black hole". See RBS example.
Well...
a) They had that for a number of years with TB and GB - I didn't see them dancing for joy then or rushing to defend Labour now
b) They continually ask for the Government to show the way out of the debt crisis, but don't offer any help - and in fact squeal when it's said they may have to accept keeping less profit.
We now see clearly how in thrall we are to banks, bond and gilt traders and business interests. It's the problem of the commons writ large - private profit and public loss.
I'm now going off to sob quietly.

Could this be the beginning of a minor revolution?

And, of course, you can buy the t-shirt....