UK - December 2019 General Election

[Nessie]

Uh, why should people who are NOT UK citizens be allowed to vote in a UK election?

I presume that what was being suggested was that EU nationals who are now resident and working in the UK and meet some criteria to qualify get to vote.

Plenty of Scots were barred from voting in the Scottish Independence referendum because they were not resident in Scotland at the time. Decisions were made as to who got to vote in the Brexit referendum.

 

[ohms]

Uh, why should people who are NOT UK citizens be allowed to vote in a UK election?

People from 53 Commonwealth countries (incl a couple of suspended members) who are resident in the UK can vote in UK general elections. I don't see why EU citizens resident in the UK shouldn't have the same rights.

 

[Lothian]

I'm thinking maybe everyone who lives in a safe seat should maybe vote Green to drive up their share of the vote. It might highlight the failures of the system if they ended up on 5% of the vote and only got 1 (or even no) MP.

it would be hard to get a better example of the distortion than Scotland in 2015 GE. 56 of 59 seats went to the SNP who got a shade under 50% of the vote.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

it would be hard to get a better example of the distortion than Scotland in 2015 GE. 56 of 59 seats went to the SNP who got a shade under 50% of the vote.

And we will end up with a government who wield absolute power to do whatever they please to the whole of the UK on about two-thirds of that share.

Of course it's not in the Tory's or Labour's interests to change the system so it will never happen.

 

[Nessie]

People from 53 Commonwealth countries (incl a couple of suspended members) who are resident in the UK can vote in UK general elections. I don't see why EU citizens resident in the UK shouldn't have the same rights.

We need a referendum on our Commonwealth membership. They rule over us with no say and it is a total loss of sovereignty to be in the Commonwealth. Plus immigrants.

 

[Information Analyst]

Uh, why should people who are NOT UK citizens be allowed to vote in a UK election?

Some already can, if they have leave to enter or remain in the UK. Your neighbours to the north, and some of those to the south, for example.

https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/i-am-a/voter/register-vote-and-update-your-details

 

[Rolfe]

IME that is not true. I come from an English family, but was born and live in Scotland. I have experienced regular anti-English comments (I also get anti-Scottish comments when back in England).

Family friends are SNP activists, the father is a former president of the SNP. A friend lives next door to a senior member of the SNP. I have been to plenty of gatherings with many SNP there and I have never experienced anything from those who are in the party, senior or volunteers.

They make it clear, they do not dislike the English, they dislike Westminster. Big difference.

All of the actual anti-English comments have been from random people, drunks in pubs, work colleagues.

This. Thank you.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

Of course it's not in the Tory's or Labour's interests to change the system so it will never happen.

I think it probably is in Labour's interests now that the SNP exists. They're very unlikely to get a majority these days, now that Scotland has turned from red to yellow. This will be even more true if Brexit happens and Scotland does decide to leave the UK.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

I think it probably is in Labour's interests now that the SNP exists. They're very unlikely to get a majority these days, now that Scotland has turned from red to yellow. This will be even more true if Brexit happens and Scotland does decide to leave the UK.

Mathematically it might be about breakeven for Labour but they still harbour ambitions of being a majority government so they don't want to lose FPTP.

 

[Ian Osborne]

It doesn't matter whether you have confidence he won't renege, you can have confidence that Boris won't. And, at the very least, you should be able to have confidence that Corbyn will want to negotiate a softer Brexit than either of the last two prime ministers.

You should also bear in mind that Labour almost certainly won't get a majority, meaning that Corbyn won't be able to force anything through. The third-largest party, who he will most likely have to form a coalition with to become PM (assuming no Tory majority), will most likely be the Lib Dems and their position is to revoke Article 50 all together. Likely other remain parties, as well. So if Labour's position moves, then it should be slightly more towards "remain" than towards "leave".

The point is that it seems somewhat silly to hold the position that you don't trust Labour to cancel Brexit, so you'll happily hand the election to the Tories who definitely won't. If you honestly think that Brexit will be bad for the UK, then you should vote tactically to get the Tories out. The Tories not having a majority is the only possible way for Brexit not to happen, and if it does happen for it not to be the most harmful Brexit possible.

My entire life I've voted for whichever parties policies most closely match my own opinions. Not this time, because there's a unique catastrophe in our near future and the only way to prevent it (not to mention all the other horrors this very right-wing government would foist on us) is to get the Tories out of power. And the only way to do that is for everybody to vote tactically.

This is an excellent post, which I'm nicking for Facebook. You're absolutely right - stopping Brexit is more important than any ideology. I was previously undecided on who to vote for, but Labour have the best chance of beating our (revolting) sitting Tory, so they get my vote.

 

[Ian Osborne]

And we will end up with a government who wield absolute power to do whatever they please to the whole of the UK on about two-thirds of that share.

Of course it's not in the Tory's or Labour's interests to change the system so it will never happen.

Unfortunately, when we had the chance for change with the alternative vote referendum, we blew it. Badly.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Unfortunately, when we had the chance for change with the alternative vote referendum, we blew it. Badly.

Yes, but that was because neither of the big 2 parties were interested in change.

One of the reasons why I am so in favour of Scottish Independence is that it is one of the few avenues open for significant change in UK politics. The current Westminster system is horrible but everything is far too entrenched to actually get any kind of proper change instigated.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

This is an excellent post, which I'm nicking for Facebook. You're absolutely right - stopping Brexit is more important than any ideology. I was previously undecided on who to vote for, but Labour have the best chance of beating our (revolting) sitting Tory, so they get my vote.

Unfortunately the Lib Dems have blown it, because I won't vote for anyone who would block the right of the people of Scotland to vote on independence. That's more important to me than Brexit.

There's basically nobody in my constituency worth voting for. I am hearing Greens may drop out in places they don't look competitive in which case I may not even bother voting at all.

 

[Rolfe]

I think it probably is in Labour's interests now that the SNP exists. They're very unlikely to get a majority these days, now that Scotland has turned from red to yellow. This will be even more true if Brexit happens and Scotland does decide to leave the UK.

It's very rare for a Labour government that has been elected to have required the Scottish seats they won to do that. Tony Blair's landelides would have happened even if they hadn't won a single seat in Scotland.

 

[Rolfe]

Unfortunately, when we had the chance for change with the alternative vote referendum, we blew it. Badly.

I remember arguing vociferously for a Yes in that referendum, not on the grounds that AV was a good idea, but on the grounds that if it was a No vote we'd be told that the British people had ratified FPTP and that was decided, forever.

But in reality (and I've seen the figures worked through somewhere), AV is even more inclined to favour the "big two" and wouldn't have helped in the slightest. It was an absolute stroke of genius of Cameron to substitute "PR" with an option that's nothing like PR and could be knocked over like an Aunt Sally.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Apparently Boris Johnson is ditching Uxbridge and South Ruislip (majority of 5,034) and scarpering off to stand in Rutland & Melton (majority of 23,104).
He only got in because of his opposition to Heathrow runway 3.

 

[Information Analyst]

Apparently Boris Johnson is ditching Uxbridge and South Ruislip (majority of 5,034) and scarpering off to stand in Rutland & Melton (majority of 23,104).
He only got in because of his opposition to Heathrow runway 3.

The coward. Again.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Apparently Boris Johnson is ditching Uxbridge and South Ruislip (majority of 5,034) and scarpering off to stand in Rutland & Melton (majority of 23,104).
He only got in because of his opposition to Heathrow runway 3.

It did sound a bit precarious when someone mentioned he only had a smallish majority on TV recently. He will look a bit of a div if he moves seat but on the other hand I doubt he will care if it means he doesn't have to worry about getting re-elected.

 

[Vixen]

Labour have two challenges, they need to explain how they will fund Brexit and they also need to explain how they will fund all of their post-election spending promises (the Conservatives have the same challenge, but their spending plans don't seem to be quite as grandiose).

One thing I find really interesting about one of Labour's pledges is to cover personal care for the elderly. Those who have low incomes and/or few assets already have this covered. It's people like my father, decent occupational pension and money in the bank, who have to pay for their own care - not unreasonably IMO. This is a policy which will make it easier the middle classes to pass on their houses to their middle aged children and maintain the wealth inequalities which IMO are a major challenge to the UK.

It can work. Here in Finland there is a capped limit to how much the elderly need to contribute towards 24/7 care (iirc it is circa €600-€700 pa max for a hospital bed in a personal room). Thus the rich get to keep their assets and pass it on to the next generation. How is this done, people do pay a higher percentage in income tax but then the average state pension is €2,400 pcm (based on lifetime earnings), university education is free and no-one need worry if they are pregnant or ill as new parents get up to three years leave with their job kept safe.

It's a new SDP government in place but had been a right wing coalition and the True Finns (perusuomalaiset, persut for short) are even more keen on a welfare state for all despite being right wing. So not even a left wing idea.

So there are different models. Even if care for the elderly is eased, it doesn't necessarily follow that the better off are penalised.

 

[Ian Osborne]

But in reality (and I've seen the figures worked through somewhere), AV is even more inclined to favour the "big two".

Do you have a cite for this? It would definitely surprise me if it was true.