• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

2022 UK Local Elections

Status
Not open for further replies.

johncrossley

Established Member
Joined
30 Mar 2021
Messages
4,402
Location
London
You may very well believe in what you say above, but I believe in the "one person, one vote" ethos

So by that logic you should think that the current system is unacceptable, as it doesn't give that opportunity.


so for a party to deliberately not put a candidate forward is to show a somewhat lack of political awareness of the rights of those members of the electorate who want to vote for the party of their choice.

But the current system makes it impossible for all parties to participate in every area, so again, what you say suggests that you should find the current system unacceptable. In other systems in other countries, that problem doesn't arise.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

You can't interpret the results in Northern Ireland as meaning that there is now majority support for a united Ireland, any more than you can interpret the results in Scotland as meaning that there is majority support for a second independence referendum or independence itself. (A fact which Nicola Sturgeon convneniently seems to ignore.

Obviously not. In both cases, the nationalist parties have got neither more than 50% of the seats nor vote. Whereas in England, it is quite possible for a party to get less than 50% of the vote and get a majority.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Flying Snail

Established Member
Joined
12 Dec 2006
Messages
2,046
Not very democratic to say that. People should have the freedom to vote for the party of their choice.

It''s not very democratic that a party that polled considerably less than 50% of the vote gets 100% of the power but that's what consistently happens in UK general elections.

It is perfectly reasonable that more aligned parties and voters will act tactically to try and overcome the failings of an appallingly unfair system that massively favours the large parties and one in particular.
You may very well believe in what you say above, but I believe in the "one person, one vote" ethos, so destroying that right just for the sake of political ease smacks of something "from the dark side". It is the right of all parties to put forward candidates, so for a party to deliberately not put a candidate forward is to show a somewhat lack of political awareness of the rights of those members of the electorate who want to vote for the party of their choice.

It is their right but not their requirement. You have no right to vote for someone who for whatever reason they wish chooses not to stand for election.

It should be a right to have reasonably democratic representation.
A constuency where 32% vote Con, 30 vote Lab, 25 vote LD and the rest vote other that returns 1 Con is ignoring the wishes of 2/3 of the electorate, that is NOT democratic, it is however very convenient for incumbent power holders as it always favours them when played out across a country.
 

johncrossley

Established Member
Joined
30 Mar 2021
Messages
4,402
Location
London
I assume that you are not referring to any of the major political parties in that statement.

I'm including all parties, major or not major. Only the very biggest can afford to be in all constituencies. Especially in the General Election because of the deposit system.
 

nw1

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2013
Messages
9,414
He's better than Corbyn, but that's not saying much.

I must say I'm amazed the Liberal Democrats did so well when I didn't even get anything through the door from my councillor - and can't really say I can remember when they last said anything much about anything.

I think they're probably just finding themselves becoming very popular as an alternative vote for upset Tory voters. It might be a step too far to vote Labour, and that will be partly what the problem facing Labour is - and a bigger issue in that the votes are going to be split.

Of course proper tactical voting can be used to deal with the problem of a split opposition, at least in seats in which it is clear who the main opposition to the Tories are. It could have been done in 2019 but in that election, concerns about Corbyn were a complicating factor. Nonetheless, perhaps the Lib Dem gain at St Albans was the first sign that such a strategy could work. I note that in that part of the world there is a whole cluster of LD councils, perhaps if Labour avoid standing candidates in places like Watford (and the LDs do likewise in Tory-Labour marginals) then we might get a working strategy to deal with 'Boris' should he stand in 2024.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

You may very well believe in what you say above, but I believe in the "one person, one vote" ethos, so destroying that right just for the sake of political ease smacks of something "from the dark side". It is the right of all parties to put forward candidates, so for a party to deliberately not put a candidate forward is to show a somewhat lack of political awareness of the rights of those members of the electorate who want to vote for the party of their choice.
That may as be, but I think it's more from "the dark side" that the Conservative Party will have been in power for 71% of the period from 1979 to 2024 (assuming 2024 election), even though they have never got even as much as 45% of the vote in that time period.

And if they hold on until 2029, they will have been in power for almost three-quarters of that 50-year period. It that fair or representative?

The nature of English politics, at least by my understanding is such that the main split is conservative (mostly Tory, also whatever Farage is calling himself this week) and non-conservative (Labour and LD, primarily). Republican and Democrat, if you will. Given this, first past the post means that the Tories will always do disproportionately well, unless strategies are developed to "game the system" such as standing only one candidate from Labour or Lib Dem to avoid splitting the vote. Granted, a few people are going to be unhappy but I suspect more will be happy that the opposition vote is not split.

Obviously the USA has a lot of problems with its system, but one advantage is that there is a more united opposition to the Republicans, meaning that, even though the USA is probably more right-wing than the UK, the Republicans have not dominated US politics since 1979 to the same degree the Tories have here.

Sadly, in England we seem to love simplistic electoral systems. We need much more in the way of consensus politics, and we won't get that with majority governments or binary referenda.
 
Last edited:

NoMorePacers

Established Member
Joined
18 Feb 2016
Messages
1,401
Location
Humberside
I was hoping to hear the views of website members local to Hull, as I would rather hear what they had to say from a local perspective rather than any media outlet these days.
Labour's defeat here was (to me at least) mostly a result of local issues as opposed to anything to do with the national leadership.

To put it simply, Labour-run Hull City Council were dire. Incompetent, seemingly uncaring and when pressed would refuse to take any responsibility for anything - choosing to pin all of the blame on central government*. I got the impression people were generally quite apathetic, although it appears this time round the Lib Dems managed to push across the message that they can provide a better alternative well enough to secure victory.

We can but hope they won't be a disappointment.

*all of that sentence seems to be a trait of "red wall" councils in general, based on descriptions I've read of them - which is interesting to note
 

brad465

Veteran Member
Joined
11 Aug 2010
Messages
11,433
Location
Taunton or Kent
And here is the perfect example why Labour will not win the next general election. Labour should have desimated the Tories, yet here we are talking about as possible collation.

I'm sorry to say it but Labour as it stands will not win a general election on it's own. And a coalition with the real winners of the local elections, the Lib Dems will be a disaster so long as the ego on a stick that is Starmer is in charge. We should today have been talking how Labour became the dominant force, not how they might scrape over the line with the help of another party.

Its not me that needs to give my head a wobble...
Nobody should be winning an election on their own unless they get over 50% of the vote, if Labour have to form a coalition, at least there might be some accountability and keeping extreme proposals out. Even Nigel Farage once said that he thinks Germany has been better run than Britain over many decades, despite constant coalitions (although they'll no doubt be some good and bad times).

Democracy is not about winners and losers, it's about representation. I'd argue for this reason Labour's biggest failure (in hindsight), was not adopting proportional representation in 1997-2001, when it was in their manifesto. It should be very telling that the only other country in Europe with FPTP is Belarus (this does not mean we are as bad as them, but it's not a ringing endorsement of the system). PR might even help Labour sort themselves out, as if the party really is two wings that could split under PR, then the extreme wing will split and the more moderate wing can unite and be more attractive.



Meanwhile, it's official that Sinn Fein are now the largest party in the NI assembly. For all this focus on the Red Wall, Blue Wall, London, etc., I think in years to come we will look back at this moment as being when the end of the Union began, which, barring another world war, will be the biggest thing to happen in our lifetimes.

 
Last edited:

daodao

Established Member
Joined
6 Feb 2016
Messages
3,601
Location
Dunham/Bowdon
I think in years to come we will look back at this moment as being when the end of the Union began, which, barring another world war, will be the biggest thing to happen in our lifetimes.
I agree about the fate of the UK in the longer term, given that the largest political parties in both Scotland and the North of Ireland are now avowed enemies of this state. Nicola Sturgeon sent an effusive tweet to Michelle O'Neill once the result became clear. Brexit has destabilised the UK and this cartoon, published in early September 2014 by Chris Cairns for the now defunct Wings over Scotland blog, remains relevant.

1651959196221.png

Peter Hitchens, as ever, has some scathing comments in his Mail on Sunday column about the victory of IRA/Sinn Fein.

https://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/
 
Last edited:

DynamicSpirit

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2012
Messages
9,211
Location
SE London
It should be very telling that the only other country in Europe with FPTP is Belarus (this does not mean we are as bad as them, but it's not a ringing endorsement of the system).

I believe France has a FPTP system - with the modification that there are two rounds, giving people more of a chance to vote tactically once they've seen what the first round results in each constituency are.

According to wikipedia, Italy has a mixed system, electing about 37% of representatives using FPTP and the remaining 63% using PR.

And although it's not in Europe, it's worth mentioning because it is a Western democracy - Australia uses AV for the House of Representatives. Same as FPTP except that voters list candidates in order of preference - again allowing tactical voting but in the end unlikely to produce a result significantly more proportional than FPTP.

So FPTP isn't quite as unique as that.

I do though agree with your main point that Governments ought be formed from groups that between them get >50% of the vote.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

Meanwhile, it's official that Sinn Fein are now the largest party in the NI assembly. For all this focus on the Red Wall, Blue Wall, London, etc., I think in years to come we will look back at this moment as being when the end of the Union began, which, barring another world war, will be the biggest thing to happen in our lifetimes.

I wouldn't be so sure. Sinn Fein do not have anything like 50% of the vote, and a quick Google suggests that at the moment, any referendum on Northern Ireland leaving the UK would see the idea very soundly defeated. For example, according to the Independent https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/b...ited-ireland-work-sinn-fein-elections-1616933:

Independent said:
The Institute of Irish Studies-University of Liverpool/Irish News survey found that 30 per cent would back the reunification of Ireland in a referendum, with 45.3 per cent voting against it.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

The voting system is not suitable for more than two parties. They split the anti-Tory vote so they should withdraw where Labour are the main threat to the Tories.

That sounds a bit presumptuous in terms of interpreting all votes for non-Tories as an anti-Tory vote. In England and Wales there's a grain of truth in the idea to the extent that the LibDems and Greens tend to be much more opposed to the Tories than to Labour, so Tory/not-Tory is the biggest single fault line, but it's patently absurd to imagine that everyone who votes for anyone other than the Tories is specifically voting against the Tories. As an example, I don't have any links to hand, but I'm fairly sure that opinion polls in recent years have consistently shown that up to about 1/3 of LibDem voters would prefer a Tory Government to a Labour Government.

And in Scotland, where as I understand it the biggest fault line is not Tory/notTory but Unionist/Nationalist, treating every non-Tory vote as a specific anti-Tory vote is even more ridiculous.
 
Last edited:

brad465

Veteran Member
Joined
11 Aug 2010
Messages
11,433
Location
Taunton or Kent
I wouldn't be so sure. Sinn Fein do not have anything like 50% of the vote, and a quick Google suggests that at the moment, any referendum on Northern Ireland leaving the UK would see the idea very soundly defeated. For example, according to the Independent https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/b...ited-ireland-work-sinn-fein-elections-1616933:
This was probably not very clear on my part: I wasn't suggesting a border poll would happen this year and NI reunifies with the rest of Ireland next year (or any other relatively short timeframe), it's probably going to be no earlier than the end of this decade in an optimistic scenario. But it is a sign of the shift in demographics and beliefs in a United Ireland, that, if continued, will eventually setup a border poll. This election would be seen as the beginning of the end in that situation, because this would be when the largest NI party switched from being Unionist to Nationalist.
 

Magdalia

Established Member
Joined
1 Jan 2022
Messages
7,369
Location
The Fens
I believe France has a FPTP system - with the modification that there are two rounds, giving people more of a chance to vote tactically once they've seen what the first round results in each constituency are.

According to wikipedia, Italy has a mixed system, electing about 37% of representatives using FPTP and the remaining 63% using PR.

And although it's not in Europe, it's worth mentioning because it is a Western democracy - Australia uses AV for the House of Representatives. Same as FPTP except that voters list candidates in order of preference - again allowing tactical voting but in the end unlikely to produce a result significantly more proportional than FPTP.

So FPTP isn't quite as unique as that.
Voting systems are a trade-off between proportionality and transparency. In First Past The Post it is very clear who has won.

The two round system used in France for the Presidential Election retains transparency. Its main disadvantage is that it requires two polling days instead of one.

Alternative Vote (AV) is, in practical terms, similar to the French system, but only requiring one polling day. This is what was on offer in the UK referendum of 2011.

Neither of the two round system or AV are proportional, but they remain transparent. It can be argued that they are more transparent than FPTP in respect of tactical voting.

Truly proportional systems, such as Single Transferable Vote (STV), are not very transparent. When counts are manual STV is also very time consuming. Anyone who has tried to follow the Northern Ireland election will appreciate this. The Foyle constituency was only decided after 13 rounds of counting.
 

nw1

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2013
Messages
9,414
The best illustration of that is the 27 seats which went from Lib Dem to Conservative in the 2015 election.

The rightwards move of the South West is something I immediately noted in 2015, but is something which few people commented on, preferring to focus on the (arguably less significant) Labour to SNP swing in Scotland.

It was that which allowed Cameron to get a majority in 2015, and without the South West, "Boris" would probably not have got a majority in 2019, and even more tellingly, May might have lost to Corbyn in 2017.

I am not sure whether the South West has actually moved right, or whether the Tories got in by default in the South West due to Lib Dem voters switching to Labour (as a result of tuition fees, etc) and the opposition became split, so rather than the anti-Tory vote rallying round the Lib Dem, it split between Labour and Lib Dem.

But perhaps the tendency for the SW to vote Brexit suggests that, outside the cities of Bristol, Bath, Exeter and Plymouth, the area has become somewhat more insular and rightwards-looking. Certainly the popular image of the SW in the 1990s was of a more liberal, more open-minded, less conservative area than the SE. These days I'm not so sure; I'd have expected a Lib Dem resurgence in the SW in 2019 if the area had the same sort of politics it had in the 1990s. Instead, in Parliament, it's solid Tory outside the cities of Bristol, Bath, Exeter and Plymouth. (I'm surprised Cornwall in particular is so solidly Tory and Brexit-supporting given that it partly sees itself as separate from the rest of England, and has received EU funding!)
 
Last edited:

Cloud Strife

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2014
Messages
2,963
This election would be seen as the beginning of the end in that situation, because this would be when the largest NI party switched from being Unionist to Nationalist.

One thing that should be noted: the Nationalist share of seats is actually down.

2017:
Unionist: 28 + 10 + 1 + 1 = 40
Nationalist: 27 + 12 = 39
Other: 8 + 2 + 1 = 11

2022:
Unionist: 25 + 9 + 1 + 1 + 1 = 37
Nationalist: 27 + 8 = 35
Other: 17 + 1 = 18

So not only has the Nationalist share of the Assembly dropped, but they actually dropped more than the Unionists did.
 

Acfb

Member
Joined
12 Aug 2018
Messages
616
This was probably not very clear on my part: I wasn't suggesting a border poll would happen this year and NI reunifies with the rest of Ireland next year (or any other relatively short timeframe), it's probably going to be no earlier than the end of this decade in an optimistic scenario. But it is a sign of the shift in demographics and beliefs in a United Ireland, that, if continued, will eventually setup a border poll. This election would be seen as the beginning of the end in that situation, because this would be when the largest NI party switched from being Unionist to Nationalist.

I can see how a border poll happens in the next 20 years. It will gain more impetus after Mary Lou Mcdonald becomes Taoiseach in 2025 (although she will probably have to go into coalition with Fianna Fail as Sinn Fein is only on 34% in RoI).
 

jfollows

Established Member
Joined
26 Feb 2011
Messages
10,085
Location
Wilmslow
Richmond (London) interested me, again the Conservative vote appears to have crashed, going from 11 to 1 councillor, whereas Lib Dem went from 39 to 48.
Details from https://www.theguardian.com/politic...lts-live-local-council-england-scotland-wales
To add to this, there's an article in today's Sunday Times (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...l-of-britain-rich-and-cosy-richmond-0smb3zk9d):
LOCAL ELECTIONS

Welcome to the Liberal capital of Britain: rich and cosy Richmond
Megan Agnew

and

Harry Yorke

Sunday May 08 2022, 12.01am, The Sunday Times

Liberal Democrats

Fiona Collingwood has just been rowing on the Thames. It is a lovely morning in Richmond, the river wide and flat. On the path beside her are the usual Saturday sights: young parents pushing prams, people wending their way to coffee shops in yoga gear, families on bike rides.

In the spring of 2020, during the first lockdown, this same stretch of river was a “nightmare”. Collingwood said: “People with dogs on chains, lots of people from out of the borough, huge numbers of people gathering and the crime that came with it. A little like Downing Street at that same time, to be honest with you.”

Collingwood, 65, voted for the Liberal Democrats in last week’s elections because she believes in “law and order”. She wants to preserve the peace and greenery of her borough — “and morals are important”.

The Lib Dems are “coming for” constituencies like Richmond: leafy, affluent, liberal, socially conscious and environmentally friendly.

They finished with 48 seats in the borough last week, while the Conservatives lost all but one of their 11 councillors — nine to the Lib Dems and one to the Green Party. Although Richmond has historically been Liberal, it is still a considerable loss for the Tories. The party now controls its fewest London councils for 24 years.

The Lib Dem performance here has been replicated across England, with the party gaining 191 councillors — almost four times as many as Labour — including in dozens of seats in traditional Tory areas.

Party officials are particularly jubilant about taking control of Somerset county council, which has been in Conservative hands since 2009.

Elsewhere, the party has taken Hull city council, edging out Labour, while making further inroads into the “blue wall” in the southeast of England. Lib Dems pulled off a historic victory over the Tories in the Chesham and Amersham by-election last year.

The results last week far exceeded the expectations of Sir Ed Davey, the party leader, who had been hoping for 120 gains at best.

Davey acknowledged that the Downing Street parties scandal had angered traditional Tory voters in rural and southeastern strongholds. However, he said the Lib Dem success could be attributed to wider problems affecting voters, in particular the state of health services and the impact of the rising cost of living.

Yet back in Richmond, the question that remains unanswered is whether this is really a Lib Dem resurgence, of lukewarm comfort, of John Lewis politics — or is this simply Anything But Boris?

“Boris was breaking the very laws he made,” said Collingwood, her rowing gloves still on, carrying a coffee. “I have always voted Liberal, but the truth is, I would vote for anyone that would get the Tories out. I have no respect for them.”

Richmond had a Conservative council between 2010 and 2018, when the Liberal Democrats took power.

Davey is “OK”, said Dr Roger Kennedy, 73, a child psychiatrist who has lived in Twickenham for 26 years. “At least he’s lost some weight.”

Kennedy has always voted Liberal — in both local and general elections — partly because voting for Labour is “a waste”. People in Richmond cared deeply about the environment, he said. “It is a comfortable area, so people want trees.” The Lib Dems had five key promises in the area, one of which was environmental: to plant a “record number” of trees, insulate more buildings and improve air quality.

Early yesterday, a group of paddleboarders collected litter on the Thames. Great boughs from willow trees hung over the water, dotted with heron nests. Richmond Park, a short climb from the river, felt ancient.

This is a green, clean, comfortable area, the middle-class butt of the joke in the TV hit Ted Lasso, in which an American football coach takes charge of the fictional Richmond Premier League football team.

Emma, 33, who works in media, and Dave, 30, in marketing, are having a sushi picnic with their toddler on Richmond Green. They both voted Lib Dem.

“It’s not Boris necessarily that I’m against,” said Dave. “It’s the Conservatives. As long as they’re not in.”

Susannah, 42, thought the Lib Dems made Richmond residents feel “safe and cosy”. “This area is soft Conservative,” she said, “but you’d be mad if you weren’t completely fed up with the way that the Tories have messed up and continue to mess up, particularly with the embarrassment of partygate. It’s a soft Tory borough that has had enough.”

The high street is a familiar mixture of brightly lit chains: Costa, Five Guys, Tesco. Independent shops and cafés are hidden off the main drag, tucked down the cobbled streets. Many have recently shut down and stand empty and gutted.

One of the key Lib Dem promises is to invest in the high street, alongside tackling crime, investing in youth services and building more affordable homes — specifically for key workers and families in need.

Steve Robson, 65, a filmmaker, did not see a single Conservative campaign poster in the lead-up to the vote, despite his long walks with his new puppy, Barney. He voted yellow last week. “The Liberals have stayed very well out of all the arguments. They’ve always been a decent party for a long time, without any massive negative things happening.

“People here care a lot about social issues but they are also wealthy,” he said. “So it is historically Liberal. It makes sense.”
 

AlterEgo

Verified Rep - Wingin' It! Paul Lucas
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
29,333
Location
LBK
I can see how a border poll happens in the next 20 years. It will gain more impetus after Mary Lou Mcdonald becomes Taoiseach in 2025 (although she will probably have to go into coalition with Fianna Fail as Sinn Fein is only on 34% in RoI).
Good luck getting FF to agree to coalition with SF.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

One thing that should be noted: the Nationalist share of seats is actually down.

2017:
Unionist: 28 + 10 + 1 + 1 = 40
Nationalist: 27 + 12 = 39
Other: 8 + 2 + 1 = 11

2022:
Unionist: 25 + 9 + 1 + 1 + 1 = 37
Nationalist: 27 + 8 = 35
Other: 17 + 1 = 18

So not only has the Nationalist share of the Assembly dropped, but they actually dropped more than the Unionists did.
Quite. The level of analysis of the election by GB-oriented pundits has been bizarre. Plus it’s fronted the “demographics are destiny” claptrap.
 

nw1

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2013
Messages
9,414
Good luck getting FF to agree to coalition with SF.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==


Quite. The level of analysis of the election by GB-oriented pundits has been bizarre. Plus it’s fronted the “demographics are destiny” claptrap.

Similar to the way that GB is assumed to be a region of right-wing politics because the Tories have been the largest party since 2010, while the "socially liberal" vote - Labour, Lib Dem, Green, Plaid and SNP - exceeded that of the Tories even in 2019.
 

johncrossley

Established Member
Joined
30 Mar 2021
Messages
4,402
Location
London
Hypothetical discussions in which people can express their perceived disagreements with the status quo system are all well and good on internet forums, but until matters are officially changed, the status quo is the reality of the situation.

The reality is that many if not most people in this country don't have a meaningful vote. I suppose it is no worse than living in the UK as a non British or Irish citizen (or in some cases EU citizen). They can't vote.
 
Last edited:

duncanp

Established Member
Joined
16 Aug 2012
Messages
4,856
One thing that should be noted: the Nationalist share of seats is actually down.

2017:
Unionist: 28 + 10 + 1 + 1 = 40
Nationalist: 27 + 12 = 39
Other: 8 + 2 + 1 = 11

2022:
Unionist: 25 + 9 + 1 + 1 + 1 = 37
Nationalist: 27 + 8 = 35
Other: 17 + 1 = 18

So not only has the Nationalist share of the Assembly dropped, but they actually dropped more than the Unionists did.

The big story from this election, which most people seem to be ignoring, is the rise in votes for the cross community Alliance Party.

The Alliance Party wants to focus on the things that matter to the people of Northern Ireland, and to stop bickering about the constitutional status of Northern Ireland within the UK.

Many people, especially the younger generation who have grown up since the implementation of the Good Friday agreement, are rejecting the politics of sectarianism and division, and this trend is likely to continue in the future.

This could have just as significant an impact on the future of Northern Ireland as the rise of Sinn Fein.
 

AlterEgo

Verified Rep - Wingin' It! Paul Lucas
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
29,333
Location
LBK
Similar to the way that GB is assumed to be a region of right-wing politics because the Tories have been the largest party since 2010, while the "socially liberal" vote - Labour, Lib Dem, Green, Plaid and SNP - exceeded that of the Tories even in 2019.
The difference is that the Conservatives have been in power since 2010, whereas in Northern Ireland no party has power other than managerialism, by design.
 

brad465

Veteran Member
Joined
11 Aug 2010
Messages
11,433
Location
Taunton or Kent
The big story from this election, which most people seem to be ignoring, is the rise in votes for the cross community Alliance Party.

The Alliance Party wants to focus on the things that matter to the people of Northern Ireland, and to stop bickering about the constitutional status of Northern Ireland within the UK.

Many people, especially the younger generation who have grown up since the implementation of the Good Friday agreement, are rejecting the politics of sectarianism and division, and this trend is likely to continue in the future.

This could have just as significant an impact on the future of Northern Ireland as the rise of Sinn Fein.
Yes if I was in Northern Ireland I'd have voted Alliance for much of that.
 

Blindtraveler

Established Member
Joined
28 Feb 2011
Messages
10,544
Likewise for similar reasons. I wish the media would focus more on this but presumably the squabbling and inviting and constitutional questions and sectarian issues make better headlines
 

duncanp

Established Member
Joined
16 Aug 2012
Messages
4,856
Yes if I was in Northern Ireland I'd have voted Alliance for much of that.

The way the Northern Ireland assembly is set up is strange, and somewhat anti-democratic.

The first minister usually comes from the largest party in the assembly, and the deputy first minister has to be from the other side of the sectarian divide. (ie. the new deputy first minister will have to be a unionist if the new first minister is from Sinn Fein)

The Alliance Party doesn't get a look in, because it is neither nationalist or unionist.

So if the Alliance Party was the largest party in the assembly, or even if it had an outright majority, it wouldn't be able to form an administration. This is manifestly unfair, and needs to change.

Power sharing has also been suspended on several occasions, usually because the parties don't agree on some issue. This lets down the people of Northern Ireland, and the Good Friday agreement needs to be changed to stop this from happening again.
 

brad465

Veteran Member
Joined
11 Aug 2010
Messages
11,433
Location
Taunton or Kent
Likewise for similar reasons. I wish the media would focus more on this but presumably the squabbling and inviting and constitutional questions and sectarian issues make better headlines
Much of the reason why the country and other parts of the world are in a mess is because the media love spectacle rather than substance for their own profits.
The way the Northern Ireland assembly is set up is strange, and somewhat anti-democratic.

The first minister usually comes from the largest party in the assembly, and the deputy first minister has to be from the other side of the sectarian divide. (ie. the new deputy first minister will have to be a unionist if the new first minister is from Sinn Fein)

The Alliance Party doesn't get a look in, because it is neither nationalist or unionist.

So if the Alliance Party was the largest party in the assembly, or even if it had an outright majority, it wouldn't be able to form an administration. This is manifestly unfair, and needs to change.

Power sharing has also been suspended on several occasions, usually because the parties don't agree on some issue. This lets down the people of Northern Ireland, and the Good Friday agreement needs to be changed to stop this from happening again.
Can't disagree with any of that.
 

Cloud Strife

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2014
Messages
2,963
Quite. The level of analysis of the election by GB-oriented pundits has been bizarre. Plus it’s fronted the “demographics are destiny” claptrap.

It's been absolutely awful. Sinn Fein becoming the biggest party is largely due to DUP incompetence and SDLP weakness more than any change in demographics.

Alliance is a big story, but then again, it depends exactly where their support comes from. Is it possible that people went for Sinn Fein/DUP with their first preference, but then supported Alliance to make sure that the 'other side' didn't pick up an additional seat? If you look at the results, you can see that Alliance often lost or won seats in the final rounds of counting, which lends to the idea that tactical voting was involved.

So if the Alliance Party was the largest party in the assembly, or even if it had an outright majority, it wouldn't be able to form an administration. This is manifestly unfair, and needs to change.

This could be changed by changing the rules so that if a party designated "Other" finishes first or second, then they have the FM or dFM role accordingly. Let's say they finish first - there would be a Unionist and Nationalist dFM with an Other FM. If "Other" finishes second, then they would have the right to nominate a dFM on top of the Unionist/Nationalist nomination.

Power sharing has also been suspended on several occasions, usually because the parties don't agree on some issue. This lets down the people of Northern Ireland, and the Good Friday agreement needs to be changed to stop this from happening again.

It's widely regarded as an imperfect system, but one that everyone is broadly signed up to. I don't see any viable alternatives, as it's politically impossible for a government to run there without participation of both unionist and nationalist parties. The only thing I can think of is that in the current situation, the UUP should be given the right to the dFM position if the DUP refuse. If the UUP also refuse, then it could pass to TUV. If all Unionist parties refuse, then the rights could pass to the two independent unionists elected - starting with the one with the most votes. This would be workable, although not very democratic if an independent Unionist ends up getting the dFM job.

One thing that should be done is that if an executive cannot be formed, then all payments to MLAs should be stopped.
 

GS250

Member
Joined
18 Mar 2019
Messages
1,031
There was always a healthy support for PR (especially from the Liberals) right up until UKIP started picking up votes from about 2010 on. It did seem to mysteriously quieten down during the middle of that decade. Whatever your feelings on UKIP....it seemed absurd that they effectively came third in this election yet got only 1 MP into the commons. On the other hand of course and it's been mentioned above...you could say that Britain overall had voted for a more left wing/liberal/remain government in the 2019 election. The interesting facet would have been would voting patterns have been the same in a PR environment?
 

johncrossley

Established Member
Joined
30 Mar 2021
Messages
4,402
Location
London
There was always a healthy support for PR (especially from the Liberals) right up until UKIP started picking up votes from about 2010 on. It did seem to mysteriously quieten down during the middle of that decade. Whatever your feelings on UKIP....it seemed absurd that they effectively came third in this election yet got only 1 MP into the commons. On the other hand of course and it's been mentioned above...you could say that Britain overall had voted for a more left wing/liberal/remain government in the 2019 election. The interesting facet would have been would voting patterns have been the same in a PR environment?
FPTP meant that UKIP and its derivatives could blackmail the Tories into taking an extreme position. They threatened to split the Tory vote.
 

DynamicSpirit

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2012
Messages
9,211
Location
SE London
Just noticed one odd result: In Tower Hamlets, the local party Aspire has taken control from Labour. Aspire is the hew party of Lutfur Rahman, the former mayor who was found guilty of electoral fraud and banned from standing for 5 years. This is his first election after the ban expired. That seems a somewhat worrying result to me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top