Comments on: Hughes attacks Labour’s “naked opportunism” in opposing vote reform bill http://www.libdemvoice.org/hughes-attacks-labours-naked-opportunism-in-opposing-vote-reform-bill-20504.html Our place to talk - an independent website for supporters of the Liberal Democrat party in the UK. Sat, 11 Feb 2012 08:55:56 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: MacK http://www.libdemvoice.org/hughes-attacks-labours-naked-opportunism-in-opposing-vote-reform-bill-20504.html#comment-135384 MacK Fri, 30 Jul 2010 14:30:14 +0000 http://www.libdemvoice.org/?p=20504#comment-135384 @Paul McKeown "Result: Labour 315, Conservatives 206, Lib Dems 100 Gerrymander? You’re damn right." Of course two wrongs don't make a right. But I watched Simon Hughes on Newsnight and thought he was being completely disingenuous. Hain said that if the Orange Tories uncoupled the elements of AV and revised boundary changes and made them the subject of separate bills Labour could support the bill on the AV referendum. Of course they will, the promise of a referendum on AV was in our manifesto. Hain also said that he would campaign for AV at a referendum. All he asked for on the boundary changes was that all alterations should be subject to time, scrutiny and accountability. What's wrong with that? It rather looks as though the coalition experience has removed the DEMOCRAT from the Liberal Democrats. @ Republica "Posted 29th July 2010 at 4:22 pm | Permalink I think the real naked opportunism that has really been going on is happening in India right now,David Cameron stirs up the muck with Pakistan and India and then tries to sell India an aircraft carrier and 57 training jets,is this really what the lib dems have come too. I was cockahoop whan the lib dems stood up against the Iraq war and showed their disquiet over Afganistan but it would seem that being a part of this executive has bought their silence which is bloody sickening." Absolutely. It takes a really talented politician to insult the Jews and the Muslims at the same time! @Paul McKeown
“Result: Labour 315, Conservatives 206, Lib Dems 100

Gerrymander?

You’re damn right.”

Of course two wrongs don’t make a right. But I watched Simon Hughes on Newsnight and thought he was being completely disingenuous. Hain said that if the Orange Tories uncoupled the elements of AV and revised boundary changes and made them the subject of separate bills Labour could support the bill on the AV referendum. Of course they will, the promise of a referendum on AV was in our manifesto. Hain also said that he would campaign for AV at a referendum. All he asked for on the boundary changes was that all alterations should be subject to time, scrutiny and accountability. What’s wrong with that?
It rather looks as though the coalition experience has removed the DEMOCRAT from the Liberal Democrats.
@ Republica

“Posted 29th July 2010 at 4:22 pm | Permalink
I think the real naked opportunism that has really been going on is happening in India right now,David Cameron stirs up the muck with Pakistan and India and then tries to sell India an aircraft carrier and 57 training jets,is this really what the lib dems have come too.
I was cockahoop whan the lib dems stood up against the Iraq war and showed their disquiet over Afganistan but it would seem that being a part of this executive has bought their silence which is bloody sickening.”

Absolutely. It takes a really talented politician to insult the Jews and the Muslims at the same time!

]]> By: Sesenco http://www.libdemvoice.org/hughes-attacks-labours-naked-opportunism-in-opposing-vote-reform-bill-20504.html#comment-135380 Sesenco Fri, 30 Jul 2010 13:50:25 +0000 http://www.libdemvoice.org/?p=20504#comment-135380 I am horrified to discover that Cameron is proposing to eliminate due process from his "equalisation" boundary review. If the review is going to be fair and reasonable, what does Cameron have to fear from public inquiries? When Simon Huighes has his constituency "equalised", I don't suppose he'll be too happy. I am horrified to discover that Cameron is proposing to eliminate due process from his “equalisation” boundary review. If the review is going to be fair and reasonable, what does Cameron have to fear from public inquiries? When Simon Huighes has his constituency “equalised”, I don’t suppose he’ll be too happy.

]]> By: JC http://www.libdemvoice.org/hughes-attacks-labours-naked-opportunism-in-opposing-vote-reform-bill-20504.html#comment-135377 JC Fri, 30 Jul 2010 12:46:15 +0000 http://www.libdemvoice.org/?p=20504#comment-135377 Tonyhill, I would just like to expand your example a bit. Our factory has five sections, each section has ten employees and all sections have conflicting interests. Two sections have full union membership the others have 20% membership giving us 26 registered voters from a population of 50. In order to equalise the mandate of the shop stewards we transfer the votes of five members of one of the sections with full membership and four of the other to the sections with only two members adding three members to each of the other three sections. We now have sections with a population of six, five and three of thirteen. One section has six voters four now have five, three sections have eight non-voters each who will nonetheless be subject to the decisions. All sections now have a majority of voting members from the first two sections. The shop steward for each section will now be selected by a majority of members from other sections who have interests conflicting with the section they now represent. In your version of the example, each section has an equal population and an equal representative for their constitutuency interests even though two sections will have a greater mandate. You consider this undemocratic. In my version, as a result of boundary changes based on registered voters, all sections will have shop stewards representing the interests of the two sections with the highest percentage of members, in other words five representatives for two sections and none for the rest. Those employees of the sections with low membership will now be subject to the decisions of representatives of others simply because they had not registered to vote for one reason or another. The interests of 60% of the overall population are rendered valueless and not represented at all. However following your logic this would be democratic. Tonyhill, I would just like to expand your example a bit.
Our factory has five sections, each section has ten employees and all sections have conflicting interests. Two sections have full union membership the others have 20% membership giving us 26 registered voters from a population of 50. In order to equalise the mandate of the shop stewards we transfer the votes of five members of one of the sections with full membership and four of the other to the sections with only two members adding three members to each of the other three sections. We now have sections with a population of six, five and three of thirteen. One section has six voters four now have five, three sections have eight non-voters each who will nonetheless be subject to the decisions. All sections now have a majority of voting members from the first two sections. The shop steward for each section will now be selected by a majority of members from other sections who have interests conflicting with the section they now represent.
In your version of the example, each section has an equal population and an equal representative for their constitutuency interests even though two sections will have a greater mandate. You consider this undemocratic. In my version, as a result of boundary changes based on registered voters, all sections will have shop stewards representing the interests of the two sections with the highest percentage of members, in other words five representatives for two sections and none for the rest. Those employees of the sections with low membership will now be subject to the decisions of representatives of others simply because they had not registered to vote for one reason or another. The interests of 60% of the overall population are rendered valueless and not represented at all. However following your logic this would be democratic.

]]> By: Hove Howard http://www.libdemvoice.org/hughes-attacks-labours-naked-opportunism-in-opposing-vote-reform-bill-20504.html#comment-135372 Hove Howard Fri, 30 Jul 2010 11:59:56 +0000 http://www.libdemvoice.org/?p=20504#comment-135372 Tony Hill wrote "I may be wrong about this, but having perused the Boundary Commission website it looks fairly clear to me that what they take into account is the electorate rather than the population, so all the huffing and puffing on here about not waiting for the results of the census is irrelevant. There is a clear legal duty on anyone of or about to become of voting age to ensure that they are registered. If people choose, for whatever reason, to be in breach of that law I can’t see any reason why the administrative structure of democracy should be required to consider them." I have emailed the boundary commission about this. I have a feeling you may be correct, though that doesn't mean that what they are doing is right. Apart from the moral considerations of considering minors and the non-registered as non-persons, what about the effect on inner city MPs' casework this is going to have in the new. larger constituencies? Instead of coming over all Tory and attacking the non-registered as criminals, perhaps it might be more helpful to consider why this phenonmenon is so common. The link between local taxation and electoral registration, established by the Tories with the poll tax and continuing with the council tax, does not help one bit. Personally, if I was rubbing along in crap jobs getting minimum wage and I thought I could avoid paying council tax by moving around and not registering, then I'd do it. Wouldn't you? Tony Hill wrote “I may be wrong about this, but having perused the Boundary Commission website it looks fairly clear to me that what they take into account is the electorate rather than the population, so all the huffing and puffing on here about not waiting for the results of the census is irrelevant. There is a clear legal duty on anyone of or about to become of voting age to ensure that they are registered. If people choose, for whatever reason, to be in breach of that law I can’t see any reason why the administrative structure of democracy should be required to consider them.”

I have emailed the boundary commission about this. I have a feeling you may be correct, though that doesn’t mean that what they are doing is right. Apart from the moral considerations of considering minors and the non-registered as non-persons, what about the effect on inner city MPs’ casework this is going to have in the new. larger constituencies?

Instead of coming over all Tory and attacking the non-registered as criminals, perhaps it might be more helpful to consider why this phenonmenon is so common. The link between local taxation and electoral registration, established by the Tories with the poll tax and continuing with the council tax, does not help one bit. Personally, if I was rubbing along in crap jobs getting minimum wage and I thought I could avoid paying council tax by moving around and not registering, then I’d do it. Wouldn’t you?

]]> By: Sesenco http://www.libdemvoice.org/hughes-attacks-labours-naked-opportunism-in-opposing-vote-reform-bill-20504.html#comment-135368 Sesenco Fri, 30 Jul 2010 10:29:25 +0000 http://www.libdemvoice.org/?p=20504#comment-135368 The Coalition government has a knack of proposing to do things that are already being done. For instance, "Equity & Excellence" lists a number of rather vague proposals for LA involvement in the NHS (we are getting a white paper dealing with just this aspect by the end of the year, apparently). However, LAs are doing all the things that E&E proposes already. Similarly, Cameron is calling for the equalisation of constituency sizes, forgetting that we have a quango known as the Boundaries Commission that does this already (and did it in the last Parliament). Clegg is wrong on three points: (1) AV is at best a marginal tinkering with the electoral system which no-one wants. The proposed referendum is a futile distraction from the real issue, and could damage the prospect of getting genuine electoral reform. (2) Reducing the number of MPs is not acceptable. If we want MPs to work for us effectively, we have to have enough of them to do that job. (3) The Boundaries Commission should be allowed to get on with its job without a partisan slant. The Coalition government has a knack of proposing to do things that are already being done.

For instance, “Equity & Excellence” lists a number of rather vague proposals for LA involvement in the NHS (we are getting a white paper dealing with just this aspect by the end of the year, apparently). However, LAs are doing all the things that E&E proposes already.

Similarly, Cameron is calling for the equalisation of constituency sizes, forgetting that we have a quango known as the Boundaries Commission that does this already (and did it in the last Parliament).

Clegg is wrong on three points:

(1) AV is at best a marginal tinkering with the electoral system which no-one wants. The proposed referendum is a futile distraction from the real issue, and could damage the prospect of getting genuine electoral reform.

(2) Reducing the number of MPs is not acceptable. If we want MPs to work for us effectively, we have to have enough of them to do that job.

(3) The Boundaries Commission should be allowed to get on with its job without a partisan slant.

]]> By: tonyhill http://www.libdemvoice.org/hughes-attacks-labours-naked-opportunism-in-opposing-vote-reform-bill-20504.html#comment-135344 tonyhill Thu, 29 Jul 2010 21:22:36 +0000 http://www.libdemvoice.org/?p=20504#comment-135344 I see my comment was blocked - presumably it was too short. I agree that compulsory voting is illiberal: participatory democracy is liberal. Let me put it in a way the Labour trolls might understand: a factory is split into five sections, each employing a similar number of workers; two of the sections are heavily unionised and three sections have very few union members, but each section appoints a shop steward. The three shop stewards who represent a very small number of people who have joined the union in their section of the factory can therefore outvote the two shop stewards who represent a large number of union members. Your argument would have it that a situation like that is democratic; mine is that it is not. I see my comment was blocked – presumably it was too short. I agree that compulsory voting is illiberal: participatory democracy is liberal. Let me put it in a way the Labour trolls might understand: a factory is split into five sections, each employing a similar number of workers; two of the sections are heavily unionised and three sections have very few union members, but each section appoints a shop steward. The three shop stewards who represent a very small number of people who have joined the union in their section of the factory can therefore outvote the two shop stewards who represent a large number of union members. Your argument would have it that a situation like that is democratic; mine is that it is not.

]]> By: Poppie's mum http://www.libdemvoice.org/hughes-attacks-labours-naked-opportunism-in-opposing-vote-reform-bill-20504.html#comment-135341 Poppie's mum Thu, 29 Jul 2010 20:54:21 +0000 http://www.libdemvoice.org/?p=20504#comment-135341 If the AV referendum and boundary changes are not separated out into separate bills I will vote No to the 'miserable compromise' of AV [presuming it even gets to referendum stage] as it seems the only way to show Clegg how wrong he is on this. What is the matter with him ? Is Clegg on a mission to pulverise the LibDem vote ? Does he actually talk to ordinary people in the street ? If the AV referendum and boundary changes are not separated out into separate bills I will vote No to the ‘miserable compromise’ of AV [presuming it even gets to referendum stage] as it seems the only way to show Clegg how wrong he is on this.

What is the matter with him ?

Is Clegg on a mission to pulverise the LibDem vote ? Does he actually talk to ordinary people in the street ?

]]> By: tonyhill http://www.libdemvoice.org/hughes-attacks-labours-naked-opportunism-in-opposing-vote-reform-bill-20504.html#comment-135333 tonyhill Thu, 29 Jul 2010 19:54:24 +0000 http://www.libdemvoice.org/?p=20504#comment-135333 Compulsory voting - illiberal. Participatory democracy - liberal. Compulsory voting – illiberal. Participatory democracy – liberal.

]]> By: Nigel http://www.libdemvoice.org/hughes-attacks-labours-naked-opportunism-in-opposing-vote-reform-bill-20504.html#comment-135325 Nigel Thu, 29 Jul 2010 18:44:11 +0000 http://www.libdemvoice.org/?p=20504#comment-135325 Peter Laubach "one of the’duties’ of having the privilege of living in a democracy (despite all the faults of ours) should be to ensure one is registered and actually to vote – and there should be a penalty, routinely enforced, for those who don’t." tonyhill "If people choose, for whatever reason, to be in breach of that law I can’t see any reason why the administrative structure of democracy should be required to consider them." Just wondering, are there any liberals left in the Liberal Democrats? Peter Laubach
“one of the’duties’ of having the privilege of living in a democracy (despite all the faults of ours) should be to ensure one is registered and actually to vote – and there should be a penalty, routinely enforced, for those who don’t.”

tonyhill
“If people choose, for whatever reason, to be in breach of that law I can’t see any reason why the administrative structure of democracy should be required to consider them.”

Just wondering, are there any liberals left in the Liberal Democrats?

]]> By: tonyhill http://www.libdemvoice.org/hughes-attacks-labours-naked-opportunism-in-opposing-vote-reform-bill-20504.html#comment-135315 tonyhill Thu, 29 Jul 2010 16:55:34 +0000 http://www.libdemvoice.org/?p=20504#comment-135315 I may be wrong about this, but having perused the Boundary Commission website it looks fairly clear to me that what they take into account is the electorate rather than the population, so all the huffing and puffing on here about not waiting for the results of the census is irrelevant. There is a clear legal duty on anyone of or about to become of voting age to ensure that they are registered. If people choose, for whatever reason, to be in breach of that law I can't see any reason why the administrative structure of democracy should be required to consider them. I may be wrong about this, but having perused the Boundary Commission website it looks fairly clear to me that what they take into account is the electorate rather than the population, so all the huffing and puffing on here about not waiting for the results of the census is irrelevant. There is a clear legal duty on anyone of or about to become of voting age to ensure that they are registered. If people choose, for whatever reason, to be in breach of that law I can’t see any reason why the administrative structure of democracy should be required to consider them.

]]> By: republica http://www.libdemvoice.org/hughes-attacks-labours-naked-opportunism-in-opposing-vote-reform-bill-20504.html#comment-135312 republica Thu, 29 Jul 2010 16:27:47 +0000 http://www.libdemvoice.org/?p=20504#comment-135312 @Alex, when i said ..you know the old saying “if you sleep with dogs,expect to get fleas” well the tories are dogs and they are very cunning dogs at that so sooner or later the itching within lib dem ranks will start. this is what i meant. http://conservativehome.blogs.com/localgovernment/2010/07/lib-dem-councillor-in-windsor-and-maidenhead-defects-to-conservatives.html When will you wake up to what your beloved leader is doing to your party? @Alex, when i said ..you know the old saying “if you sleep with dogs,expect to get fleas” well the tories are dogs and they are very cunning dogs at that so sooner or later the itching within lib dem ranks will start.
this is what i meant.
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/localgovernment/2010/07/lib-dem-councillor-in-windsor-and-maidenhead-defects-to-conservatives.html
When will you wake up to what your beloved leader is doing to your party?

]]> By: republica http://www.libdemvoice.org/hughes-attacks-labours-naked-opportunism-in-opposing-vote-reform-bill-20504.html#comment-135299 republica Thu, 29 Jul 2010 15:22:07 +0000 http://www.libdemvoice.org/?p=20504#comment-135299 I think the real naked opportunism that has really been going on is happening in India right now,David Cameron stirs up the muck with Pakistan and India and then tries to sell India an aircraft carrier and 57 training jets,is this really what the lib dems have come too. I was cockahoop whan the lib dems stood up against the Iraq war and showed their disquiet over Afganistan but it would seem that being a part of this executive has bought their silence which is bloody sickening. I think the real naked opportunism that has really been going on is happening in India right now,David Cameron stirs up the muck with Pakistan and India and then tries to sell India an aircraft carrier and 57 training jets,is this really what the lib dems have come too.
I was cockahoop whan the lib dems stood up against the Iraq war and showed their disquiet over Afganistan but it would seem that being a part of this executive has bought their silence which is bloody sickening.

]]> By: Stuart http://www.libdemvoice.org/hughes-attacks-labours-naked-opportunism-in-opposing-vote-reform-bill-20504.html#comment-135295 Stuart Thu, 29 Jul 2010 15:00:05 +0000 http://www.libdemvoice.org/?p=20504#comment-135295 Surely one of the luxuries of opposition is not having to carry out awkward manifesto-defying U-turns in the face of changed circumstances. How rubbish does an opposition have to be to betray its own manifesto within three months of an election? What a shower the Labour party has become... its obsessive loathing of Lib Dems is now so all-consuming that it leads them to this twisted policy position. Surely one of the luxuries of opposition is not having to carry out awkward manifesto-defying U-turns in the face of changed circumstances. How rubbish does an opposition have to be to betray its own manifesto within three months of an election? What a shower the Labour party has become… its obsessive loathing of Lib Dems is now so all-consuming that it leads them to this twisted policy position.

]]> By: Peter Laubach http://www.libdemvoice.org/hughes-attacks-labours-naked-opportunism-in-opposing-vote-reform-bill-20504.html#comment-135276 Peter Laubach Thu, 29 Jul 2010 12:48:26 +0000 http://www.libdemvoice.org/?p=20504#comment-135276 Labour are doing no less than I would have expected of them - they really are the pits, especially the mealy-mouthed, weasel-worded Straw. As for the numbers being based on registered voters, those who cannot be bothered to get themselves registered have no cause for complaint - one of the'duties' of having the privilege of living in a democracy (despite all the faults of ours) should be to ensure one is registered and actually to vote - and there should be a penalty, routinely enforced, for those who don't. Labour are doing no less than I would have expected of them – they really are the pits, especially the mealy-mouthed, weasel-worded Straw.
As for the numbers being based on registered voters, those who cannot be bothered to get themselves registered have no cause for complaint – one of the’duties’ of having the privilege of living in a democracy (despite all the faults of ours) should be to ensure one is registered and actually to vote – and there should be a penalty, routinely enforced, for those who don’t.

]]> By: Alex http://www.libdemvoice.org/hughes-attacks-labours-naked-opportunism-in-opposing-vote-reform-bill-20504.html#comment-135273 Alex Thu, 29 Jul 2010 12:35:46 +0000 http://www.libdemvoice.org/?p=20504#comment-135273 @ Tonyhill. True. But then STV has a completely different MP-constituency dynamic so comparisons to the current scenario are therefore extremely limited. @ Tonyhill.

True. But then STV has a completely different MP-constituency dynamic so comparisons to the current scenario are therefore extremely limited.

]]> By: tonyhill http://www.libdemvoice.org/hughes-attacks-labours-naked-opportunism-in-opposing-vote-reform-bill-20504.html#comment-135271 tonyhill Thu, 29 Jul 2010 12:24:05 +0000 http://www.libdemvoice.org/?p=20504#comment-135271 CowleyJon - I may be wrong, but I think that the Electoral Reform Society's proposals for STV always allowed for a few sparsely populated, geographically enormous constituencies to have MPs elected by AV instead of STV. CowleyJon – I may be wrong, but I think that the Electoral Reform Society’s proposals for STV always allowed for a few sparsely populated, geographically enormous constituencies to have MPs elected by AV instead of STV.

]]> By: CowleyJon http://www.libdemvoice.org/hughes-attacks-labours-naked-opportunism-in-opposing-vote-reform-bill-20504.html#comment-135269 CowleyJon Thu, 29 Jul 2010 12:14:19 +0000 http://www.libdemvoice.org/?p=20504#comment-135269 But we know there is an enormous difference between what the census tells us who can vote and what the registers say. Constituency sizes have been drawn up with regard to the what the census tells us how many people live in the area and can vote: not how many of those people have actually registered. Using the census does ensure equal representation as the vagaries of voter registration, transient populations, etc are taken into account. But we know there is an enormous difference between what the census tells us who can vote and what the registers say. Constituency sizes have been drawn up with regard to the what the census tells us how many people live in the area and can vote: not how many of those people have actually registered. Using the census does ensure equal representation as the vagaries of voter registration, transient populations, etc are taken into account.

]]> By: Alex http://www.libdemvoice.org/hughes-attacks-labours-naked-opportunism-in-opposing-vote-reform-bill-20504.html#comment-135253 Alex Thu, 29 Jul 2010 09:48:04 +0000 http://www.libdemvoice.org/?p=20504#comment-135253 It seems one of the major concerns could be answered by the Government including a commitment to reviewing and maintaining equal constituencies as and when new data is available... i.e. when new consensus and other similar investigations are carried out, starting with a promise to take next years consensus in to account. I agree that they should probably wait, but if they made this commitment, it really wouldn't make that much difference overall (apart from making more admin. work) It seems one of the major concerns could be answered by the Government including a commitment to reviewing and maintaining equal constituencies as and when new data is available… i.e. when new consensus and other similar investigations are carried out, starting with a promise to take next years consensus in to account.

I agree that they should probably wait, but if they made this commitment, it really wouldn’t make that much difference overall (apart from making more admin. work)

]]> By: john martin http://www.libdemvoice.org/hughes-attacks-labours-naked-opportunism-in-opposing-vote-reform-bill-20504.html#comment-135252 john martin Thu, 29 Jul 2010 09:40:19 +0000 http://www.libdemvoice.org/?p=20504#comment-135252 There is no compulsion on Labour to play a Coalition game with the Constitution. The real issue is not a referendum but the circumstances under which it is proposed it should be held. The Labour Party has a duty to itself and to the country to get rid of this Coalition before too much damage is inflicted upon British society. There is no doubt that Clegg and Cameron have turned out to be ruthless operators so they can hardly compain if others do ikewise. There is no compulsion on Labour to play a Coalition game with the Constitution. The real issue is not a referendum but the circumstances under which it is proposed it should be held. The Labour Party has a duty to itself and to the country to get rid of this Coalition before too much damage is inflicted upon British society. There is no doubt that Clegg and Cameron have turned out to be ruthless operators so they can hardly compain if others do ikewise.

]]> By: Henry http://www.libdemvoice.org/hughes-attacks-labours-naked-opportunism-in-opposing-vote-reform-bill-20504.html#comment-135249 Henry Thu, 29 Jul 2010 09:04:59 +0000 http://www.libdemvoice.org/?p=20504#comment-135249 The Chartists campaigned for equal constituencies. This was at a time when Tories benefitted from variations in size. Who would have thought that so many Labour supporters would be against equality. Paul Foot would be spinning in his grave. As for registration, this government will do all it can to increase registration, a problem everywhere - not just Labour seats -, but a) the previous government was pretty shoddy and b) 100% perfect registration is not possible, so if this is what you are demanding, it is simply an excuse for opposing the existing bias in the system. The Chartists campaigned for equal constituencies. This was at a time when Tories benefitted from variations in size. Who would have thought that so many Labour supporters would be against equality. Paul Foot would be spinning in his grave.

As for registration, this government will do all it can to increase registration, a problem everywhere – not just Labour seats -, but a) the previous government was pretty shoddy and b) 100% perfect registration is not possible, so if this is what you are demanding, it is simply an excuse for opposing the existing bias in the system.

]]>