Sad news from Yorkshire: John Boakes, UKIP candidate for Thirsk & Malton, has died. This means the election will be delayed with polling now taking place on 27 May. During to the change in law following a similar tragedy in 2005, existing nominations roll forward but UKIP is permitted to nominate a new candidate.
Subscribe
-
Follow @LibDemVoice on Twitter
-
Like us on Facebook
-
Subscribe to our feed
-
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Most Read
Search
Op-eds
-
Conference Day 1 highlights (Caron Lindsay)
-
Observations of an Expat: The Debate (Tom Arms)
-
Sunday Trading Reform: Open All Hours or Keep Sunday Special (Michael Bukola)
-
Budget Challenge from Lib Dems: Capture Land Values (Tony Vickers)
-
VAT cuts – is it really a fair deal for musicians? (Brandon Masih)
-
Calling them out
-
The railway wars come to Market Harborough
-
Is Kind Hearts and Coronets the only nasty Ealing comedy?
-
Constructive opposition: a phrase you will hear a lot
-
Lord Bonkers' Diary: In case they get peckish during Lent
-
Friends of Riverside Nature Park AGM #dundeewestend
-
Nice work if you can get it
Recent Comments
Hugh Young
I can see both sides of the argument, but remember people who work in supermarkets are low paid and work hard, surely they deserve some time with their families...
Roland
" The number of hours that shops are open has greatly increased from the days when almost all were shut on Sundays and also shut on early closing day." Kevin Ha...- Roland
@Simon R - That letter clearly indicates there needs to be follow up FoI for the Network Rail detailed assessment. From this report: https://www.bbc.co.uk/n... 
Kevin Hawkins
Two further points that should be considered:- 1) Having restricted Sunday hours for the larger shops provides a boost for smaller businesses. If Sunday tradin...
Steve Trevethan
Thank you for your article and the work it involves! “ Political Theatre” is such an appropriate phrase! Is either person securely capable of serving...
17 Comments
Any clues on the nominal majorities?
~*paging David Boothroyd*~
From the BBC website the nominal pecentage of votes from 2005 for what is the new constituency of Thirsk & Malton are:
Conservatives 51.9%
Labour 23.4%
Lib Dem 18.8 %
Others 5.9%
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/election2010/results/constituency/e68.stm
how does this work. if i cant vote 2day then i cant have a say in who is prime minister
Leanne, I don’t know anything about the constituency but from the look of those 2005 totals Bill has given, you’re in ultra-safe Conservative territory and the result is pretty much a foregone conclusion. So sadly your vote would have very little impact on the overall outcome anyway. That’s the rubbish system we’re in.
Still, it’s a good point. What if this had happened in a marginal, and the overall race was very close, as it is today? It is theoretically possible that a delayed result in one constituency could affect the hold contest. Anyone know if there is a protocol for such cases?
I don’t understand why UKIP didn’t have a “reserve” in place. Why doe’s our vote have to be put back so far. When we get the chance to vote the whole thing wil be sorted out, our vote will be irrelevent, unless the “Swingometer” is down to one seat!
If a candidate has a coronary during their acceptance speech do they get to have a ‘reserve in place’? Under the law, I suggest not. There are proper procedures. The lib dems problems are not a three week delay in one seat (have some respect).
The problem is that Clegg is about to climb into bed with the enemy. A week ago the lib dems looked like they might sweep all before them. Now you might do in the whole country by making a deal with Cameron and kill your own party in the process. Few will forgive you, and I have no doubt that includes many of your own members and supporters.
I totally agree with you Paul.
If that deal goes through it will be the end for two parties. Labour and the Lib Dems. Clegg will of course be thinking that if he sides with Cameron he will be ‘looked after’. But long term to the voter is surely a Party destroyer. Although Cleggs Party didn’t win the extra seats that was the early indication the turn out overall for the Lib Dem vote was huge. Surely by becoming a lighter shade of blue they are effectively saying, sorry guys and gals your vote and support means nothing as we are just the Tories in disguise.
To me forming a coalition with Brown would be the better option. that way he keeps his Party identity as there is no one power base, although of Course Brown will still be sailing the ship Clegg will still hold the balance of power in decision and mandate bargaining. with Cameron in charge no matter what Clegg and his Party candidates want he will not have the power as the smaller of the 3 Parties.
The fact Cameron never got his majority, the Lib Dem vote was high, they did pretty well locally from what I can see, and Labour just about survived the night surely the electorate spoke loudly that they want a piece of everyone and want a steady ship. But at the moment we are indeed at risk of a lack of respect for democracy, and back door under the table deals.
Surely the ‘best’ outcome is for Cameron to form a government and moderate his policies to ensure some cross party support – could party interest be set aside in the national interest – at least for while??????
Paul we can see who you voted for. I am a long way awat in Australia but a Labour/Lib Dem coalition even throwing in the SDLP in Ireland would not have a majority. How is that going to get the UK back on track. It seems to me two million more Brit’s want a change surely the Lib Dem’s need to give the people what they voted for!
@Leane. You don’t have a say in who is PM realy.
@leanne
say LAB and CON both had 325 seats each right now, both one off from a majority, they would have to wait until Thrisk & Malton has voted to see who gets the final seat, and if it was LAB or CON then it would be the decider. As it stands however there is more than one seat between any of the parties getting a majority so it does’t matter. but your vote still counts as much as anyone else’s.
We should either ask the Labour party very politely not to field their candidate or not field ours; I suspect Labour voters would be more likely to vote for our candidate than ours would for theirs. If we/they won it would make the ‘rainbow coalition’ that bit more plausible.
NICK, 20 YEARS OF TRUST….YOU HAVE NOT LET US DOWN. But PR is fundamental and we wont accept anything less.
woooooo wooo woooooooooooooooo woooo
im a (white) ghost
wooo wooooooooooooo
Now that the Lib-Dems and the Tories have made a single agreement on policy surely it must form the basis of a shared manifesto at the postponed general election contest (not by-election) at Thirsk and Malton. The logical extension of this is that both the Lib Dems and the Tories must now stand as a Lib Dem Tory Coalition Party at Thirsk and Malton and at any subsequent by-election. To stand as separate parties under discrete manifestos would make nonsense of the coalition agreement for in such circumstances each party would be standing on a false prospectus, one that they could not remotely guarantee to implement. Surely, the only other solution to this mess is for one party to offer to withdraw?
MacK: coalitions in Scotland, Wales and other countries have not required electoral pacts, so why should this one be any different?
Thirsk & M election: Lib Dems vote Labour if you don’t like coalition, Lib Dem if you do … maybe Labour can get close? Nah, just dreaming but Lib Dem to lose deposit!