Following my earlier post today, is not a referendum on AV one that has been arrived at by possible 'consultation' - and, dare I say, 'collusion' - amongst the Lib/Lab/Con?
Consider the question of UKIP and Green votes during the counting and 'knock-out' stages. It can be argued that, more than likely, UKIP second preference votes will, in general, be for the Conservative candidate and that Green second preference votes will, in general, be for Labour or Liberal Democrat Candidates. In other words, what is being 'foisted' upon the electorate is a choice whereby the Lib/Lab/Con retain their hold on British politics and one which enables one, or two of them, to retain their hands on the 'reigns of power'.
It is about time the British electorate asked themselves a question that I always ask myself when a politician proposes a course of action - namely, whats 'in it' for them!
A further oddity is the position adopted by UKIP, who are now backing a 'Yes' vote on AV, yet it is not the system proposed in their manifesto, which is AV+. It does seem rather contradictory that a party who consistently argues against undemocratic rule from Brussels is accepting that self-same undemocratic rule at home, bearing in mind the point made in my previous post and repeated below - a position which I would suggest presents a rather mixed message to the voting public.
As I have stated previously, surely there is a principle involved here in that if the system by which MPs are elected is to be changed, should it not be the people that decide that and make that decision based on all the alternative methods - FPTP, AV, AV+, STV, AM, PR etc? Would it not be more logical that, rather than support the Yes2AV campaign, UKIP suggested to their members that they campaigned for the No2AV side, because of the matter of principle I outline - and then abstained?
Does not the fact that the longer it can be seen the Lib/Lab/Con are 'in this' for themselves, that they are content with rule from Brussels, not strengthen UKIP's case for independence, small government, local government, flat taxes etc etc? Of course, that assumes UKIP have the 'nous' to recognise that and act accordingly - but, unfortunately I have my doubts.
Just a thought, or two, for discussion.........
Change of URL
2 years ago