On May 5th we get the chance to vote on a new voting system. We will be asked whether we want to replace the First Past the Post system that we have now with the Alternative Vote. See, it’s more exciting than you thought, isn’t it!

This is only the second national referendum, the first being in 1975 to gauge our appetite for continued membership of what was then called the Common Market. We’ve been arguing about the topic of that one ever since.

However, despite the palpable excitement, with the UK involved in two conflicts abroad, the economy on its knees, tough cuts about to bite, public sector hit hard and people losing their jobs you have got to ask if now really is the right time to be having a vote on a voting system.

I’m sure that the Liberal Democrats would say that the country needs a change because the people are disenfranchised and the FPtP results are unrepresentative of the way people actually vote. And that the Conservative and Labour parties would say that what ain’t broke don’t fix it.

My feeling is that until you can get people to feel like this about voting then the method by which the votes are counted is largely irrelevant. Turnout has been in decline for many years with a large proportion of the voting population showing huge apathy for the process.

So forget how we vote and concentrate on getting people to actually get out and cast their vote in the first place. Only then can we worry about how we count the votes.

ShareThis

The panel was made up of a representative from the three mains parties and one each from UKIP and the Greens and was supposed to be looking at local issues – those directly affecting South of England, however, as ever, it proved impossible to prevent a politician from answering the question that they wanted to answer rather than what the questioner asked.

I’m not sure that I feel any better informed for having attended than had I just read the statements in the media and the manifestos but it was interesting to see the process and I made the following observations (based on a partisan position it should be noted):

• Chris Huhne talks too much
• Nigel Farage talks way too much
• Michael Gove talks without any substance
• John Denahm talks the party line
• Caroline Lucas talks a lot of sense (but then you can when you aren’t likely to ever get into a position of power!)

So Alex and I got our 15 minutes of fame and we’ve got pictures to prove it. Actually I added to my fame bank following my successful media debut on the Timmy Mallet programme promoting my record, but that’s a story for another day!

ShareThis

Just going through the photos taken when on our tour of Australia and Hong Kong and came across this one taken at Melbourne airport. Now I know that “aviation security” or terrorism as it is called outside of airports, is important but I have never considered jokes as “a threat to commit an unlawful interference with aviation”. Obviously I didn’t point this out to the security officers!

ShareThis

You go onto the site and answer 30 questions about what your thoughts are on a range of European related issues, spanning from should the EU have a say in your retirement age to should we join the Euro (Yes!). Should you not have lost the will to live by the 30th question it then matches you against the answers given by the policies of the parties entering the elections and tells you who your best match is.

So this is a good idea right? Wrong!

The idea behind the site is to engage with more people and encourage them to vote. While the idea is laudable I think it is a bad idea. Firstly, because, as they have been saying on the radio all this week, no one cares about the European elections. In fact it seems that no one cares about Europe until you ask them if they want to see a change of coinage. SO why is anyone going to get excited by 30 questions on the subject?

The major problem thought, is that is this the way to be encouraging people to vote? Yes, we want people to get out and enjoy the democracy that we have but I would much rather people took an interest and looked at the issues for themselves rather than be guided by a series of simplistic questions.

Whatever happens the turnout in June will be low and the major parties will take knock as a backlash against the economy and having had to pay for MPs to have their swimming pools and moats cleaned.

Feel any different? Think it is a good idea? Leave a comment.

ShareThis

ShareThis

One site this morning was urging their readers to go and vote which I thought was very laudable until they added “You get to decide the course of the free world for the next four years”. Unfortunately I think that is the problem right there – perhaps it is about time that responsibility was given to someone else.

ShareThis

So the 2008 Olympic Games are drawing to a close and the British are celebrating a record haul of medals – as I write this we have a pretty amazing total of 39, including 17 gold medals. What has been striking is where the successes have been achieved, in the sailing and, particularly, in the cycling where there were ten gold medals on offer of which we won seven.

Looking at the medals table you can see just how great the achievement really is – third for a county of our size is fantastic. Putting it into perspective I took the top 10 and worked out each countries relative position based on the medals won per head of population. On this basis it puts us second, just behind our current sporting rivals Australia. That last fact should give some comfort to this lot of whinging Aussies! 

ShareThis

Is it just me that thinks that this is a bit of a cheek and that the application should be rejected out of hand? What makes them think that they can make a better job of it than they did previously, other than them being insulated by guarantees from the government with my money. Not me that’s for sure!

ShareThis

According to the last census in 2001 36 million people recorded themselves as Christian while 15% had no religion at all. Of that 85% who have some religious affiliation only 6.3% attend church. So, they may not get out much on Sundays any more (probably too busy shopping) but as Nick Clegg has found they are clearly a scary lot. It is still the case that you need to have some form of religious belief in a public and political position and as Tony Blair found out that had better not be of the Catholic variety.

Of course religious affiliation makes no difference to your ability to do the job whatsoever and I was heartened to read the words of the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, who said: “It matters less to me than to know they are honest and reliable and that what beliefs they have they hold sincerely.” Now all we need to do is find an “honest and reliable” politician and we’re in business!

ShareThis

ShareThis