h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I remember Martin Bell saying he would only serve as MP for Tatton for one term. What then has caused him to want to stay in politics, albeit in a different seat?

He did say that he would only serve in Tatton for only one year, but he did not say anyhting about moving on some place else. I think he wants to avoid moving back into journalism, since one of the reasons he left was because in his opinion news was becoming more and more dumbed down and tabloid.

I seem to remember hearing that only about 17% to 24% (depending on area) of people who were eligible to vote at the last general election bothered. It's a shame. Well, actually, I believe it's a disgrace. But whose fault is it? You could say we get the government we deserve when we can't be bothered to make the small effort involved every 4 years or so. Maybe people would be more inclined to make the effort if parties were legally obliged to keep their promises.

I just mentioned in another forum that I'm considering voting green at the next election because I voted for the party that won last time and they've failed to deliver. BBS, you talk about how they should increase taxes but if people wanted their taxes increased, they would have voted for the lib dems. The lib dems are always gleefully telling us how they're looking forward to having the opportunity to increase our taxes. Probably, most people would prefer the government to stop wasting the considerable amount they already clobber us for in taxes instead of taking and wasting even more of our hard earned dosh. I agree with Sue.

The US experiences the same phenomenon discussed here. Everyone thinks it is useless to vote. They don't like either the Republican or the Democrat. Those few who vote do so not for the one they like the best, but the one they fear the least.

One of the things I blame is the media, for making the general election *appear* to be a two-horse race. That's ludicrous. We live in democracies. When the major parties are no longer relevant to us, we should replace them with parties that are. That's why I vote for third parties. But people don't want to vote that way, because they consider their vote wasted. If you ask me, the only vote that is wasted is the one cast at someone you don't like. The candidates interpret your vote as unwavering support.

We need to disavow people of the notion that Democrat/Republican or Conservative/Labour are their only options. Until that happens, we have no democracies, because our countries are being run by people who have very little "will of the people."

Unfortunately many people here in Australia fed up with the "two party system" like to vote for Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party, to shake the govt up.

(If you don't know who she is, why she's such an evil person, and you actually care; I have links posted here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/A529913 )

Just got round to reading the Frank bruno story.

On 'matters of faith' I keep a fairly open mind (each to their own) but I've seen the 'church' in Brentwood, and this lot scare the (expletive not typed by poster) out of me.

Don't be a plank, vote for Frank *giggle*
Who needs the Monster Raving Loonies?

So with a General Election (probably?) coming up, who's going to bother voting?

I won't be.

Anyone want to try and persuade me that it's my duty?

It's not your duty - but it is sad that you do not want to

People are very fond of saying "when did you last hear of a politician doing anything selfless?" etc etc. Well, I can't speak for individual politicians, but I do work at the rockface of one little piece of democracy and I do know this:

Most people claim that they do not believe that the media portray a complete view of the democratic processes. However, the vast majority of people do indeed make their judgements on the world based on the media, and as a result are ill-informed. Very few people bother to contact their elected representatives, make points, express opinions, or find out for *themselves* what it's like and what is going on. "politician solves housing problem for little old lady" will not make the news, nor does the vast amount or sheer problem-solving slog that does go on.

I'm not saying all or even any politicians are good, but I am saying that *not* taking part (in any way), as an independantly-thinking, intelligent person, will ever really help.

You may say that you shouldn't have to go and find out, but that this information should be delivered to you: a moot point: comments anyone?

This isn't all necessary aimed at you, BBS!

I've a feeling I may get ranted at now

Maybe not ranted at as you make very good points however much has been writen about voter apathy, but there is a growing opinion that not voting is a concious decsion based on lack of any real alternative, perhaps one of the most vocal and successful of these advocates is Mark Thomas

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk_politics/newsid_1106000/1106167.stm

The above details the great success he has had without having to bribe voters with gimicks. For example the bit that says - "Another stunt highlighted how difficult it is to view art which, in return for tax exemptions, some stately home owners are meant to display publicly. " doesn't mention that in doing so he got one Lord to pay between £200K and £400K in tax rather than have the great unwashed demanding to see his works of art that he avoided paying inheritance tax on.

More and more groups are looking at single issues and pursuing them with great success, the old party system just cannot react in time to reflect peoples demands, it is like the super tankers taken 50 miles or whatever to change course. Mark Thomas has achieve in a few short years what politians in the major parties would be proud of over a career.

Whatever, I'm going to be out of the country on election day, do I bother with a postal ballot?

CHawke

If only we had a 'none of the above' box...

It doesn't matter who you vote for, because the government always gets in, and it's a moot point just how independent any government is, given international influences, the markets, multinational corporations.

However, there's a difference of emphasis. Neither of the two big UK parties really represents my views, but one is much closer than the other. One is also much scarier than the other. So I vote.

Also, I live in a constituency that has historically been seen as marginal, so my vote is worth more than those of you who live in constituencies that are safe seats (that doesn't seem very democratic, I haven't done anything to deserve that). So I vote.

And further, and this is important to me, I have realised that my local MP expresses views that actually chime quite well with my own, and I see from his voting record that he is not afraid to defy his party's whip and vote with his conscience. So I vote.

And maybe in voting I achieve very little, but no less than I would achieve by not voting. I can understand people who take a deliberate decision to abstain - that's a vote of sorts, and the nearest you can get to 'none of the above', and it's not the same, it seems to me, as saying 'it's not worth voting'.

But when I start to wonder if it's worth the bother of voting I just think back to the TV pictures of the first post-apartheid elections in South Africa, pictures of people queueing for hours so they could cast their vote and that usually gets me out of my chair to exercise a right that is denied to so many.

I still think that Mark Thomas is wonderful, though.

I'm Scottish everyone (before we start...).

OK... 1) Fringe.. ummmmmm.. never been, don't know.

But the Highlands AREN'T CLOSED!!! Where do you get your information from, mate?

We are open. No F&M here (yet...).

Also - to the person before the one I replied to - learn about Scotland - there are a darn sight more Con. seats than 1 (unfortunately...) in the Scottish Parliament.

I bet if we did a quiz, I'd know more about England than most English know about Scotland (and I'm not being racist - my own mother is a Londoner).

2) To the very first person to post: "a 2 horse race where neither the labour or conservative parties can win". COME ON! 2 horse race, yes. Neither party can win? Just watch Labour. The Tories don't have a chance in h**l. (sorry, everyone - and I self - censored there).

Anyway, New Labour are honorary Tories.

Ignore me. I'm spouting a load of rubbish because I've been eating too many chocolate liqueurs.

Captain Kebab - all very good points and reasons why you should you vote. For me however .....

IMHO there is little difference between Labour & Conservative, (both have scary leaders - Tony smiles too much for a normal person, Bill exists - that (lack of) hair, (lack of) charisma, that voice all far too scary, I liked Johnny M much better). So there seems little point in choosing between them. They'll each do some things I like, each do some things I don't like.

I live in a constituency that is solid blue. So my vote has little significance. Vote for them, they win bigger. Vote against them, they still win. Pretty much same result, why expend the effort?

I don't even know who my local MP is. I expect (s)he falls in line with the Tory party whip. I may be misinformed on this point.

And in not voting, I do not waste half an hour of my day that I could be using to go down the gym or watching Trisha or whatever

As for the "think of all those people who fought for their vote" argument, I will vote when I get scared by the possibility of a party against my beliefs getting into power (e.g. Nazi's, BNF).

But until then I feel happy to let the people who think they're making a difference worry about things such as politics. There are more than enough things in my "direct" life that I can spend my time on.

SB's helper:

Serve me right for not going into detail!

Let me remedy that:

In the Scottish Parliament elections of 6 May 1999, the Conservatives received 15.6% of the constituency votes, but received no seats as a reult. The closest they got was Ayr when Phil Gallie (Con) received just 25 votes less than Ian Welsh (Lab). Ian Welsh resigned on 21 December 1999 and in the resulting by-election (16 March 2000) John Scott (Con) was elected - Phil Gallie had already received a regional seat in the Parliament.

In the 2nd, regional vote, the Conservatives received 15.4% of the vote and through the additional member system received 18 seats, 13.95% of the overall seats in the Scottish Parliament (129). The addition of John Scott's seat took them to 19, which is 14.7% of the seats.

Please feel free to check this information against anything produced by the Scottish Parliament, or give them a call: 0131 348 5000

As for the Highlands: don't let me stop anyone going to the Highlands! I wrote that posting after a conversation with my embattled father-in-law on Skye, at a time when the disease was still spreading and panic was high. The West Highland way - perhaps the best way to see the Highland - was at that point closed, as were most of the other major walking routes. I was following the advice of the Scottish Tourist Board Chief Exec: "Chief Executive Peter McKinlay said that the decision had been taken after an analysis of the impact of the outbreak on tourism indicated many visitor attractions, country parks, nature reserves and footpaths in the countryside were closed to visitors until further notice. Mr McKinlay said: “So long as these precautions remain in place, we do not believe it is appropriate for us to promote access to the countryside. " (sorry - can't give you the URL, but it should be self evident. Moderators: please note that that quote is from a press release and should cause no problems.

I am confused.

Not politically. I am absolutely apolitical, never having lived in a country where I had a vote. As far as I can see it, wherever you are there is the "Yes Minister" syndrome and once in government, there's not much difference in the parties. Some political decisions seem unfair, but when compared to other countries, you can always find someone worse off.

My confusion is due to this ruling that elections are not allowed to be discussed here (i.e. on H2G2). If not, then what is this, please?

Valuable contributors are leaving the site in protest, but this discussion is unmoderated? Anyway, good luck to all contributors here.
Apparently there may be some elections soon on some island off the West Coast of Europe. Whatever next? Will it change the world?

All the discussions on UK elections will be pulled, I undersatnd, at the point that Parliament is dissolved and the election is called. Technically nothing (such as direct campaigning) is supposed to start until then, although obviously there is some overt stuff happening.

I think people are trying to get it out of their system before the lights go out

I'll try and make this apolitical by not naming parties. The principle being stated remains whatever the topic area.

Another reason why I suggest politics to be a waste of time is because a few years ago the ruling party introduced charges for things like going to the dentist, the optician and getting a prescription. The opposition parties denounced this as terrible and everybody has a right to free health checks etc.

However now that the opposition party have become the ruling party they've had 4 years to turn this policy around. But quite blatantly HAVEN'T. So what was all their whingeing about? A lot of hot air - I suggest and they really don't have any principles.

The standard reply to the above would be that the labour party have only had four years to turn around 18 years of neglect.