|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Apr 17, 2013 21:37:05 GMT
He being the councillor whom the council suspects to be behind the 'Mr Monkey' blog. The announcement of his candidature may or may not be linked with this news: www.shieldsgazette.com/news/local-news/mr-monkey-candidate-to-contest-shields-by-election-1-5561245I don't know whether they are. South Tyneside Council has been strongly attacked for seeking to identify the blogger; but I do know that were it to turn out that their suspicions were correct, then the critics would have a lot of egg on their faces. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2013 7:24:18 GMT
We should do away with election of people - we should elect policies. Politicians and anyone else should create and submit policies to a central computer, and then campaign for their policies to be elected. On polling day, voters go into a booth and are presented with various policy packages with costs, and various tax pages with values. The voters are allowed to mix and match policy and tax packages and submit their favourite balanced choice. The computer then runs a minimisation routine that find the best total fit of policies and taxes that balances and fulfils the most desires of the most people. The civil service then implements the policy/tax package in full transparency, while the political parties scrutinise them.  Such a dreadful idea. People will vote to have the most expensive everything and then to have the lowest possible taxation. Ultimately most people are neither intelligent nor interested enough to come up with a coherent set of policies that function together. To little democracy fails to protect people from dictators, too much democracy would fail to protect people from themselves. |
|
|
|
Post by stepney on Apr 18, 2013 7:34:58 GMT
I once thought up a variant on that where each party would put forward separate policies for each Department and they would be elected separately, with associated price tag - and the Chancellor would be obliged to raise the appropriate total amount in each year's budget but with discretion as to which taxes to use. A similar idea: |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2013 7:38:30 GMT
I once thought up a variant on that where each party would put forward separate policies for each Department and they would be elected separately, with associated price tag - and the Chancellor would be obliged to raise the appropriate total amount in each year's budget but with discretion as to which taxes to use. Thats a loaded system. The right would intrinsically suffer as you are implementing increased services before you consider peoples wishes to (presumably) lower the taxation. |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Apr 18, 2013 8:18:10 GMT
I once thought up a variant on that where each party would put forward separate policies for each Department and they would be elected separately, with associated price tag - and the Chancellor would be obliged to raise the appropriate total amount in each year's budget but with discretion as to which taxes to use. Thats a loaded system. The right would intrinsically suffer as you are implementing increased services before you consider peoples wishes to (presumably) lower the taxation. Is it loaded? If one candidate for the Department of Health stands with a budget of £143bn (an increase of 10%), and a rival stands proposing to spend £125bn (a slight cut), and the voters elect the first, they don't get any presumed benefit from the increased spending until it feeds through. I always thought it would be the other way round, with voters generally seeing the election as a chance to cut government spending directly. |
|
mboy
Liberal
Listen. Think. Speak.
Posts: 23,716
|
Post by mboy on Apr 18, 2013 8:47:40 GMT
The voters are allowed to mix and match policy and tax packages and submit their favourite balanced choice. Such a dreadful idea. People will vote to have the most expensive everything and then to have the lowest possible taxation. You obviously missed the sentence I've left quoted. Voters would only be able to choose balanced budgets. |
|
mboy
Liberal
Listen. Think. Speak.
Posts: 23,716
|
Post by mboy on Apr 18, 2013 8:52:21 GMT
 Wonderful!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2013 11:09:58 GMT
Such a dreadful idea. People will vote to have the most expensive everything and then to have the lowest possible taxation. You obviously missed the sentence I've left quoted. Voters would only be able to choose balanced budgets. Our budget is nowhere near balanced now. Thats a very drastic economic condition. |
|
mboy
Liberal
Listen. Think. Speak.
Posts: 23,716
|
Post by mboy on Apr 18, 2013 12:10:08 GMT
Deficits would still occur, during and after recessions - because the projections of the balance at election time would not be met. Of course, it's not a perfect system (otherwise presumably we'd already be doing it), but it's not flawed in the particular way you suggest.
|
|
john07
Labour & Co-operative
Posts: 15,788 
|
Post by john07 on Apr 18, 2013 13:57:15 GMT
The thread is drifting alarmingly.
|
|
Tony Otim
Green
Suffering from Brexistential Despair
Posts: 11,902
|
Post by Tony Otim on Apr 18, 2013 13:58:46 GMT
The thread is drifting alarmingly. Probably a sign of how exciting we find the prospect of this by-election. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2013 6:43:13 GMT
Grouping together would be terrible. Would kill the regular traffic to my election results sites. Just because you're able to not work for a living without doing anything didn't mean it's a bad idea to suggest reform. |
|
|
|
Post by AdminSTB on Apr 19, 2013 9:09:26 GMT
Being a student, for the win.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2013 11:17:20 GMT
It stinks.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2013 14:55:38 GMT
I think the rule in Scotland is that the by-election has to be within three months of the vacancy. It is and, as importantly, it is the Presiding Officer who determines the date for the by-election. |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Apr 19, 2013 16:29:53 GMT
The SOPN is out:
Karen ALLEN (The Conservative Party Candidate)
Hugh ANNAND (Liberal Democrat)
Lady Dorothy MacBeth BROOKES (British National Party)
Phil BROWN (The Independent Socialist Party)
Thomas Faithful DARWOOD (Independent)
Richard Peter ELVIN (UK Independence Party (UK I P))
Howling Laud HOPE (The Official Monster Raving Loony Party)
Ahmed KHAN (Independent)
Emma LEWELL-BUCK (Labour Party Candidate)
One candidate withdrew their nomination:
Lee NELSON (Independent)
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,925
|
Post by The Bishop on Apr 19, 2013 16:33:04 GMT
Unusual to have an "L" at the bottom of the ballot paper with that many candidates.
Also noted is the absence of any Green, Respect or TUSC candidate here.......
|
|
|
|
Post by markgoodair on Apr 19, 2013 16:57:44 GMT
The SOPN is out: Karen ALLEN (The Conservative Party Candidate) Hugh ANNAND (Liberal Democrat) Lady Dorothy MacBeth BROOKES (British National Party) Phil BROWN (The Independent Socialist Party) Thomas Faithful DARWOOD (Independent) Richard Peter ELVIN (UK Independence Party (UK I P)) Howling Laud HOPE (The Official Monster Raving Loony Party) Ahmed KHAN (Independent) Emma LEWELL-BUCK (Labour Party Candidate) One candidate withdrew their nomination: Lee NELSON (Independent) |
|
|
|
Post by markgoodair on Apr 19, 2013 16:58:51 GMT
Who are the Independent Socialist Party?
|
|
Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 16,029
|
Post by Sibboleth on Apr 19, 2013 17:18:34 GMT
There was an anticommunist ILP splinter of that name in the 30s - the main figures were former Liverpool MP Elijah Sandham and the literary critic John Middleton Murry (who was also Katherine Mansfield's widower) - but I'm presuming it's not the same organisation.
|
|
