On 05/05/2011 09:45, Mark wrote:
On Wed, 04 May 2011 20:26:43 +0100, Old
wrote:

On 04/05/2011 13:51, hugh wrote:
In whill.co.uk, Dave
writes
On Mon, 02 May 2011 20:24:19 +0100, Old Codger wrote:

But, because of the electoral boundaries, parties end up in
government
with less votes overall than the opposition, and you can't get
more
unfair than that.

That effect is primarily because we vote for a candidate, not a party.

I think most people vote for a party, probably the one their parents
and grand parents voted for, simply because "that is what you do".

Personally I vote for the candidate(s) who show most promise in
actually representing and working for me in parliament/council. The
party they may or may not belong to is almost irrelevant.

TBH the parties ought to be abolished and MPs forced to do what they
should be doing, representing their constituents, not just cow towing
to the party whip.

If they don't toe the line they get deselected. Too many of our MPs
today are career politicians. That's all they know.

That includes the present Prime Minister.

And the chancellor who went into politics because he failed to make it
as a Journalist.

Indeed.

--
Old Codger
e-mail use reply to field

What matters in politics is not what happens, but what you can make
people believe has happened. [Janet Daley 27/8/2003]