Clegg to be sidelined from AV campaign

DavidDP

I'd be wary of drawing too many conclusions from the "deluge of abuse". The most vocal people are going to be Labour supporters fell in to voting LibDem simply to keep the Tories out.

TrevorsDen

Polling shows that the public are supporting the coalition's measures.

Citing troublemakers at meetings is not particularly scientific. cameron was confronted by just such a one (a LD activist) who was not interested in listening about education for disabled children - he just wanted to peddle his own prejudice.

But the anti AV vote is not being fronted by a Conservative either; so whats the point?

Richard of York

To think the Tax Payers Alliance used to claim to be none political......there goes another Ryanair pig, where's my gun?

John Richardson

"The Lib Dem leadership fear that if Clegg heads the campaign it will descend into a referendum on Clegg and his decision to form a coalition with the Tories."
Hilarious.

If the above thing folk will go out of the house and walk down the street for/against Mr Clegg they are delusional.
He is utterly irrelevant.
No one cares about him.

I hope the AV referendum can be hijacked by The People.
I hope enough of us can scrawl 'we want a vote on Europe' on our slips to embarrass even this political class.

Imagine this:-

For a change 14 %
To stay the same 39 %
Spoilt papers 47 %

There is until May to spread this idea.

Dimoto

So Richard of York hasn't realised that on this one, the tax payers alliance are on the same side as his beloved workers party ?
Oh well, BIG rap on the knuckles from his fat controller coming up !

Why do Cameron and Clegg put themselves through this ? There are no imminent elections, normal members of the public are sick of politics and politicians, and just want the cuts to be announced so that they know where they stand, and at these meetings, C & C are just sitting ducks for every malcontent or crazy with an agenda. It makes for really bad PR too. Nuts.

Ian Stewart

Would it not be more accurate to say that Mr elliot will be heading the "No" campaign from the Tory side?
There will be a minority of Tories who will support AV, as they have a different view of the Tamworth Manifesto to the "Ultras", who hold sway within the party.
For the Libdems, the trouble may start in earnest after the probable failure of this measure at the polls. Labour are split, which seems odd given the last manifesto, but given the inclusion of boundary changes et al into the bill, is not to be wondered at. Clegg has played a good game - Labour can be damned in the eyes of LibDem voters for not supporting AV, whilst the LDs still look simon-pure. Thats my guess at his tactics anyway.
It is revealing how quickly the one party to highlight the deficits in our electoral system for the entire post-war period can reduce this issue to a mere tactical position. Apparently our votes are not that important after all.

Roy Smith

Which goes to show the ones appointed by a minuscule public vote will be dealt with through their own discordant combination of actions without anyone saying a word.

TrevorsDen

Dimoto - the Labour Party have said they would support AV. They offered it to the LibDems. It will be quite amusing watching their contortions as they find a way to change their mind.

Pretty soon we will be back to calling the LDs the 'Liberals' again. The so called 'social democratic' socialist element will be back in the labour fold - the shock of the coalition seems to have sent most of them their already.
Although Balls' desire for a closer link to the unions would make that a bit more difficult.

I do not think we should lose sight of this point - currently the currently the coalition that is the Conservatives and the 'Liberals' polls 55ish% whilst the coalition that is the Labour Party and ex SDP/Greeny LDs polls 35%.

LD left and Tory right should ponder that and it makes the decision on AV all the more intriguing.

Richard of York

@Dimoto
Well Labour would support AV if it were detatched from the boundaries bill.
The point I made is the Tax Alliance has always been a tory funded pressure group that tried to deny its links and now seems exposed.
On a personal level I like fptp.

Chris lancashire

Yes, Labour likes "fairness" except when it's applied to equalizing the size of constituencies.

Fergus Pickering

Richard of York, what have you got against the boundaries bill? Well, I know what you've got against it, but what is your PRINCIPLED reason for being against it?

Frank P

There's a parable that can be applied to this appalling political compromise:

http://www.love-poems.me.uk/browning_robert_pied_piper_of_hamelin_s.htm

Richard of York

Fergie,

Nothing I couldnt care less about the boundaries but Labour do. This would make the vote on AV a bit tight for Clegg.
If Clegg wants his AV then he needs to think about splitting the issues.
Simple.

Onlooker

A fine opportunity for Simon Hughes to self-destruct, if he heads up the pro-AV campaign and loses.

Ian Stewart

A principled objection to the boundaries bill:
Increasing the size of constituencies further weakens the bond between locality and Parliament, whilst favouring the Capital-based party machines over local wishes.
It also cuts down on the potential number of free-minded MPs of every party.
No serious person would wish for constituencies to be as uneven as they can be, but aside from population, geographical interests must play a part - or will the Highlands & Islands of Scotland be ruled by voters in Aberdeen? Or the Isle of Wight by Southampton?
The Boundary Commission has been fairly neutral in its re-drawing over the years, with seats being lost to all main parties over the last century, so why change now?
At a time when we as voters have less faith in Parliament than ever, and newMPs are increasingly seen as coming from a breed apart, decreasing the chances of a local person getting a candidature are not going to help.
As our population is rising, would someone tell me why we now need less MPs to scrutinise increasingly complex legislation and governance on our behalf?