UK Politics: The Edge of Destruction

[SeanF]

58 minutes ago, felice said:

Yeah, the problem is trying to do PR with just 5 seats and a relatively large number of viable parties.

You could treat the whole country as a single constituency, in which case, any party winning 1% would have a chance of winning a seat.

[mormont]

On another topic entirely, I want to bring people's attention to this blog post by the Scottish Cabinet Secretary for Equalities today on trans rights and feminism:

https://blogs.gov.scot/fairer-scotland/2019/04/18/transgender-rights-and-equality/

Quote

 

There is always a danger in over-simplifying complex issues and I am not intending to do so, but it strikes me in listening to some of the concerns raised that, at their core, it is not so much a problem with the rights of trans women but instead a fear of men who abuse women.

The fear is that some men will use trans equality as a Trojan horse to access women and do us harm.

And I understand that. But it means the problem we face is not one of trans women wanting to feel safe and accepted – it is one of how we protect and safeguard women against potentially abusive men. That’s not a new problem in Scottish or global society – nor is it one created by trans women.

If we are able to appreciate this and other perspectives, I believe we can work through many of these issues, address the concerns that are being raised, and make Scotland a place where everyone can feel safe. And do so while standing full square behind the rights of trans men and women not to be discriminated against.

 

I encourage you to read the whole thing (it's not long). And I raise it not only because it is a good post, but to raise the point that I find it absolutely impossible to imagine anyone in the shower of chancers that comprise the current UK government showing such understanding and being so articulate, or even having the courage and sensitivity, to write a piece like this. (Just as it's impossible to imagine Theresa May using her Twitter feed to talk about her favourite authors and publicise book festivals and events in the way that Nicola Sturgeon does.)

Sometimes people wonder why Scots vote for the SNP. One reason is simply because we get a better government. 

[ants]

20 hours ago, Mentat said:

The D'Hondt system aims to assign each seat to the largest number of votes. 

For simplicity's sake, lets assume the East Midlands region has 1.000.000 votes. In the example quoted Brexit Party has 300.000 votes, Labour has 200.000, Conservatives 160.000 and Lib-Dems 90.000 (we'll ignore the rest for now). So the first of the 5 seats should obviously go to the Brexit Party. This seat would represent 300.000 votes. Second goes to Labour, and represents 200.000 votes, and third to the Tories, representing 160.000 votes. Now we could give the fourth seat to the Lib-Dems, but it would only represent 90.000 votes. If we give it to the Brexit Party instead, though, it would represent 150.000 votes (half of the votes the Brexit Party got). Similarly with the fifth and final seat, if we give it to Labour it will represent 100.000 seats, which is more than the Lib-Dems got, so to Labour it goes.

Some people criticize the D'Hondt system for under-representing minority parties (which it does), but it has a solid rationale behind it. 

 

That’s the most fucked up proportional system I’ve ever heard of. 

[SeanF]

4 hours ago, ants said:

That’s the most fucked up proportional system I’ve ever heard of. 

PR should be simple, but mad geniuses have invented all sorts of complicated versions.

[mormont]

The D'Hondt system works well if used in an appropriate context. As with any electoral system.

In fact, it's used also to allocate posts in the NI executive, where it has been a key part of the foundation of a peace process that now appears to be taking some heavy blows. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-47985469

Quote

 

A journalist has been shot dead during rioting in Londonderry that police are treating as a "terrorist incident".

Dissident republicans are being blamed for killing 29-year-old Lyra McKee during rioting after police searches in Derry's Creggan area on Thursday night.

 

In case anyone was thinking that the Irish border issue was not as serious as we all make out, this is a sad reminder that peace in NI is still fragile. 

[BigFatCoward]

Emma Thompson flew all the way from LA to address London climate protest? Am I missing something?

[Heartofice]

25 minutes ago, BigFatCoward said:

Emma Thompson flew all the way from LA to address London climate protest? Am I missing something?

I'm also pretty sure the rest of the protesters didn't walk to London either. 

Will they also be holding protests in China, the US, India and Russia you have to ask?

[Mosi Mynn]

This article shows some the frustrations the EU have had to contend with re Brexit.  They come across as diplomatic, patient, polite and united - despite very different opinions on Brexit.  Our politicians come across as utterly delusional and incompetent.

[SeanF]

Andrew Adonis has told eurosceptic voters not to vote Labour in the EU elections.

That's an interesting approach from someone who hopes to get elected as a Labour MEP.

[mormont]

26 minutes ago, SeanF said:

Andrew Adonis has told eurosceptic voters not to vote Labour in the EU elections.

That's an interesting approach from someone who hopes to get elected as a Labour MEP.

Has he though? Because I can't find any news story saying so. And I feel like this is one where he might easily have said something a little more nuanced and been misreported.

[Loge]

On 4/19/2019 at 6:51 AM, ants said:

That’s the most fucked up proportional system I’ve ever heard of. 

There's nothing weird or fucked up about the d'Hondt system. You always need a rule how to distribute the seats and d'Hondt is as good as any. In the example above seat 5 is a tie between Brexit and Labour, BTW. I guess that would be rare in real life but there needs to be provision for that. The reason the distribution of seats doesn't represent the election result very well in the example is that the constituency is too small. There are other systems than d'Hondt, e.g. the largest remainder method. If the latter was used with the Hare quota, then you'd get Brexit two seats, Labour, Conservatives and Lib Dem one seat each. But whatever system you pick, when the number of seats is small somebody always gets screwed.

 

ETA: The Webster / Sainte-Lague method, which is a modified d'Hondt system, would also result in Brexit two seats, Labour, Conservatives and LibDem one seat each.

[Impmk2]

And it completely disenfranchises anyone who votes for a smaller party.

Again, why not just use instant run off? It's simple, people just rank their choice in order. And it stops the need for tactical voting. Ie, you could vote for a smaller remain party confident that even if they don't get a seat your vote will still count, and go towards someone who isnt ukip2.0.

[SeanF]

Most countries with PR have some method of excluding tiny parties (Israel and Holland are exceptions).

Germany has a 5% national threshold (or you have to win 3 constituencies); . Denmark has a 2% threshold, Austria and Sweden 4%. Most others have regional lists, which require a party to win 6-10% in any given region (so, a party like the South Tyrol Peoples' Party wins enough votes at regional level to get a couple of MP's, despite winning a minute share of the Italian vote).

STV would usually require you to win about 12% in any one multi-member seat to be sure of winning a seat, although it can throw up quirky results.  

[Heartofice]

On 4/19/2019 at 8:30 PM, mormont said:

Has he though? Because I can't find any news story saying so. And I feel like this is one where he might easily have said something a little more nuanced and been misreported.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1013725/Brexit-news-latest-Labour-Party-Jeremy-Corbyn-Theresa-May-Lord-Adonis/amp

Quote

He told LBC: "If you are a Brexiteer, I hope you won't vote for the Labour party because the Labour Party is moving increasingly against Brexit.”

 

[Seli]

On 4/20/2019 at 10:47 AM, Impmk2 said:

And it completely disenfranchises anyone who votes for a smaller party.

Again, why not just use instant run off? It's simple, people just rank their choice in order. And it stops the need for tactical voting. Ie, you could vote for a smaller remain party confident that even if they don't get a seat your vote will still count, and go towards someone who isnt ukip2.0.

Apparently in the Netherlands we only use d'Hondt for larger elections (19 seats and up) due to these issues. For smaller ones we apparently (wikipedia) use a largest-remainder method.

Instant run-off systems haven't been introduced here yet. Likely partly because we are in a weird mix between voting for parties as well as for individuals.

[Werthead]

On 4/19/2019 at 2:29 PM, Heartofice said:

I'm also pretty sure the rest of the protesters didn't walk to London either. 

Will they also be holding protests in China, the US, India and Russia you have to ask?

One day people will realise that responding to complex discussions with superficial whataboutery is not a valid debating tactic. Alas, it will not be this day.

[Heartofice]

25 minutes ago, Werthead said:

One day people will realise that responding to complex discussions with superficial whataboutery is not a valid debating tactic. Alas, it will not be this day.

Well no, the point was more that pointing the finger at the UK for climate change when it contributes a very minor amount is misplaced. Why no spend that mental energy campaigning for China, where 75% of all its energy comes from coal or the US? 

It’s not like the UK has been doing nothing either, it’s carbon emissions have been going down and there have been plenty of action to reduce them. Sure more can be done, and should be done, but many of the demands of the protesters like 0% carbon emissions are totally unrealistic.

[maarsen]

56 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

Well no, the point was more that pointing the finger at the UK for climate change when it contributes a very minor amount is misplaced. Why no spend that mental energy campaigning for China, where 75% of all its energy comes from coal or the US? 

It’s not like the UK has been doing nothing either, it’s carbon emissions have been going down and there have been plenty of action to reduce them. Sure more can be done, and should be done, but many of the demands of the protesters like 0% carbon emissions are totally unrealistic.

China is building nuclear reactors for power at a tremendous rate. Solar panels and wind power are not far behind. Why do you think they are trying to conere the market on rare earths? 

[Heartofice]

20 minutes ago, maarsen said:

China is building nuclear reactors for power at a tremendous rate. Solar panels and wind power are not far behind. Why do you think they are trying to conere the market on rare earths? 

So we don’t even have to worry about China! That’s great news

[SeanF]

1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

Well no, the point was more that pointing the finger at the UK for climate change when it contributes a very minor amount is misplaced. Why no spend that mental energy campaigning for China, where 75% of all its energy comes from coal or the US? 

It’s not like the UK has been doing nothing either, it’s carbon emissions have been going down and there have been plenty of action to reduce them. Sure more can be done, and should be done, but many of the demands of the protesters like 0% carbon emissions are totally unrealistic.

Moving to 0% carbon emissions in six years would devastate the economy, and could require a very authoritarian government to put down the ensuing opposition.