'a move which is likely to favour the Tories at the next election.'

'BBC political correspondent Vicki Young said Lib Dem insiders have "made it clear" that they are prepared to block the re-drawing of constituency boundaries, a move which is likely to favour the Tories at the next election.

Under the plans, the number of MPs would be reduced from 650 to 600, to allow for a more even spread of voters in each constituency and it is predicted the Conservatives could gain an extra 20 seats as a result.'

I wasn't going to blog again today but as I have driven through the rain today every time I hear the BBC news, I hear this phrase when referring to the upcoming boundary changes - 'a move which is likely to favour the Tories at the next election'

Surely the move will actually remove the unfair advantage that Labour have enjoyed for some years now. An advantage which in 1997 gave Tony Blair418 seats with 43.2% of the vote but John Major in 1992 just 336 seats with 41.9% of the vote. In 2010 the Conservatives received 306 with 36.1% of the vote but Labour 258 seats with 29% of the vote. Surely the 'unbiased by charter' BBC should not just take the Labour line, unless they aren't actually unbiased...

Personal Exit Poll

Very heavy late voting in this London constituency; is that good or bad for the Yes2AV campaign?

Very simple but wrong (or at least not quite right)

In this latest Yes2AV video Dan Snow confidently tells us that AV is the system used to elect local mayors. Well actually the London Mayor is chosen by the Supplementary Vote system. Ah Yes2AV will say but Dan Snow actually said "AV or systems like it". Yes the Supplementary Vote is similar to pure AV but there is one big difference: under the Supplementary Vote 'voters express a first and second choice of candidate only, and, if no candidate receives an absolute majority of first choice votes, all but the two leading candidates are eliminated and the votes of those eliminated redistributed according to their second choice votes to determine the winner.' So under Supplementary Vote only one of the top two candidates in the initial voting can win and there are just two rounds of voting. Under AV candidates are eliminated one by one and it is possible that the candidate coming third could win - now do you see why Lib Dems like AV?

No2AV

Off the web...

Blogging will be light today as I have a busy work day.

Why are the Yes2AV campaign the only ones out campaigning?

Our local high street is full of them, the happy smiley faces of the Yes2AV campaigners. Leaflets and badges at the ready they spread their half-truths and lies as they nab unsuspecting passers-by.

"AV means an MP has to get 50% of the vote" I am told by one. Really I ask and explain why this is not the case. I ask him how he feels that one of his leaflet's major claims is wrong, he seems not to care.

"AV means that MPs will work harder" I am promised by one. I ask why this will be the case but he seems unable to explain why.

"Will you be voting on Thursday?" another asks me (they were in four separate camps on the high street). Yes I will I said. "Oh good" I reply. But "I will be voting no" I said. The reply "Why am I not surprised". It seems I look like a nasty Tory not a cuddly LibDem.

"Which parties will benefit from AV and which will not?" I ask a fourth campaigner. There's a lot of umming and ahing; "Will the Conservatives be the biggest losers and LibDems the biggest winners?" I ask. Eventually there is acknowledgement that this will be the case. "Is that why you support AV then?", I ask. There is no reply as he turns away, but I think I knew the answer anyway...

In case you were wondering why the BBC are so clearly in favour of AV

The BBC's promotion of the Alternative Vote has been clear to anyone watching, listening or reading their coverage of the story, Craig's piece at Biased-BBC being a good analysis of just one example, but many are asking why? Surely the Labour party are split on this matter so why are the BBC so decided? Then Vince Cable (government loyalist (?)) explained it with his comments this morning that voting for AV would end Tory dominance; what more reason does a true BBC person need to support AV than that?

The Yes2AV campaign's latest rubbish

LetMeAvIt is a piss poor game that seems to suggest that the No2AV campaign wants to stop people voting. Desperate lies, the usual resort of the Yes campaign.

Why Labour opposes changes to constituency boundaries by the Boundaries Commission

Gordon Brown won fewer votes and a smaller share of the vote in 2010 than John Major got in 1997, when the Conservatives where destroyed by Tony Blair's landslide.

2005: Labour 35.3% share = 356 seats.
2005: Conservative 32.3% share = 198 seats .
A 3% points lead for Labour equated to a 158 seat difference and a 66 seat majority for Labour.

2010 Labour 29% share = 258 seats.
2010 Conservative 37.1% share = 307 seats.
A 7.1% point lead for the Conservatives equated to a 49 seat difference and the need for a Coalition.

In fact the Conservatives in 2010 got more votes than Blair's Labour party in 2005, whilst Gordon Brown's 2010 Labour party received less votes than John Major's Conservatives in 1997. Put another way, the Conservatives in 2010 beat Labour by 7% points and yet received only 49 more seats than Labour? Yet from a smaller share of the vote in 2005, and whilst beating the Conservatives by just 3% points Labour had 158 more seats than the Conservatives.

The enormous pro-Labour, anti-Conservative bias in the structure of electoral boundaries needs addressing but will the changes be allowed to happen before the next general election?

The Yes2AV campaign and its sources of income

Take a read and ask yourself if anything stinks?

The one hundred and twenty fifth weekly "No shit, Sherlock" award

This week's award is presented to politics professor and 'election expert' John Curtice as reported by the BBC for the insight that:

'An election expert says the pressures on those counting election votes could spell an end to the overnight count in future elections.'

I wonder if the introduction of AV would increase the pressures, complexity and delays?


So John Curtice - "No shit, Sherlock"

The Rt Hon Alan B'Stard on the Alternative Vote - Alan B'Stard is in favour, so we should not be...

Alan B'Stard is one of the great comic creations of recent times and Rik Mayall is a brilliant live performer, if you get the chance to see him live then go.

Avoiding answering the pertinent question (update)

Further to this post I have just read the BBC's article about the same subject. I was interested how the BBC would reconcile their hatred of anti-black racism (anti-Jewish and anti-white being acceptable) with their support for any change to the electoral system that would ensure permanent left of centre governments; the article is entirely as expected but the end did rather take my breath away:

'A Yes campaign spokesman said: "These allegations mark a new low for the 'No' campaign and their increasingly desperate smears.

"Let's put it this way: Operation Black Vote, the Muslim Council of Britain and a host of similar groups are backing the 'Yes' campaign. The BNP are backing the 'No' campaign. People can draw their own conclusions."'Yes the Yes campain complain of the No campaign marking a new low and then promptly dive even lower!

Avoiding answering the pertinent question

The Telegraph report that:

'The "Yes" campaign, which is supported by Nick Clegg and the Liberal Democrats, was severely embarrassed after it emerged that it had removed the poet Benjamin Zephaniah from leaflets destined for the home counties, while leaving him in leaflets distributed in London.

Mr Zephaniah is one of six celebrities who adorn a leaflet from the "Yes" campaign calling on householders to back the Alternative Vote in a forthcoming referendum on May 5 in which people will be asked if they want to change Britain's voting system.

He appears alongside Joanna Lumley, Eddie Izzard, Colin Firth, Honor Blackman and Stephen Fry in the leaflet which was delivered in London and which is signed by Katie Ghose, chair of Yes To Fairer Votes.

It calls on people to back AV because it will give them "a stronger voice".

However, in an identical leaflet sent to other parts of the country including Sussex and Cornwall the poet is not there. Only white celebrities are featured and Mr Zephaniah is replaced by a picture of the actor Tony Robinson. '

The Telegraph then explain that:

'Terry Paul, spokesman for NO to AV, said: "Why are Yes to AV ashamed to have the support of Benjamin Zephaniah in places like Cornwall and Hampshire?

"The Yes Campaign's leaflet offers a chilling preview of politics under the Alternative Vote. We have warned that AV would encourage parties to pander to extremist opinions in a chase for second and third preference votes, but we never imagined the first example of such outdated views would come from the Yes Campaign itself." '

When the Yes Campaign purport to answer the question why they dropped Benjamin Zephaniah from the leaflets sent to less multi-cultural places than London, they really don't:

'A spokesman for the "Yes" campaign said: "We have a number of endorsers and we vary the endorsers we use on our leaflets.

If the No campaign want to accuse us of racism on the day that Kriss Akabusi launches our campaign, that is up to them. Who are Operation Black Vote and the Muslim Council of Britain backing? The Yes campaign." '

The No campaign were not accusing the Yes campaign of racism but of pandering to minorities, including those who would be more likely to listen to pay attention to what white Tony Robinson says than black Benjamin Zephaniah.

It seems to me that the Yes campaign have done precisely what the No campaign have accused them of and just like many lefty politicians they have resorted to reacting to being accused of being racists when no such accusation was made. In fact the Yes campaign have tried to pander to racists and been found out.


Comparing  Benjamin Zephaniah and Tony Robinson, we find that whilst Benjamin Zephaniah is a vegan, supporter of PETA, has written a book about the Animal Liberation Front, has spoken in favour of turning Britain into a Republic and the disestablishment of the Crown, Tony Robinson is a long time Labour party supporter, a former member of Labour's National Executive Committee and a participant in the recent 'March for the Alternative' protests in Central London.

The BBC's odd definition of 'cross party'

The BBC Twitter account @BBCPolitics tweeted that 'Ed Miliband shares a platform with Charles Kennedy, Baroness Williams and Green Caroline Lucas at cross party Yes'

Hmm so Labour leader shared a platform with:
1) ex-Lib Dem leader now on left of that  party
2) ex Lib Dem leader in Hose of Lords, prior to that founder of SDP and prior to that Labour MP
3) Green MP with views well to the left of mainstream politics

To the BBC that may seem 'cross party' but to me it looks more 'left of centre'. Nobody from the Conservative party, the largest party in this House of Commons. Nobody from UKIP who mostly support the Yes2AV campaign and who are gaining ground at elections to vie with LibDems for fourth place?

No to the BBC the concensus of British politics is centre left so the above four people are a cross section.

AV would mean that elections would be determined by 'the most worthless votes given for the most worthless candidates'

Not my words but those of Winston Churchill in 1931, he is right isn't he?

AV would mean that elections would be determined by 'the most worthless votes given for the most worthless candidates'

Thursday morning catch-up

Even more Firefox tabs that can now be closed...

1. The Telegraph report that:

'A huge off-shore wind farm is to be built off the Jurassic Coast in Dorset, England’s only geological World Heritage Site, prompting concern for tourism and sea views.

About 250 450ft tall turbines will be built across a 76 square mile area of the English Channel , making the development twice as big as the world’s largest offshore wind farm, which is currently 100 300ft turbines off Kent.

The turbines, which will be sited in a depth of 120ft of water, will provide enough energy to power up to 820,000 homes.

But protesters claim that the wind farm could spoil the view and effect tourism.

The turbines will be situated just eight miles east of Swanage, Dorset, which makes up part of Britain's World Heritage Jurassic Coast and will be seen from the shore.

It will also be 10 miles from Bournemouth and visible to the hundreds of thousands of tourists who visit its beaches every year. The horizon is 17 miles away from the resort's cliffs.

They will also be lit up at night-time so they don't present a danger to shipping. '

2. The Daily Bayonet reports that:
'Ontario’s green energy numbers don’t add up:

'Wholesale Average Weighted Cost (YTD) of Ontario electricity: 3.35 cents/kWh

Guaranteed 20-year contract price per kWh for solar panels (ground level): 64.2 cents/kWh

Guaranteed 20-year contract price per kWh for solar panels (roof-top): 80.2 cents/kWh

Guaranteed 20-year contract price per kWh for wind turbines: 13.5 cents/kWh

Cost to the province in 2011 to reduce bills by 10% to hide increases caused by green energy programs until after the election: $1.1 billion'

3. Bella Gerens thinks that '‘electoral reform’ is an issue so utterly pointless in the modern British polity that it deserves me taking the piss.'


4. Ows Blog says that 'Bad things come in three's, so the saying goes: 3 billion, 3 million, 3 hundred thousand...' and explains why:

'The first is the increasing size of the 'black hole' in MoD procurement which "increased by £3.3billion in Labour's final year in office alone to reach around £36billion". [Link]

The second is no real secret and I've certainly banged on about it for years: 'Immigration Under Labour – Chaos or Conspiracy?' from Sir Andrew Green's Migration Watch press release: "It is no exaggeration to say that immigration under New Labour has changed the face of the country.":

"Every country must have firm control over immigration and Britain is no exception." Labour election manifesto 1997

From the Migration Watch briefing paper (PDF). Net immigration to the UK quadrupled under Labour, bringing more than 3 million immigrants to Britain (more than this arrived but of course some others left and also a million British citizens emigrated)...almost literally 'changing the face of the country'. Pressure on housing, pressure on schools, pressure on services. Pressure on spending.

The third, ... handing responsibility for the decision to media secretary and Conservative Jeremy Hunt - it cost the government (the taxpayer) £300,000'

5. Climate Depot reports that:

'A $200-million wind farm in northern New Brunswick is frozen solid, cutting off a potential supply of renewable energy for NB Power.

The 25-kilometre stretch of wind turbines, located 70 kilometres northwest of Bathurst, N.B. has been completely shutdown for several weeks due to heavy ice covering the blades.'

Another good reason why wind power is not the answer to the world's power problems.


6. David Davies at Conservative Home has 'A layman's guide to the difference between debt and deficit - and why the Government is right to be cutting it (the deficit)'


7. Front Page lists some 'Leftist Dupes: From the Communist Brotherhood to the Muslim Brotherhood'. Here are some examples:

'“I’ve never met a man more candid, fair, and honest,” marveled author H. G. Wells upon his return from a meeting with Joe Stalin in 1934, at the start of the Great Purge. “Everyone trusts him.” Wells had likewise been impressed by Vladimir Lenin, whom he called a “frank,” “refreshing,” and “amazing little man,” who had “almost persuaded me to share his vision.”

Fully persuaded was Wells’ fellow socialist, George Bernard Shaw, who piped up with an even more outrageous assessment after meeting with Stalin: “[W]e cannot afford to give ourselves moral airs when our most enterprising neighbor [the Soviet Union] … humanely and judiciously liquidates a handful of exploiters and speculators to make the world safe for honest men.”

Shaw was deadly serious; this was not sarcasm scribbled for some tasteless stage comedy.

...

“I’ve never met a man more candid, fair, and honest,” marveled author H. G. Wells upon his return from a meeting with Joe Stalin in 1934, at the start of the Great Purge. “Everyone trusts him.” Wells had likewise been impressed by Vladimir Lenin, whom he called a “frank,” “refreshing,” and “amazing little man,” who had “almost persuaded me to share his vision.”

Fully persuaded was Wells’ fellow socialist, George Bernard Shaw, who piped up with an even more outrageous assessment after meeting with Stalin: “[W]e cannot afford to give ourselves moral airs when our most enterprising neighbor [the Soviet Union] … humanely and judiciously liquidates a handful of exploiters and speculators to make the world safe for honest men.”

Shaw was deadly serious; this was not sarcasm scribbled for some tasteless stage comedy.'

8. The Times of India reports on 'Device turns PC into porn TV':

'Pornography from around the world for free is the promise of vendors selling a new device at one of the popular markets of electronic products in China's business hub of Shanghai.

Customers who buy the device are told that the television USB flash drive can receive pornographic channels, reports the Shangahi Daily.

Once plugged into a computer, a television USB flash drive automatically scans the internet for more than 5,000 channels across the world, including news, sport and movies.'

9. Tory Aardvark informs us that 'The Dutch Lose Faith In Windturbines, Comments Please Chris Huhne', here's an extract:

'As Chris Huhantic prepares to make wind power a major electricity generation source for this country with all the dangers that entails for both energy security, and cost, the Dutch are fast losing faith in wind turbines and so called renewable energy sources.

The new Dutch government is cutting back on subsidies for most forms of renewable energy, and ending subsidies for wind power, solar power and biomass'

Friday afternoon catch-up

Once again I have too many Firefox tabs and not enough time, so here we go:

1) Politics Home reveal why the LibDems control the coalition government.

2) The Telegraph reports that the Crown Prince of Iran is calling for aid for the demonstrators but unlike in Egypt Barack Obama and the western media are just not interested. Why the double standards Barack Obama? It is almost as though you want Islamists to keep and gain power in the Middle East.

3) The Blaze think that they may have video proof that Mexican authorities are operating inside of the USA.

4) Harry Phibbs in The Mail thinks that we should not get rid of the First Past The Post voting system.

5) Devils Kitchen agrees with me that National Insurance is a ponzi scheme and just as out of control as Bernie Madoff's and that the government's response will make us all poorer (except for the unemployed).

6) Gates of Vienna thinks that the BBC has broken its charter and explains at length why - all relating to Geert Wilders and radical Islam.

7)The Mail reports that the Royal Society has realised that 'A'Levels are now not fit for purpose - That's the comprehensive education system and 13 years of a Labour government dumbing down exams for you.

8) OyVaGoy has 10 facts that 'they' don't want you to know about the evil right-wing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

9) CIF Watch have spotted that even The Guardian's travel section is influenced by the newspaper's anti-Israel agenda.

10) Daniel Hannan in The Telegraph thinks that the state can be successfully shrunk and that Ronald Reagan US Presidency should be the model.

11) The BBC report on a rather nasty comment made by one of their heroes - the Irish tax avoider Bono.

12) Harry's Place explains why iEngage should not be allowed to serve as the secretariat to the all party parliamentary group on Islamaphobia. Very sound stuff as always from Harry's Place now one of my favourite blogs.

13) The Mail managed to report the interesting fact that 'Road deaths dropped 14 per cent in three months while speed cameras were being axed or switched off.  Fatalities over a year fell 21 per cent to a record low, Department for Transport figures show.'

14) Finally The Mail reports on the Indian inventor who claims to have invented the flying car - unfortunately its a flying 1980s Maruti.

The fundamentally fraudulent nature of the Yes to AV Campaign

The voting reform referendum will engage few people which is why the 40% threshold could not be contemplated by the supporters of the YestoAV campaign. The Alternative Vote is not proportional and is likely to give even more unfair outcomes to elections than First Fast The Post. I believe that the supporters of AV fall into three camps: those that see AV as a halfway house to a voting system of full proportional representation such as the single Transferable Vote, those that will support any measure that would diminish the Conservative Party's chances of ever forming another government alone and those that see the benefits of amending the British constitution as a precedent for future changes.

Analysis as reported by UK Polling Report suggests that a system of AV would have given Tony Blair's Labour party a larger majority in 2005, an election that Labour won with a majority of 60 seats despite receiving just a third of the votes cast. A system of AV at last year's general election would have have given Labour more seats and the Conservatives fewer and this despite Labour receiving a smaller share of the popular (under AV the first preference) vote than at any time since the 1920s.


Remember the above when people clan that AV means no more wasted votes or that AV means fairer votes. AV means neither of those things but it does make it more likely that there will be permanent left of centre governments in the UK. If that is what the supporters of the YestoAV campaign want then at least let them be honest about it.

Gerrymandering or correcting an inequality?

The BBC are happily parroting the Labour line that the Conservative/LibDem coalition's bill is attempting to gerrymander House of Commons seats. This is odd as before the general election I remember the BBC admitting that the current electoral system is stacked against the Conservatives.

I looked at the BBC's own 'Election seat calculator' and fed in some numbers around the 30:30:20:10 split:
Conservatives 29.9%, Labour 29.9%, LibDems 19.9%, Others 20.2% - Labour 325 seats, Conservatives 225 seats

Then I played around with the settings such that the LibDems were stuck on 20% and Others on 10%:
To get 326 seats (the amount needed to form a majority government) the Conservatives needed 40%, whereas Labour needed 34.7% (at that level the Conservatives could have 35.3% and still be well beaten by Labour)

So the current electoral system favours Labour over the Conservatives, is that why Labour and the BBC want to keep it?

Spot the difference and anyway...

The BBC report that:

'The proposed wording for the question in the referendum on changing the UK voting system needs to change, the Electoral Commission says.

Some people - "particularly those with lower levels of education or literacy, found the question hard work and did not understand it" - its report says.

The watchdog says the structure, length and the language used made the question "harder to read than it needed to be".

The final wording of the question is a matter for the UK Parliament.'

Wow the wording must be really complex, maybe it includes the exact way that AV systems work? Well no:

'The proposed wording for the question at the moment is: 'Do you want the United Kingdom to adopt the "alternative vote" system instead of the current 'first past the post' system for electing Members of Parliament to the House of Commons?

The Electoral Commission's suggested redraft is: At present, the UK uses the 'first past the post' system to elect MPs to the House of Commons. Should the 'alternative vote' system be used instead?'

Two points; first ss the second wording much, if at all, clearer than the first and second if someone doesn't understand either question then should they be allowed to vote? The natural extension of this second point is that all electors should have to sit a short economics, history, mathematics and English test to see if they are intelligent enough, and have enough knowledge of the historical context to issues, to be allowed to vote. This is of course in addition to my 'no representation without taxation' rule. So long as the unemployable, dispossessed and intellectually challenged can vote on a par with taxpayers and intelligent human beings, this country will have to fear a return of the Labour party to power and that must not be allowed to happen.... (Only slightly tongue in cheek).