Lightnews — Scholar-powered news

David Herdson @davidherdson.bsky.social · 13m

You can't. But their influence will be felt within parliament and how other parties (who voters in Reading or Liverpool can support) interact with them matters.

David Herdson @davidherdson.bsky.social · 1h

I agree. That's the purpose of the formula I suggest, which ofcom and the like could adopt.

One issue with the 5% rule, if applied alone, is it cuts off regional parties. The SNP wouldn't qualify even if they were about to return 50+ MPs (as they might be).

1

David Herdson @davidherdson.bsky.social · 2h

Fine in theory but there are hundreds of registered parties. Where do you draw the line?

I do think it's fair that the parties get proportionate coverage. Those most likely to form, participate in or influence governments should get most scrutiny and visibility.

2

David Herdson @davidherdson.bsky.social · 14h

I agree.

I sketched out a formula a little while ago that I think would work in the interim. Three equal parts: vote share last election, MPs last election, poll share now.

You'd probably need to give poll share greater weight in an election but I'd still keep an element of the other two.

1

David Herdson @davidherdson.bsky.social · 14h

Yes, well, it's much the same formula of 'it's all someone else's fault' + 'break things' + 'only we truly represent the nation'.

1

David Herdson @davidherdson.bsky.social · 18h

Yes. It's extraordinary that after all the scandals of the SNP these last few years - not to mention how the effects of leaving a lesser Union have become obvious - that the nationalists are so far clear. But there we are: on for another landslide.

1

David Herdson @davidherdson.bsky.social · 19h

Wouldn't a civil servant be more likely to say something like "you do realise, minister, that if you do this then you'll be cutting this much from these councils?"

It's not for civil servants to say policy options are good or bad: merely to imply it through the likely consequences.

1 1

David Herdson @davidherdson.bsky.social · 19h

It's a stupid argument from Jenrick's supporters.

Never say or write anything in private that you wouldn't be prepared to justify if it became public. It's a good rule in general; it's a better rule for those in the public eye.

1 2

Reposted by David Herdson

Tim Bale @timbale.bsky.social · 1d

If you can't see how this will end, then you're not paying attention (not least to what's going on on the other side of the Atlantic).

84 540 1.6K

David Herdson @davidherdson.bsky.social · 20h

If it is, that's only a perception at a national level - there was a lot of very good policy that came out of the Lib Dem conference.

But it's certainly possible. That is the local image and the one most voters will see.

3

David Herdson @davidherdson.bsky.social · 21h

Is that second one a line-out put in? Looks more like a football throw-in but then it's a big (and presumably pretty heavy) pumpkin!

1

David Herdson @davidherdson.bsky.social · 21h

It's impossible to say with precision. The swings are so large and in so many directions, and the shares are so small that you can get big variations depending on how clumpy or spread-out the shares are.

Personally, my guess would be Reform biggest party but short of a majority.

1

David Herdson @davidherdson.bsky.social · 22h

The people doing it are weaponising the justice system against its enemies.

They don't even understand the concept of a neutral system; they genuinely believe that the other side would (and did) use it against them purely for partisan advantage, that what they're doing is legitimate and normal.

3

David Herdson @davidherdson.bsky.social · 23h

Thank you.

I shall try to continue to post mildly interesting, occasionally amusing and hopefully insightful takes.

5

David Herdson @davidherdson.bsky.social · 23h

That's as maybe (and, FWIW, I think he probably did the right thing considering his political capital was spent by that point).

Despite that, the following year the Tories were in a position to deliver a crushing general election win - and then screwed the campaign up.

Then, Johnson.

1

David Herdson @davidherdson.bsky.social · 23h

I don't see how Labour can sustain this reform. A government even semi-functioning politically wouldn't have let it get this far.

Chaminda Jayanetti @cjayanetti.bsky.social · 1d

Some of London’s poorest areas could see their share of the children’s services funding formula halved under Labour’s plans to reform local government grants.

By me, for Politics Home: www.politicshome.com/news/article...

London Councils Face Losing Half Their Share Of Children's Services Funding

Some of London’s poorest areas could see their share of funding for children’s services halved under Labour’s plans to reform local government gran...

www.politicshome.com

2 4

David Herdson @davidherdson.bsky.social · 23h

Absolutely. The Lib Dems should be all over this.

In fact, they almost certainly are: it's just that national media seem to think a party with 72 MPs and 15% of the vote share isn't worth talking to, even though they have a much more distinctive voice than, say, the Tories.

1 2 11

David Herdson @davidherdson.bsky.social · 23h

The Alliance was only fighting two opponents and came third in vote share.

Reform might not win a majority on these numbers but they'd probably be the largest party. The Tories - even a rump of a few dozen - might end up being the swing vote. No prizes for guessing which way they'd go.

1

David Herdson @davidherdson.bsky.social · 23h

YouGov do tend to find lower Reform shares than some other pollsters. But:

- Joint-lowest Ref share since June
- Joint-highest LD share since 2019
- First time top four parties within 10 points since April

It's anyone's guess what FPTP would do to these shares.

Mark Chadbourn @chadbourn.bsky.social · 1d

New YouGov Westminster poll:

RFM: 27% (-2)
LAB: 20% (-2)
CON: 17% (+1)
LDM: 17% (+2)
GRN: 12% (+1)
SNP: 4% (+1)

2 2 4

David Herdson @davidherdson.bsky.social · 1d

To be fair, when Cameron stood down as Tory leader, they had a majority in parliament and would go on to win the next two elections.

I'd blame Johnson far more for the Tories' current mess, both in his behaviour under May, preventing a Brexit deal, and even more so as PM and Tory leader.

1 1

David Herdson @davidherdson.bsky.social · 1d

I agree. It'd be that breakaway Euro-league experience all over again.

1

David Herdson @davidherdson.bsky.social · 1d

Macron will probably believe that simply by staying there and acting as a blocker, he is doing France a favour. He may even be right.

Maybe a new president could manufacture a legislative majority; it's been done before. But whether that's a good thing depends on who wins.

1

David Herdson @davidherdson.bsky.social · 1d

The mirror image also holds.

The public elected the Tories in 2019 in no small part because Labour (1) was led by Corbyn, and (2) had no credible Brexit policy.

Johnson may have been flaky but Corbyn was even worse. Also, the Tories have form on kicking out flaky PMs. Labour keeps its leaders.

David Herdson @davidherdson.bsky.social · 1d

Winner-take-all elections (ie where the system itself is for the winner to corrupt and abuse against opponents), usually decay into a one-party system.

If the prize of victory is 'everything' then so is the cost of defeat - which those in power cannot risk. And they have the tools to prevent it.

David Herdson @davidherdson.bsky.social · 1d

You could. Or you could put the drawing of boundaries in the hands of an independent, expert body.

Both are good. Both are used in most other developed countries.

But that will take a change in mindset and the belief that the system itself isn't a spoil of victory. Good luck with that.

1