What drives the British electorate?

First topic message reminder :

Having had an interest in politics from way-back I have been watching how the face of British politics has changed over the last few years and this has encouraged me to think about what drives the British voters.

I know that a lot of us come from fixed political philosophies and people like those are liable to keep voting for the candidates that wear the correct colour of rosette rather than looking deeply into the policies of each candidate. Having said that I have also noted that many voters now come from the demographic known as the "floating voters" and it is these voters that often have the making or breaking of potential governments in their hands when they go to lay their little crosses.

The question I really want to ask is: Do the voters, ( if not voting in a traditional left or right direction ), vote for the party that promises them the most at the time rather than voting for any specific party philosophy, or are the British voters actually far better educated about what each of the parties stand for and they vote accordingly ?

In other words... Are the great British electorate BOUGHT each time that they go to the polls or in the main do they think carefully about what will be the result of where they lay their individual crosses ?

Regards....

Papaumau.

tlttf wrote:Sounds good Papa, will you come back and tell me when we have a refreshed and modernised labour party. At present we are offered the same from the professional politicians of all parties, anybody that believes the present labour party is any different to the socio/lib presently taking up valuable space in parliament is deluding themselves.

I agree entirely, tlttf.

Anybody who believes Labour would offer much different to what we presently have is deluding themselves.

Hopefully, Labour's policy-wonks will not be diverted by the clear invitation to continuously apologise for the past.

"The Past is another Country. They did things differently there."
(L P Hartley, The Go-between 1953).

The urgency, it seems to me, will be to have a party in a position to challenge the coalition by 2015 - I think that needs to be a political party that's already in existence - a newly-formed political party won't have time between now and the next general election to gather a big enough following - which may leave us back in the hands of the Tories and whoever they can get on board to support them (UKIP perhaps?)

That prospect appals me, so I'm sticking with Labour.

By 2015, boatlady, I confidently expect the entire Nation to be proud contributors to these threads (or at least to pretend that they always were).

I tend to think OW & boatlady that come the 2015 general election we will get a better result than Tony Blair got in 1997, what do you both think ?

I'm inclined to think it'll be a bit of a close-run thing - I believe there are many out there that continue to harbour right-wing views, or to feel let-down by recent Labour mistakes. (The war in Iraq, for one, not really very recent, but still reverberating and has given rise to a lot of negative outcomes, both here and abroad)
The fact that we now lack an industrial infrastructure to a large extent, and are in fact net importers of quite a few necessities, also seems at time to give a bit of credence to some of the Tory ideas - there's no longer the unskilled and semi-skilled work out there for boys to start when they leave school - and where it exists it's underpaid, and does lead to dependency on benefits, which can be spun to look like 'scrounging' and 'skiving'.

oftenwrong wrote:

Papaumau wrote:
It is just too easy to say that the political types don't care about the poor and the people who live at the bottom end of society and it is also too easy to encourage the same people to not vote because their votes will be wasted.

As a confirmed Socialist, I have to suggest that there is now only ONE party left in Britain that thinks as we do and that party is a refreshed and modernised LABOUR party. ( Not New-Labour BTW ).

Our votes would be wasted anywhere else !

Regards....

Papaumau.

In today's Independent Owen Jones savours the taste of heresy in commenting, "The Left has been forced into an entirely defensive posture. "Stop Privatisation", "defend our NHS", "stop the cuts", savecomprehensiveeducation". Contrasted with booming right-wing .... Policy Exchange, Taxpayers Alliance and Conservative Home.

.... CLASS is a think-tank set up by Trade Unions .... The People's Assembly due to meet on 22 June in Westminster General Hall, aims to unite all opponents of austerity in one movement.

Watch that space.

I will be watching closely OW, if the Unions get together that could spell an General Strike !! it has just been announced that it looks like a Triple dip recession more trouble for Herr Cameron and Diddy Giddy.

To interest "The Poor" enough to vote for a change of Government, the Labour Party has to identify a credible means of assistance which doesn't simply add to the tax burden. A massive council-house-building programme is going to take time to show results but just making that commitment should reduce the widespread current sensation of helplessness.

A Socialist government managed it at a time when the Country was skint following a World War.

Well here we are again, folks.

I get sad when I read left-leaning people talking doom and gloom and no hope for politics in Britain as I have and still do believe in democracy and the will of the people.

Yes, we have swung from left to right and back again many times since the war but that is just the way that democracy works in a two-party system.

We have to make this flawed system work for us as well as we can, if we give a damn, and I still think that for the people at the bottom end and the middle of British society only the Labour party and government can or will serve us as we need to be served.

Tony Blair, as much as I respected him as an orator and a charismatic leader, did get it seriously wrong when he took the great Labour movement lurching over to the right just so that he could attract a few disaffected ex-Tories to his New-Labour camp. This attempt at taking the Labour movement to the centre-right was extremely successful at the time but in order to get votes I believe that the Labour party and government lost it's way under Blair and Brown.

When I talk about a "refreshed and revitalised" Labour party and next government I mean that under the leadership of Ed Miliband I see no reason why this reformed party can not take all of the best values of traditional Labour and move it into the modern world so that it can AT LAST serve the ordinary people of Britain as we hope and expect it should serve us.

Regards....

Papaumau.

bobby wrote:Make voting Compulsory.

That is a really good idea if that could be brought in bobby, I believe that in Austrailia you can be fined if you do not vote.

bobby wrote:Make voting Compulsory.

.... and voting Tory a Capital Offence !

oftenwrong wrote:

bobby wrote:Make voting Compulsory.

.... and voting Tory a Capital Offence !

That is a [b]HANGING OFFENCE OW or better still HANDS BEEN CHOPPED OFF for voting Tory.

Any advance on 'limb severance' in the mutilation stakes... ?

Prepare the boiling oil, Igor!

Damn - I've only gone and dropped the thumb-screws in it...!

Phil Hornby wrote:Any advance on 'limb severance' in the mutilation stakes... ?

PH do not get me started there are many punishments I could think of, the nasty ones I would keep for Tory MPs and they involve the Tower of London !!

oftenwrong wrote:To interest "The Poor" enough to vote for a change of Government, the Labour Party has to identify a credible means of assistance which doesn't simply add to the tax burden. A massive council-house-building programme is going to take time to show results but just making that commitment should reduce the widespread current sensation of helplessness.

A Socialist government managed it at a time when the Country was skint following a World War.

Well here we are again, folks.

Been thinking about that - I think you may be right as far as that goes - but we may need more- what other Labour policies might anyone want to suggest?

Joking aside, I too see no reason why Britain should not take up the forced-voting idea so long as we are not told WHO to vote for.

This idea has been successfully tried in other countries as they thought that anybody who does not take up their right to vote is by this act attacking democracy.

We often take our freedoms for granted in Britain and this is a sorry condition to get into when the people we elect continually do nothing to right the wrongs of inequality in this country.

Regards....

Papaumau.

If I've understood it correctly, Australian Law makes it compulsory to attend the Polling Station.

Once there whether to cast a vote, or not, remains a personal decision.

boatlady wrote:Been thinking about that - I think you may be right as far as that goes - but we may need more- what other Labour policies might anyone want to suggest?

Here's one I've submitted to a Labour party policy group, which I think has the benefits of being both radical and practical:

Have you ever wondered at the lack of imagination shown by many politicians on key issues, and the ensuing willingness to accept the status quo? Perhaps the problem is that they like the status quo or are afraid of the consequences of challenging it, and therefore ‘dumb down’ their imaginations and suppress their hopes of ever seeing genuine, fundamental change. Either way, the consequences for ordinary people tend to be bad – sometimes very bad.

So it is with the discussion on the ‘living wage’ (a wage sufficient to allow a decent standard of living without requiring state support, e.g. housing benefit) – about which David Cameron said, in the run-up to the last General Election, that it was ‘an idea whose time has come’, yet once in office he decided it wasn’t workable. The living wage is currently estimated at £8.55 per hour for London and £7.45 elsewhere – substantially higher than the legal minimum wage for adults of £6.19.

In the last edition of The Red Book, Teresa Pearce MP wrote an excellent chapter on the truth about the living wage – that this country's taxpayers effectively pay a massive subsidy to enhance the private profits of companies that don't pay their workers enough to make ends meet. Forcing such companies to pay a living wage is not only morally right but fiscally essential, lifting a huge burden from public finances by expecting companies to pay their employees properly.

The problems?

The first objection opponents raise with the idea of a living wage is that small businesses, particularly new ones, won't be able to afford to pay more than the current minimum wage to their staff, and that imposing a living wage will cause some of those businesses to fail, or not to be started in the first place. While this is in part a red herring, as there are plenty of small businesses whose owners make plenty of profit and pay themselves substantial salaries while many of their employees are paid the minimum wage, it does hold true for some.

The second problem is that companies, if forced to pay a living wage , are likely to simply put up prices to maintain profits, creating inflation and cancelling the benefit of the improved income for the lowest earners. It is therefore not enough simply to mandate a minimum wage that is a living wage at the time when it is mandated, as it soon won't be.

But not creating a living minimum wage is not an acceptable option – UK taxpayers are currently subsidising private profits to the tune of around £20 billion a year in the form of working tax credits – so a creative solution needs to be found for both of the key problems outlined above.

Of course, a key underlying problem is one of excessive profit expectations by investors, who want to squeeze every last percentage-point of profit from every enterprise, enriching themselves at the expense of the vast majority. But it is possible to discourage that, if we’re just a little bit creative and bold enough to implement them.

A solution

Here’s one way to achieve a living wage – or better – and without necessarily legislating one, although it could easily be combined with legislation to stipulate a living minimum wage. It would also help to manage investor expectations downward to a more realistic and sustainable level and to curb the scandal of ridiculous pay packets for top executives (who usually receive entrepreneurial rewards for managerial performance, as economics commentator John Plender put it). And it could do it with little if any impact on prices, while favouring small businesses. Here’s how:

To achieve the unquestionable good of a decent living wage with minimal adverse consequences, the next Labour government needs to pass a law putting corporation tax on a sliding scale based on the ratio of the chief executive’s salary to that of the lowest earner in his company. This would kill several birds with one stone.

Investors would then have more to think about than just profits – they’d be a lot more interested in limiting executive salaries to reasonable levels and they’d have a vested interest in paying their lowest earners a better rate.

The differential in the tax rate would only need to be small and the reduction in tax take (if you calculated the sliding scale correctly) would be more than offset by the state’s savings in terms benefits that no longer need to be paid to low earners who are now magically getting a living wage or better.

Ethical companies, who would already be geared up to make profits without underpaying their workers, would find themselves more competitive and more profitable, too, which would impede the urge of greedy companies to push up prices to customers, as they would then struggle to compete against their ethical competitors.

If calculated correctly, the new tax scale would also protect small businesses and encourage entrepreneurship. If small business are genuinely unable to afford to pay a better wage, they will also be paying the owner-CEO a lower salary – leading to a low top-bottom wage differential and a lower tax rate. When the small business starts to thrive and the owner wants to increase his own salary, he also has to factor in a pay increase for his staff or else face a rise in tax – so small businesses could compete and survive without providing an excuse for the greedy to pay poorly. Small businesses who truly needed to could be allowed to continue to offer the minimum wage in force at the time (most likely to employees who are the 2nd earners in a family and can afford to accept them).

Will it stop the 'cream' rising?

The cry from opponents will be that limiting wage differentials in this way will prevent companies attracting the ‘cream’ of executives – but executive salaries have climbed constantly without any link to improved performance. If those executives don’t want the jobs, someone else will who’ll be just as competent and probably more concerned with the a fair society and the welfare of others.

Similarly, if large, multinational businesses don’t want to operate under conditions that will help achieve a decent society, others will see the opportunity their departure creates and come – or else real entrepreneurs will see the opportunity and form companies to fill the gap – and we’ll have a more balanced economy with a wider spread of wealth. It’s simple supply and demand and it can work without exploiting and impoverishing people.

The current government’s narrative for all our problems is that there’s nothing we can do about the real issues in a globalised economy, and that we therefore have to try to solve problems created by the rich (although what they’ll actually say is they were created by Labour, which is simply untrue) by penalising the poor: capping benefits, reducing the number of people eligible for them, slashing wages. making pensions more expensive and making us work longer.

That’s because actually articulating, let alone addressing, the real issues would mean the Tories couldn’t continue their habitual demonisation of those they want to rob in favour of those who are already wealthy.

Any right-thinking person should know that's not the way to a healthy, sustainable society.

....the next Labour government needs to pass a law putting corporation tax on a sliding scale based on the ratio of the chief executive’s salary to that of the lowest earner in his company.

Nothing wrong with setting not only a lower rate but also an upper one. However in Company Law, not all animals are equal. Employees will have PAYE tax deducted from their wages before they even get to see them, whereas the Guvnor is entitled to charge the expenses of running the company against the tax liability, which in any case does not become payable until the Year following. Furthermore Company dividends are treated differently to Directors' salaries.

"The next Labour Government" coud do worse than revisit the whole question of The Companies Acts of 1985, 1986 and 1989, and also investigate the continuing situation whereby a foreign company does not necessarily pay tax on its business within the UK.

Skywalker.......The problem is and in recent has been that our politicians are in bed with the industry leaders, bribed with nice little earners as non exec directors, trips away, cozy dinner parties and gifts etc. While these practices are allowed to continue the average man and women in the street does not stand a chance of getting fairness no matter who is in charge. Aggressive lobbyists offering cash for questions and holding those policians by the nuts will always get what they want over you and I.

Maybe we should pay our MP's more and make it illegal for them to hold any board positions while in office


As a foot note I would like to see RBSI nationalised (we own 80% already) and then the government should tell the rest of the banks that there is no more money to bail them out...ever!! The new nationalised RBSI would be run as an independent bank in government ownership and then any quantitive easing cash would be poured into RBSI but only if that amount is used to lend out to SMEs rather than disappearing down a black hole as it seems to now...and an independent Accountant would need to keep an eye on this so it does go where its meant to.

The only way things will get better for mr and mrs average is if there are some fundamental changes and the only party offering this at the moment is UKIP (rightly or wrongly)....That says a lot about the state of our politics in the UK

Blueturando for PM

blueturando wrote:Skywalker.......The problem is and in recent has been that our politicians are in bed with the industry leaders, bribed with nice little earners as non exec directors, trips away, cozy dinner parties and gifts etc. While these practices are allowed to continue the average man and women in the street does not stand a chance of getting fairness no matter who is in charge. Aggressive lobbyists offering cash for questions and holding those policians by the nuts will always get what they want over you and I.

Maybe we should pay our MP's more and make it illegal for them to hold any board positions while in office


As a foot note I would like to see RBSI nationalised (we own 80% already) and then the government should tell the rest of the banks that there is no more money to bail them out...ever!! The new nationalised RBSI would be run as an independent bank in government ownership and then any quantitive easing cash would be poured into RBSI but only if that amount is used to lend out to SMEs rather than disappearing down a black hole as it seems to now...and an independent Accountant would need to keep an eye on this so it does go where its meant to.

The only way things will get better for mr and mrs average is if there are some fundamental changes and the only party offering this at the moment is UKIP (rightly or wrongly)....That says a lot about the state of our politics in the UK

Blueturando for PM

Enjoyed reading your post blue and you have some not bad ideas to boot, firstly you would have to tell Cameron there will be no more asking the rich and wealthy to No10 Chequers for donations of £250,000 to the Tory party with a policy change thrown in for dessert, and no more giving gov't contracts to his mates in the private sector or Tory donors. If you want to pay MPs a larger salary they will be told they will have to earn it and there will be no more claiming expenses there salary will have to cover the same things the normal man/women salary has to cover travel food rent/ mortgage ect.

We do not have to nationalize RBS or the rest of them, but I would agree that they should be told "The Taxpayers of the UK will NEVER bail you out" that will be up too the people that get the bonuses and didvidends from the bank when times are good and it will be up to them when things go wrong.

As for the UKIP party the only reason they are high in the polls at the moment is because they have nicked one of the Tories policies "Frighten the S**T out of the public with a LIE mixed in with a bit of Spin that is how the public have kept quiet for the last 3 years while the Tories got there nasty and UNFAIR Bills through the H.O.C, if you do not believe this cast your mind back to what happened when the Poll Tax was brought in riots and general unrest until the Maggot saw the light.

Some really good and constructive ideas here - your idea, Steve, is one I've read somewhere else, and it makes sense even to a dunce like me.
I think a party that would sign up to the kinds of measures that are being described here - without any racist or Little Englander baggage - would definitely get my vote.
Wonder what the chances are that the Labour party will not only accept these kinds of policies, but also sell them to the public?

Many of the 'poor' or non-voters may choose not to vote as they see that their voice is not heard...

Currently spoilt ballot paper are counted but not always listed in the overall results....Thereby denying those who made the deliberate choice their say and being heard....

Perhaps one way to change this would be to have a 'None of the above box on the ballot paper......

Whilst in agreement with all of the above, the pre-election Elephant in the Room for Miliband & Co is Labour's history as stewards of the Nation's finances, which is not beyond criticism. They have clearly realised that, and have recently made apologies and attempted explanations for some of Gordon Brown's more detached moments of unfathomable activity.

Many undecided voters will be even more impressed if there is clear and indisputable evidence of a determined break with the past, evidenced by the sacrifice of some Brownites still enjoying inexplicable shadow-cabinet status.

oftenwrong wrote:Whilst in agreement with all of the above, the pre-election Elephant in the Room for Miliband & Co is Labour's history as stewards of the Nation's finances, which is not beyond criticism. They have clearly realised that, and have recently made apologies and attempted explanations for some of Gordon Brown's more detached moments of unfathomable activity.

Many undecided voters will be even more impressed if there is clear and indisputable evidence of a determined break with the past, evidenced by the sacrifice of some Brownites still enjoying inexplicable shadow-cabinet status.

OW I agree with what you have said, and it just shows me that the good people on this forum need to get out there and convince the people to get out and vote and to explain that if you do not vote your voice will never be heard.

I guess it has to be admitted that the ordinary "man/woman on the street" is much less likely to go to vote because they firstly, have little interest in politics and they also feel that they are too far removed from what goes on in parliament for their wishes ever to even be listened to never mind acted upon.

Of course those of us that are interested in politics know that every vote counts and that the vote laid by the most powerful person in Britain is valued at the same level as the poorest person who can manage to get to the polling booths. Getting this idea across to the proletariat is a much harder thing to do.

As said above, of course the Tories will never introduce compulsory voting as if they did they would be wiped off the face of the earth by the people who would then vote who had never voted before.

I would hope that for this precise reason, the next Labour government might think to introduce compulsory voting as it would be in their best interest for this to come about.

Regards....

Papaumau.

boatlady wrote:Some really good and constructive ideas here - your idea, Steve, is one I've read somewhere else, and it makes sense even to a dunce like me.
I think a party that would sign up to the kinds of measures that are being described here - without any racist or Little Englander baggage - would definitely get my vote.
Wonder what the chances are that the Labour party will not only accept these kinds of policies, but also sell them to the public?

You might have read it on my blog? Pretty sure I came up with it first, although 'nothing new under the sun', as they say.

Another idea I like very much is from the Tax Justice Network (I think). Require companies selling here, like Google, Amazon and co declare their worldwide profits plus their worldwide and UK turnovers as a condition of doing business here - then make them pay tax on the same proportion of their worldwide profits that the UK turnover represents of the worldwide figure. Would prevent all the dodging and the shuffling among jurisdictions to avoid paying tax on what they generate here.

I would vote for that Skwalker....Great idea

I know what would get people out there to vote even the ones that have not done so for a while "Five years of Cameron Gov't" they will be queuing up before the polling stations are open. With the Bedroom Tax and Universal credits the people of the UK will be desperate to KICK Cameron out of No10.

Yes Redflag, after all of the evil things that this coalition government have done to the people of Britain in the name of "the deficit", surely they will turn out in their droves to boot this cruel bunch into touch.

What needs to happen now, ( it has not happened yet ), is for Ed Miliband and his hopefuls to get their act together and tell us what they are going to do in order to get this job done.

Regards....

Papaumau.

Papaumau wrote:Yes Redflag, after all of the evil things that this coalition government have done to the people of Britain in the name of "the deficit", surely they will turn out in their droves to boot this cruel bunch into touch.

What needs to happen now, ( it has not happened yet ), is for Ed Miliband and his hopefuls to get their act together and tell us what they are going to do in order to get this job done.

Regards....

Papaumau.

I agree Papaumau and yes I think it is time that the Labour party came out and gave the voting public an idea of the things it would attempt to do if elected but not the secrets of its Manifesto which will come out at the appropriate time before the general election.

Yes Redflag, of course the details of the new Labour manifesto will have to be kept close to the chest until just before the election in order not to give too much away to their opponents.

What I actually mean by my statement above is that while I do hope that Ed Miliband is much closer to the great and original values of the Labour movement and is going to properly move away from the dark days of Blair and Brown, I only wish that he would try a bit harder to persuade us that he is the right man for the job.

Regards....

Papaumau.

If the severely put-upon ordinary people of Britain, backed up by the true Labour movement, were to attack the wicked policies of this exhausted and valueless government RIGHT NOW, I would not be able to see the rotten coalition surviving to term.

They need to go NOW so that Labour can sort out the terrible damage that has been done to our famous NHS and the wider welfare state before the damage is so ingrained that it will be too difficult to reverse.

Regards....

Papaumau.

Firstly, we need the Labour Party to make real connections with those at the bottom of the ladder, those on low incomes and struggling, people who are been hit by this cruel government, make people understand and realize that things really could be different if they went out and voted.

I signed up to the Facebook campaign against the bedroom tax, and some of those campaigners in Liverpool feel that the local Labour Party is attempting to make political gain out of their misery, some campaigners have turned to more millitant, more left wing groups for support.

This cannot be right, the natural territory of these people should be the Labour Party, and allthough the party must attract the middle classes and business people, it must not forget its roots and what it stands for, a fair government can look after everyone who tries, and it can offer a helping hand to those that need it.

They need to go NOW so that Labour can sort out the terrible damage that has been done to our famous NHS and the wider welfare state before the damage is so ingrained that it will be too difficult to reverse.

Yes Papa, we now know the full price patients had to pay for Labours target driven NHS.....A severe lack of patient care and thousands of needless deaths. Is the NHS safe in Labours hands, I think not