General British politics discussion thread

I'm a massive fan of PR-STV but categorising it as simple is not accurate. The majority of people in this country do not fully understand it. Every single election I hear the same things from friends and family and in media spots:

• Oh yes, I like the two candidates from party Y - I'll be giving them both votes (This is not how it works - you don't have multiple votes. You have a single vote, that can potentially transfer to other candidates, under certain circumstances depending on the preferences that you dictated)
• Do I have to vote all the way down - I don't recognise a lot of those candidates?
• I really don't like candidate X - how do I make sure I don't vote for them by accident?

And that's before you even get to the counting where the confusion really ramps up: quotas, tallies, transfers, surpluses etc etc

The right-wing media were able to easily portray AV (a relatively simple voting system) as too complicated back in 2011. God only knows what they'd say about PR-STV.

The slogan 'one person, one vote' was a key factor in 2011. Obviously we can happily argue all day that ticking more than one selection in order of preference doesn't suddenly nullify the concept of 'one person, one vote', but the FPP campaign successfully got the idea out there that ticking just one box was the 'British way'. There was also an anti-ARV campaign on costs. Why spend £250M on ARV when we could spend it on the NHS instead (you may recognize that one as being recycled a few years later!).

Can see an example of both these if you google search images for 'one person, one vote, 2011 referendum' - I'm not sure how to post images these days.

I've said before that the LibDems missed a trick. This didn't have to go to a referendum, there is no constitution that needed changing so the Libs should just have made it a plank of government that it would be voted through parliament in the first few weeks. Otherwise, no deal. Obviously future parliaments could undo it, but those parliaments would have had many MPs elected via ARV who would be wary of undoing it. So it just might have stuck and become the accepted system. Missed opportunity.

Well in that case - your first-hand comprehension and experience of the voting system is an anecdote - which by your own logic proves nothing.

Point 1 is just a way of speaking and if you are asking point 3 you should be deemed too thick to vote.

I do hear point 2 a lot though.

Well it's Sue Gray Day, Part 1.

Johnson has been handed an 'Update' on her report, as full report cannot be published due to Police request. He's now reading it to figure out how to spin it, and will make statement at 15:30.

But sounds like all the actual juicy bits are gone - the actual events that happened removed, and instead a gist of what was the prevailing attitude in Downing St.

Pile on the pressure on Johnson for what is revealed, but keep the sniping rolling for next few weeks waiting for full report. It's probably a goldmine for the opposition, some more red meat today to get stuck into, a public that's deeply distrustful of how all this is being handled, and an issue not put to bed at all but with more to follow.

Add to that that Johnson is expected to throw some staff under the bus today, to save himself. I wonder what goodies they might 'leak' over next week in retaliation. Everyone is waiting for the photos of Johnson at a party, locked and clearly partying away, that'll be the ultimate smoking gun.

Grays limited report has already leaked, and while not able to talk of particular parties, it's incredibly scathing - quotes like 'excessive alcohol consumption', 'difficult to justify events' and failure of leadership, that'll resonate with the public.

In questioning Johnson later, the opposition should just focus on getting him to say was he there - if he denies, then he's on record on parliament and any further revelations, either by Police, full Gray report or a leak sinks him. If he evades, he looks shifty, especially if he starts down the police investigation line (So you're under investigation Mr Prime Minister?). If he admits, then he's already lied to Parliament, unless he pathetically says that the excessive alcohol consumption was at a work event

Starmer was masterful. Put the onus on the Tory MP's to do the right thing. Boris tried getting back at him and flailed and was laughable.

Teresa May dissed Johnson too. Corbyn needs to learn how to wear a facemask - his beak was exposed, at least, I think it was Corbyn sitting behind a hairless Scotsman who got up to speak.

Hmm...Bojo needs to get real about bringing the West together. His country has long since been a bit player.

Serious "Al Bundy: 'Did you know I once got 4 touchdowns in 1 game?' " energy off of Boris Johnson every time he brings up the UK vaccine rollout at this stage.

There’s little in the report to force a quick resignation of push enough MPs to submit letters.

The police enquiry gives another excuse to delay any action, and the results of that won’t be made public anyway.

= Johnson survives until the next scandal.

It was a brilliantly worded and delivered speech. There must be a lot of temptation to be animated and shouty in such circumstances but his measured delivery was pitch perfect. A character assassination along with an appeal to the conservative party to do the right thing and call time on this moral vacuum.