We do not want any more onshore wind turbines/farms in Norfolk or elsewhere in the UK.

We appeal to our MPs to represent our views and to vehemently oppose these projects. These plants are an uneconomical and inefficient way to produce electricity and are only pursued by the Government to secure the “green” vote and to keep the EU happy. Locally, they industrialise the landscape, have detrimental health, financial and other effects on peoples lives, destroy wildlife and have a negative impact on tourism. The billions of pounds wasted on these projects should be used in other areas to improve the lot of the British people.

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/22958

Today has been amazingly significant also with the reception Brenda’s received. I can understand the emphasis on protection but i’m sure she’ll get to meet people tomorrow. For her not to be able to visit for a 100 years and yet there’s a land border is madness. Unlike Newsnight which ran completely with some drivel hypothetical, i’m a little nervous about Ireland. I don’t think it’s ‘fixed’ and I think today has been absolutely fantastic and needs a bit of a diary entry.

Glad yer enjoying yerself

I have heard all the arguments for and against Alternative Vote but cannot believe that nobody has
talked about the real problem with AV

We have all heard the Yes to AV side saying that it is the system used by various political parties to choose a leader
and that therefore it must be right that the public get to use it to decide which person wins and becomes an MP.

The real issue is this

In political parties each MP and member knows each of the candidates very well indeed and therefore can rate them
in order of preference.

In elections let us be honest, we may know one or two at most of the persons wishing to become an MP but we do not know
them well enough to rate them against each other as a preference.

The perverse issue is however that if AV is chosen as the way forward, people will be given the opportunity to make choices
and therefore because they can they will do so.

Alternative vote when people do not know the candidates very well is a perverse system. People will try to make it work
if it is chosen, the public will make the decision that they are asked to make.

It is the outcome which is a lottery and is being exploited by the Yes to AV group.

If AV wins the day, will Britain get the Government it deserves? I don’t think so.

Regards
David Curtis

AV prioritises one person’s vote over their neighbours, depending on their voting preference.
FPTP offers the principle of one man, one vote; how you can attempt to claim that this system skews democratic accountability is quite frankly ludicrous.

The proposed AV v FPTP UK Referendum consists of a contrived and simplistic bipolar choice of only two inadequate options set against unfit UK Electoral Law, unfit UK Electoral Registers and unfit UK Election Returning Officer negligible powers of cross-constituency scrutiny. Election Returning Officers will be unable to guarantee ‘One Person-One Vote’ nor to sign off ANY part of such a referendum as ‘true’, ‘democratic’, ‘free’ or ‘fair’.

Here are fundamental AV v FPTP BOGUS REFERENDUM flaws:

1. UK Electoral Law – NOT ‘fit for purpose’.
2. UK Electoral Registers – NOT ‘fit for purpose’.
3. UK CERO powers – NOT ‘fit for purpose’.

A UK REFERENDUM MUST, ON PRINCIPLE, BE GUARANTEED TO BE VERIFIABLY AND GENUINELY ‘ONE PERSON-ONE VOTE’.

IF THIS AV v FPTP BOGUS REFERENDUM IS ATTEMPTED IT WILL NOT BE.

BOGUS UK ELECTORAL REGISTERS = BOGUS REFERENDUM:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/grahamsmith/2010/06/second_home_voters_1.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/grahamsmith/2010/06/secret_ballots_and_second_home.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/grahamsmith/2010/06/worried_about_second_home_vote.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/grahamsmith/2010/06/kevins_too_busy_to_probe_secon.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/grahamsmith/2010/06/game_on.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/grahamsmith/2010/06/a_letter_to_the_chief.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/grahamsmith/2011/04/some_second_home_voters_purged.html

In the face of such corrupt and non-democratic electoral foundations, these may be the only rational responses to the RUBBISH REFERENDUM:

BOYCOTT THE LIBERAL DEMOCRAT CONSERVATIVE PARTY CAMERON CLEGG COALITION BOGUS AV v FPTP REFERENDUM.

OR

SPOIL YOUR BALLOT PAPER WITH A SUITABLY CONSTRUCTIVE COMMENT IN RESPONSE TO THE BOGUS AV v FPTP UK REFERENDUM – A LIBDEMCON COALITION CON.

NOTE: ALL SPOILED BALLOT PAPERS HAVE TO BE RECORDED AND NUMBERS PUBLISHED.

Well at least they are not supporting FTP simply because it benefits your Party.
A party putting principles over political advantage what ever next?

Instead we get this. An argument about the nature of an electoral voting system can’t be decided on the basis of which particular candidates you happen to prefer at the present time, or recent past. It can only sensibly be debated in terms of how well it represents the will of the electorate.

That is of course unless you are intent on skewing the electoral system in favour of your own party regardless of any notion of democratic accountability.

Also – whilst it’s perfectly possible to look at a previous AV election result, and determine how it would have turned out under FPTP – the same is not true the other way round – since no second or subsequent preferences were cast in the last General Election, any attempt to project a result under AV has to be pure conjecture.

It would appear that you are campaigning in favour of a “No to AV” vote – so how on earth is this twisted logic supposed to appeal to those who are not Conservatives, and those Conservatives who care about democracy, rather than just short term political gain ?

You have perhaps forgotten that almost 60% of the votes cast when you were elected were votes against you, and that your “majority” represented only 27% of the electorate in your constituency.

Is that fair ? Is that democratic ? Convince me – I am genuinely a floating voter on this issue with misgivings about both AV and the existing FPTP system.

“what I am saying is”
“what I have been saying is”
“as I’ve been saying”
etc

It’s really irritating; and that’s apart from the adenoidal blockage ; the talking out the side of his mouth and the lisp.

There are many other scientific reasons to be relaxed (or idle, depending on how you see things) Gadewch y llwch yn lonydd ac ymlacio