Leave a comment

Comments 14

gonzo21 June 20 2015, 12:05:00 UTC
That UK election results video needs to be shown on the evening news.

Reply

andrewducker June 20 2015, 12:59:40 UTC
Spread the word!

Reply

gonzo21 June 20 2015, 13:09:47 UTC
I'm s urprised Labour haven't made more of a fuss about it. Yes, they benefit from the system as it is too, but the Tories are clearly benefitting the most.

And it would give Labour a good clear populist policy to campaign on, that would make them markedly different to what the Tories have to offer.

But. Hey. I've given up trying to make sense of what the Labour party are trying to do.

Reply

andrewducker June 20 2015, 13:42:04 UTC
Labour being in favour of electoral reform is about the only thing that could make me vote for them.

Reply


(The comment has been removed)

andrewducker June 21 2015, 11:03:18 UTC
That's rather neat (if almost certainly illegal in the UK).

Reply


apostle_of_eris June 21 2015, 00:20:36 UTC
Six hundred fifty constituencies all known by NAME? Does any normal citizen know more than a handful of these names? OK, I'm in the Illinois 9th district for the House of Representatives, which could be more informative, but at least that makes sense. How can you tell where Wembly-on-Macassar is if you don't already know?

Reply

drdoug June 21 2015, 08:41:39 UTC
There are lots of things wrong with the UK electoral system, but naming the constituencies for the areas they serve is really not one of them! I think this is one of the rare good things about it.

Does any normal citizen know more than a handful of these names?

Yes!

Scanning down the list, I recognise all but a handful. But I'll admit I'm not normal ( ... )

Reply

apostle_of_eris June 22 2015, 02:52:42 UTC
OK, I see that names have serious advantages. In the U.S., when there's urging for unmediated rattling of Congressional cages ("write" rather than "Give Us Clicks!!!") it begins with where to look up your district.
"Bognor Regis and Littlehampton" sounds like a joke to American ears, like so much British geography, but if you're there, you know it. (I'd known there were four Georges, but somehow had missed #5.)
We have the further complication that districts do not cross state boundaries. The individual states are themselves the districts for Senators, and after each decennial census the state legislatures divide up their allotted number of Representatives. (And yes, you would much rather watch sausage being made.)

I might quibble with your last remark. After the massive Republican sweep at the state level in 2010, most redistricting was done by Republican-owned state governments. Illinois' problems are its own, but fortunately that's off-topic.

Reply


agoodwinsmith June 21 2015, 05:14:41 UTC
The heart attack care thing is amazing. Thx for sharing.

Reply

andrewducker June 21 2015, 11:02:33 UTC
Glad you liked it. I do think it's fantastic that we're getting much better at process, as well as technology.

Reply


£144m to take Edinburgh trams to Newhaven drdoug June 21 2015, 07:45:56 UTC
I was going to write a proper comment on this but a commenter on the article pithily sums up my feelings in just three words: "£144m yeah right".

(And actually it's £145m to the nearest m ... As if mere hundreds of thousands of pounds made a difference here.)

Reply

Re: £144m to take Edinburgh trams to Newhaven andrewducker June 21 2015, 11:00:40 UTC
To be fair, all of the hard work is already done - the under-road pipes have all been moved as part of phase one, and they own the tracks and trams for that part of the work. It's just the laying of the new track that needs to be completed. Still expensive, but a much smaller task than what's been done already.

Reply

RE: Re: £144m to take Edinburgh trams to Newhaven drdoug June 21 2015, 13:15:45 UTC
I totally agree that it should be a much smaller task and a much smaller cost than what's been done already. And I do think that if it does go ahead it will cost less than the £776m for the scheme so far. (If for no other reason than I don't see the City Council and the Scottish Government finding that much cash.) But I don't for one minute believe it will cost less than £145m. In the unlikely event that it does scrape in close to that figure, I am pretty sure it won't be going all the way to Newhaven.

Only last month the cost to run to Newhaven was still being estimated at £80m. The figure shooting up 80% with no clear explanation wouldn't inspire confidence, even if there wasn't an appalling history of woefully mistaken estimates on the scheme.

The Inquiry is supposed to get to the bottom of why it cost so much more and delivered so much less than it promised. Until that is clear, and changes made, I have little confidence that similar issues won't arise again. Unfortunately, it's not reporting any time soon.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up