Many people will say that Britain has never really been comfortable in the European Club. There are probably a number of reasons for that. Perceived loss of national identity is a biggie. Some people do highlight the Norwegians and the Swiss as a fine example of having Free Trade with Europe, and being able to survive outside the EU. I do look at this and think it certainly is possible that Britain could do ok on the outside.
With the modern EU containing 27 Member States, decisions will always be taken by Qualified Majority Voting. That means the UK will sometimes have to accept legislation from Europe it does not support. Let's not forget though that Europe is the market in which many British products and services are sold. We will sometimes get outvoted, but for me it is better to actually have a vote. We would have less say on the outside.
I believe we would be better in than out. However, I do believe it is time we held a new referendum. Most of the current electorate did not vote in the 1975 referendum. That factor along with the general debate about Britain's future in Europe, does I believe require a fresh mandate from the people to end the uncertainty one way or another.
Monday, 30 September 2013
Cycling on Pavements in the UK
For many pedestrians on the streets of the UK today, there can be no bigger nuisance than someone coming past very quickly on their bicycle. As someone who walks to work twice a day (on split shifts) and twice back, I should know. I have lost count of the number of times someone has whizzed past me, leaving me with the thought of what if I had moved my arse or elbow at that point!
Having read the first few lines of this post, one may be surprised to read I would actually support some form of limited legalisation for cycling on pavements. Whilst there are some careless cyclists, there are also (perhaps surprisingly) many considerate cyclists. A simple use of the bell can always be appreciated by the pedestrian. A main point to consider is that if the pedestrian is walking straight ahead, he or she will not always know that there is something potentially sinister behind! I am very often in a world of my own, wondering what team Liverpool will field next weekend!
Now I am under no illusions that to permit some cycling on pavements will still require some clear RED LINES. For instance I believe it should be compulsory for the cyclist to dismount near a group of people, children, or a blind person. It would be also desirable I believe for the cyclist to dismount if the pedestrian does not hear the bell due to traffic noises etc. Where cycle lanes are present, the cyclist should be expected to make use of that facility instead. Any bikes which are not fitted with bells should be BANNED.
In an ideal world, the UK's major towns and cities would have more cycle lanes. However, due to the fact that some roads will already have narrow pavements, building a cycle lane is not always possible.
I recognise it is not ideal for cyclists to use many major roads, due to the amount of traffic. Where cycle lanes are not an option, THE PEDESTRIAN AND THE CYCLIST CAN CO-EXIST. My daily experiences do confirm this.
Having read the first few lines of this post, one may be surprised to read I would actually support some form of limited legalisation for cycling on pavements. Whilst there are some careless cyclists, there are also (perhaps surprisingly) many considerate cyclists. A simple use of the bell can always be appreciated by the pedestrian. A main point to consider is that if the pedestrian is walking straight ahead, he or she will not always know that there is something potentially sinister behind! I am very often in a world of my own, wondering what team Liverpool will field next weekend!
Now I am under no illusions that to permit some cycling on pavements will still require some clear RED LINES. For instance I believe it should be compulsory for the cyclist to dismount near a group of people, children, or a blind person. It would be also desirable I believe for the cyclist to dismount if the pedestrian does not hear the bell due to traffic noises etc. Where cycle lanes are present, the cyclist should be expected to make use of that facility instead. Any bikes which are not fitted with bells should be BANNED.
In an ideal world, the UK's major towns and cities would have more cycle lanes. However, due to the fact that some roads will already have narrow pavements, building a cycle lane is not always possible.
I recognise it is not ideal for cyclists to use many major roads, due to the amount of traffic. Where cycle lanes are not an option, THE PEDESTRIAN AND THE CYCLIST CAN CO-EXIST. My daily experiences do confirm this.
The Three Plus One Electoral System
I am no fan of the UK Electoral System, the First Past The Post System. Too many voices are not heard. Unless you live in a marginal constituency, your vote will not be central in determining who will form the next Government.
Britain held a referendum in 2011 on a proposal to change the electoral system to the Alternative Vote System. The Alternative Vote System (AV) enables the voter to rank constituency candidates in order of preference. Many critics made the point during the referendum campaign that AV allows voters of minor parties a few bites of the cherry, whilst it should also be pointed out that pro-electoral reform politicians really supported another system known as the Single Transferable Vote.
WHAT I PROPOSE IS SOMETHING NEW- THE THREE PLUS ONE SYSTEM.
The main principles are as follows:
1. Constituencies would become multi-member constituencies, whereby four MPs would be returned in each constituency.
2. Political parties would be allowed to field up to 3 candidates per constituency. There would be no limit on Independent candidates.
3. Voters would continue to mark an X for their choice of candidate.
4. The first three MPs would be elected on their individual share of the vote.
5. The fourth candidate would be elected on a more proportional basis. The successful candidate for the fourth seat would be the candidate from the winning party (or the list of independent candidates) who has the highest individual share of the vote out of that party's remaining candidates.
So how would the fourth member be elected for each constituency? Let me give you a few examples.
The first example sees Party A, Party B, and Party C all return an MP on individual share of the vote. The fourth MP would be determined by which Party has polled the most votes.
The second example sees Party A return 2 MPs and Party B return 1 MP on individual share of the vote. The first question to ask is which party has polled the most votes? If it is Party A, we would then ask does Party A have more than 50% of the Constituency Vote. Party A will get a third MP returned if they achieve that 50% threshold.
In a third example, we have the same scenario of Party A returning 2 MPs and Party B returning 1 MP. On this occasion that 50% threshold is not met, even though Party A has still polled the most votes. So we would now ask if Party C has polled more votes than Party B, yet somehow failed to win a seat on individual share of the vote. If Party C has polled more votes than Party B, then Party C would secure the fourth seat on a proportional basis. If Party C has not polled more votes than Party B, then the candidate with the fourth largest individual share of the vote will be returned as the fourth MP, irrespective of party affiliation.
For the fourth example, we will once again use the scenario where Party A has returned 2 MPs and Party B has returned 1 MP. Again we will ask which party has polled the most votes? This time Party B actually has the largest share of the vote, and will secure the fourth MP on a proportional basis.
The Three Plus One Electoral System is designed to hear those voices which are currently not heard under the First Past The Post Electoral System. Furthermore, by continuing to mark an X against the voter's preferred candidate, it is very voter friendly!
WHAT I PROPOSE IS SOMETHING NEW- THE THREE PLUS ONE SYSTEM.
The main principles are as follows:
1. Constituencies would become multi-member constituencies, whereby four MPs would be returned in each constituency.
2. Political parties would be allowed to field up to 3 candidates per constituency. There would be no limit on Independent candidates.
3. Voters would continue to mark an X for their choice of candidate.
4. The first three MPs would be elected on their individual share of the vote.
5. The fourth candidate would be elected on a more proportional basis. The successful candidate for the fourth seat would be the candidate from the winning party (or the list of independent candidates) who has the highest individual share of the vote out of that party's remaining candidates.
So how would the fourth member be elected for each constituency? Let me give you a few examples.
The first example sees Party A, Party B, and Party C all return an MP on individual share of the vote. The fourth MP would be determined by which Party has polled the most votes.
The second example sees Party A return 2 MPs and Party B return 1 MP on individual share of the vote. The first question to ask is which party has polled the most votes? If it is Party A, we would then ask does Party A have more than 50% of the Constituency Vote. Party A will get a third MP returned if they achieve that 50% threshold.
In a third example, we have the same scenario of Party A returning 2 MPs and Party B returning 1 MP. On this occasion that 50% threshold is not met, even though Party A has still polled the most votes. So we would now ask if Party C has polled more votes than Party B, yet somehow failed to win a seat on individual share of the vote. If Party C has polled more votes than Party B, then Party C would secure the fourth seat on a proportional basis. If Party C has not polled more votes than Party B, then the candidate with the fourth largest individual share of the vote will be returned as the fourth MP, irrespective of party affiliation.
For the fourth example, we will once again use the scenario where Party A has returned 2 MPs and Party B has returned 1 MP. Again we will ask which party has polled the most votes? This time Party B actually has the largest share of the vote, and will secure the fourth MP on a proportional basis.
The Three Plus One Electoral System is designed to hear those voices which are currently not heard under the First Past The Post Electoral System. Furthermore, by continuing to mark an X against the voter's preferred candidate, it is very voter friendly!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)