So, in two weeks time – and three years earlier than we expected – we have a general election to look forward to. Some people may have reacted to this news with “a chance to get rid of the current government”; others with “a chance to give the government a greater mandate”. But for many it is possibly “here we go again”. I hope this post will cater for all reactions.
Manifestos
The party manifestos (which few people actually read) highlight each political party’s views on what is important for the new government to achieve. Some of these views will be put into practice should that party win the election.
The problem, as I see it, is that the manifestos are written in isolation of government – and this applies to all political parties, including the one(s) currently running the country. It’s not until they get into government that the party realises that implementing one manifesto commitment would instigate a chain of events that would compromise the ability to implement another.
I don’t expect many people agree 100% with any of the manifestos. All parties promise some actions that we like and some that we don’t like. It is a case of choosing which is the best – or maybe least worst. But best for us personally, or best for the country? The two may not be the same.
It’s all about the money
A lot of argument between political parties is over levels spending and taxation. But a really important point to remember is this: whatever the colour of the party taking office in June they will have the same amount of money to play with – it’s called Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and is the total income the country generates in a year.
Government expenditure and taxation are inextricably linked. Governments do not create money, they just move it around. When a party promises to spend more money, we should be asking “what taxes are they going to increase”. Similarly, when a party promises to reduce taxation, we should be asking “what expenditure are they going to cut”. For the sake of completeness, I should add that governments can also borrow to raise funds – but that is just taxation postponed to the future.
The Opposition
As a result of this election I would like to see an effective and well-considered opposition. One that can properly hold the government to account (and, where necessary, block legislation) but that uses this power wisely. For years, the opposition’s practice has been to denounce anything the government proposes. It’s like two children squabbling in the playground; we become desensitised to the arguments and conclude that the opposition is useless.
But surely the opposition doesn’t have to disagree on everything the government does – but nor should it agree on everything the government does. After all, how often do we see a new government reverse the legislation that they so vehemently denounced when in opposition?
Why Thursday?
Have you ever wondered why UK elections are held on a Thursday? There’s no legislative reason for it; it is just convention. No one knows why for sure, but suggested reasons include:
- Thursday is market day in many towns, so traditionally a day when voters would be coming into town
- Thursday is as far as possible from Friday and Saturday pub night (where voters might be influenced by tory-leaning brewers) and Sunday (when voters might be influenced by liberal-leaning free-church ministers)
- An election on Thursday means that the result is known on Friday, giving a chance for the new government to form over the weekend and start work on Monday morning.
Related post: General Election 2017 Candidates Announced (Winchester; Eastleigh)
Related posts:
General Election 2017 Candidates Announced (Winchester; Eastleigh)
Who Should I Vote for?
Steve Brine MP: Call for Future Local Plan Exhibitions to Include Chandler’s Ford
Eastleigh Borough Council Explains Why Local Plan Exhibitions Exclude Chandler’s Ford
Chandler’s Ford & Hiltingbury PACT Meeting – Merdon School: Thursday 18th December 2014
There isn’t going to be an election hustings event in Chandler’s Ford this time round, so thank you for starting this article discussing the upcoming election. Some friends said Chandler’s Ford might not be seen as ‘important’ (as compared to Winchester), as it is more marginalised, so we might not get politicians knocking on the doors.
However our votes count!
Like you, I would ike to see “an effective and well-considered opposition”. Personally I’m concerned about social care most. In leafy Chandler’s Ford we may not see some social problems (ok, we only had some anti-social behaviour in Chandler’s Ford shopping area last year), but there are more than 13.3 million Disabled People and people with long-term health conditions in the UK. Furthermore, the policies of austerity have hit disabled people particularly badly. I hope there wll be a long term and sustainable solution to the social care crisis.
It seems to me that this general election is a smoke screen to deflect us from considering the real problems of the country. I am sanguine about politicians, we seem to have very few people with intellectual stature an integrity in parliament.
Here are some questions I would like to ask politicians but politicians are extremely well trained in avoiding questions and changing the subject.
1. The party manifestos seem to take no account of our present situation in this country. Why not?
2. Wages and salaries are stagnant, decreasing or subject to caps, inflation is increasing due to devaluation. Prices are rising,fuel, food, services. Productivity is slowing. All parties are committed to raising taxes including council tax. Exactly how will we benefit from this?
3. We are about to lose our European citizenship. What benefits will this bring? Should we not have a choice in this?
4. There are many thousands of our countrymen living abroad in Europe. They are in a state of uncertainty which could have been resolved months ago. Why did you not do something?
5. What exactly will replace the loss of the European institutions such as Erasmus, European Space Agency, European Medicines Agency, Gallileo GPS, Open Skies, and others? Will there be replacements and in what way will the replacements be better than the existing system?
6. When will immigrants be certain of their status and can our NHS and companies plan ahead to employ them when needed?
7. What can be done to stop the loss of good, high wage jobs to other countries? This loss is increasing in pace and looks likely to continue for years?
8 What assurances can be given to would be investors about the current uncertainties in our economy.
9. Is it not the first duty of leaders to protect those being led even if they are seeking to injure themselves?
That is enough for starters, I do not want to get into double figures.
If we get any answers at all I guess they will be cut and paste paragraphs written by spin doctors. Sound bites surpass substance these days.
Mike,
Your question No 3 – “We are about to lose our European citizenship. What benefits will this bring? Should we not have a choice in this?”
Yes we had a choice. The answer was Brexit.
In my experience, members of political parties do not always disagree on what is needed, but often disagree about the ways to get there!
For example, if we all value every child and want the best start in life, why are we starving schools of money?
If we know our school system works in this county with comprehensive system, why spend money changing it, and creating second class schools into the bargain?
I know that parents move here to avoid punishing grammar school ‘cramming’ in other counties. Selection is made early in year 6 when most children are just 10.
It doesn’t produce better GCSE results overall, just feeds the ‘crammer’ industry. The most academic children do just as well in Grammar and Comprehensives, but less able do worse in the selective system.
If we know the NHS needs radical change, where do they get the money to do it?
If we know that 48%, nearly half, of the country wanted to remain on the EU, then shouldn’t the Government be examining the reasons for and against and use that evidence as a basis for their negotiating stance?
And not use EU nationals as a bargaining tool? Make it easier for EU nationals to consider British citizenship, particularly if their children were born here and are British?
If we know that climate change is happening, that the environment is a key part of our health and quality of life, why are we not prioritising air quality, energy production methods that work with nature not against it? I see nothing of that from Mrs May. Vote blue go green has disappeared from her mantra.
I am one of the candidates in this election. I am a Liberal Democrat. We know the education and health professionals work hard, but the real terms additional money hasn’t been put into these areas as the numbers of users has increased (health spending as a % of GDP is falling, not rising) and we have a proposal to raise income tax by 1p to create a ring fenced fund for the NHS.
Personally, I would like the status, conditions and pay of care workers improved so the job is more attractive. (This could be kick started by Government, who pay minimum rates for authority managed care, thus bringing the whole industry to lower expectations) The current staff turnover rate exceeds 25%. Improving social care jobs for comparatively small sums would immediately improve the bed blocking which costs hospitals and patients £000’s as theatres remain empty and consultants cannot perform operations.
There’s a lot more to say, but apparently Mark Twain said something like ‘voting can’t be important, otherwise they wouldn’t let us do it’.
Voting IS important.
I understand the comments made in the first reply, but it’s not necessarily the intended outcome that is different- it’s the way that we do it that matters.
And who benefits, who are the losers? That’s very important to me.
Yes, there will always be winners and losers when the same amount of money is redistributed. And sometimes the effect isn’t seen immediately – such as how increased spending on social care may result in a long-term saving on health care.
When I’m feeling cynical, I summarise the policies of the two major parties as: “I can afford to pay for it, so you can pay for it too” and “I can’t afford to pay for it so you’re not allowed to buy it either”