Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

The government is right to junk Supplementary Vote – it’s the worst of all worlds – politicalbetting

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited March 22 in General
imageThe government is right to junk Supplementary Vote – it’s the worst of all worlds – politicalbetting.com

The only exciting thing about the London mayoral election result this year is likely to be whether Sadiq Khan wins on the first vote or is forced into second preferences. He will not be close by Shaun Bailey or any of the many other candidates but may miss out on the 50% share needed to secure a first-preference win.

Read the full story here

«134567

Comments

  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 64,430
    Sixty-one percent of French adults surveyed said the vaccine was unsafe, a rise of 18 percentage points compared to February, YouGov said.

    Just over half of German adults surveyed said they thought the vaccine was unsafe, a rise of 15 percentage points compared to February, while 43% of Italians had serious doubts, an increase of almost a third.


    Well done mini-Trump...time to build a wall around France.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 2,487
    How does one go about building and equipping a nightingale mrna vax factory?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 51,014

    Sixty-one percent of French adults surveyed said the vaccine was unsafe, a rise of 18 percentage points compared to February, YouGov said.

    Just over half of German adults surveyed said they thought the vaccine was unsafe, a rise of 15 percentage points compared to February, while 43% of Italians had serious doubts, an increase of almost a third.


    Well done mini-Trump...time to build a wall around France.
    The survey showed that only in Britain, where the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine has been used in a national rollout since January, have the blood clot concerns had little to no impact on public confidence. The majority of people polled in the UK - 77% - still say the shot is safe. Their trust in it is on a par with Pfizer's 79% perceived safety rating.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 33,485
    Wakes up

    Reads news

    Sees the world is going mad

    Goes back to bed...
  • ClippPClippP Posts: 828
    I thought I was not going to agree with David Herdson, because Conservatives are always wrong when they talk about voting systems. But then I read his piece, and I was persuaded.

    If this system was introduced in 2000, then it was under a Labour Government, and they are almost as corrupt and self-interested as the Tories.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 7,482
    moonshine said:

    How does one go about building and equipping a nightingale mrna vax factory?

    Hancock will have a mate from one of his dogging spots.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 26,021
    I see that another African politician has died of Covid:

    https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/3/22/congos-opposition-candidate-kolelas-dies-a-day-after-poll

    The combination of meeting lots of people, age much greater than the national average and air conditioned offices is not a good one.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 35,361
    As record-breaking rains batter the NSW coastline and southern Queensland, causing widespread flooding, animals and insects are scrambling to escape the waters.

    “There were also skinks, ants, basically every insect, crickets – all just trying to get away from the flood waters. My husband videoed it, because I was not going close to it. When he was standing still he had spiders climbing up his legs. A skink used him as a pole to get away from the water.

    Macksville resident Melanie Williams was also shocked by a swarm of spiders climbing the outer wall of her home as they fled for higher ground. “I occasionally see spiders around the place but never anything like that, it was just insane,” she told the ABC. She told Guardian Australia the spiders outside her home were “horrific” but her neighbour told her there were twice as many inside his garage.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 24,136
    Sandpit said:

    Wakes up

    Reads news

    Sees the world is going mad

    Goes back to bed...

    It's sunny though, here. Sort of. Some breaks in the cloud cover we've had for several days.

    If PP was changing the system just for these elections that would be one thing, but her claim seems to be that FPTP is always best.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 56,668
    Good morning, everyone.

    All eyes on EU leaders to see what the magic 8-ball throws up on Thursday. So far, "AZN vaccine is poison", "Export bans", "Mandatory for the elderly", "Forbidden for the elderly", and "Unscientific pause to give a few people more chance to die" have come up, but we're all eager to see what happens next.


    F1: returns this weekend.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 24,136
    edited March 22

    US AZ results out - works among over 65s as well as younger people and 100% effective against serious illness seventy something against symptomatic infection.

    If Frau Dr van der Leyen has any sense she'll issue a statement along the lines of 'We've had concerns over the AZN vaccine, but as a scientist I've realised these were groundless. It should be part of the range of vaccines being used.'
    And leave it to the company, and the industry generally, to get one with meeting contractual obligations.

    That sort of co-operation is what the EU is for.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 2,487

    US AZ results out - works among over 65s as well as younger people and 100% effective against serious illness seventy something against symptomatic infection.

    Is it correct that the US could meet Biden’s new vaccine target without AZN? But with it they have a whopping surplus? Interesting. Most interesting...
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 51,014
    Also no serious side effects in US AZ trial. AZ will present data to FDA in a few weeks.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 41,201

    Sixty-one percent of French adults surveyed said the vaccine was unsafe, a rise of 18 percentage points compared to February, YouGov said.

    Just over half of German adults surveyed said they thought the vaccine was unsafe, a rise of 15 percentage points compared to February, while 43% of Italians had serious doubts, an increase of almost a third.


    Well done mini-Trump...time to build a wall around France.
    The EU will soon be welcoming the return of witch trials and the Spanish Inquisition....

    "Embrace the medieval!"
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 41,201

    US AZ results out - works among over 65s as well as younger people and 100% effective against serious illness seventy something against symptomatic infection.

    If Frau Dr van der Leyen has any sense she'll issue a statement along the lines of 'We've had concerns over the AZN vaccine, but as a scientist I've realised these were groundless. It should be part of the range of vaccines being used.'
    And leave it to the company, and the industry generally, to get one with meeting contractual obligations.

    That sort of co-operation is what the EU is for.
    But that still leaves Brexit Britain W-A-Y out in front.

    "If we can't stop the vaccines - can we stop the needles?"
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 41,201

    Good morning, everyone.

    All eyes on EU leaders to see what the magic 8-ball throws up on Thursday. So far, "AZN vaccine is poison", "Export bans", "Mandatory for the elderly", "Forbidden for the elderly", and "Unscientific pause to give a few people more chance to die" have come up, but we're all eager to see what happens next.


    F1: returns this weekend.

    Before either, we'll see Nicola Sturgeon branded an unreliable witness. Maybe an out and out liar. You may hear nothing of the other two over the Stuka whine of the Nats.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 24,136

    US AZ results out - works among over 65s as well as younger people and 100% effective against serious illness seventy something against symptomatic infection.

    If Frau Dr van der Leyen has any sense she'll issue a statement along the lines of 'We've had concerns over the AZN vaccine, but as a scientist I've realised these were groundless. It should be part of the range of vaccines being used.'
    And leave it to the company, and the industry generally, to get one with meeting contractual obligations.

    That sort of co-operation is what the EU is for.
    But that still leaves Brexit Britain W-A-Y out in front.

    "If we can't stop the vaccines - can we stop the needles?"
    Yes the UK has done very well. Given our health structure I suspect we'd have done just as well if we'd still been in the EU.

    We'd have been a significant partner in the EMA too, of course. That would have moved more smartly.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 41,201
    Foxy said:

    I see that another African politician has died of Covid:

    https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/3/22/congos-opposition-candidate-kolelas-dies-a-day-after-poll

    The combination of meeting lots of people, age much greater than the national average and air conditioned offices is not a good one.

    As I mentioned yesterday, the traditional Congolese greeting is not the handshake, but rubbing alternate temples together. Covid couldn't have devised a better vector for transmission - two faces in extended close contact.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 41,201

    US AZ results out - works among over 65s as well as younger people and 100% effective against serious illness seventy something against symptomatic infection.

    If Frau Dr van der Leyen has any sense she'll issue a statement along the lines of 'We've had concerns over the AZN vaccine, but as a scientist I've realised these were groundless. It should be part of the range of vaccines being used.'
    And leave it to the company, and the industry generally, to get one with meeting contractual obligations.

    That sort of co-operation is what the EU is for.
    But that still leaves Brexit Britain W-A-Y out in front.

    "If we can't stop the vaccines - can we stop the needles?"
    Yes the UK has done very well. Given our health structure I suspect we'd have done just as well if we'd still been in the EU.

    We'd have been a significant partner in the EMA too, of course. That would have moved more smartly.
    The alacrity of the EMA moving out of London - 1st March 2019, well before Brexit - didn't help. It was a reduced body as a result.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 6,985
    IanB2 said:

    An unusually silly lead from Herdson. Yes, the way SV limits second preferences is flawed, but having a second preference is better than none, and ensures both that fewer votes are wasted and that the winner has the support of at least half of the voters, which FPTnP doesn’t do. His suggestions that votes aren’t wasted under our current system is absurd. Indeed every flaw he seeks to call out under SV is worse when there is no second choice at all.

    Agreed. More votes are wasted in FPTP. So a nonsensical argument.
    But I also agree with David that this is a distraction from more important issues.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 9,376

    Sandpit said:

    Wakes up

    Reads news

    Sees the world is going mad

    Goes back to bed...

    It's sunny though, here. Sort of. Some breaks in the cloud cover we've had for several days.

    If PP was changing the system just for these elections that would be one thing, but her claim seems to be that FPTP is always best.
    Morning all. Thank-you, David.

    Time for gardening.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 41,201
    Bright sunshine, Chiffchaff singing near the window - winter is now but a faded memory.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 24,136

    US AZ results out - works among over 65s as well as younger people and 100% effective against serious illness seventy something against symptomatic infection.

    If Frau Dr van der Leyen has any sense she'll issue a statement along the lines of 'We've had concerns over the AZN vaccine, but as a scientist I've realised these were groundless. It should be part of the range of vaccines being used.'
    And leave it to the company, and the industry generally, to get one with meeting contractual obligations.

    That sort of co-operation is what the EU is for.
    But that still leaves Brexit Britain W-A-Y out in front.

    "If we can't stop the vaccines - can we stop the needles?"
    Yes the UK has done very well. Given our health structure I suspect we'd have done just as well if we'd still been in the EU.

    We'd have been a significant partner in the EMA too, of course. That would have moved more smartly.
    The alacrity of the EMA moving out of London - 1st March 2019, well before Brexit - didn't help. It was a reduced body as a result.
    True; there was a reason give for the haste, but I can't recall what it was! IIRC it was our idea, but that could be wrong.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 56,668
    King Cole, I thought we'd offered to retain it until they had time to sort things but the EU wanted to take the EMA out quickly.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 24,136

    Bright sunshine, Chiffchaff singing near the window - winter is now but a faded memory.

    Yes, in a few weeks I shall be spending an hour or so a week putting the world to rights in the sun in a pub garden, instead of on here.

    Not at 7.30am, of course!
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 24,136

    King Cole, I thought we'd offered to retain it until they had time to sort things but the EU wanted to take the EMA out quickly.

    Could be, although I recall going to a Retired Pharmacists meeting in Nov 2018 where a speaker, a retired EMA scientist, urged us to lobby out Govt. to keep the EMA as it was.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 43,641

    Bright sunshine, Chiffchaff singing near the window - winter is now but a faded memory.

    Snow is forecast for Friday apparently
  • felixfelix Posts: 13,532

    US AZ results out - works among over 65s as well as younger people and 100% effective against serious illness seventy something against symptomatic infection.

    If Frau Dr van der Leyen has any sense she'll issue a statement along the lines of 'We've had concerns over the AZN vaccine, but as a scientist I've realised these were groundless. It should be part of the range of vaccines being used.'
    And leave it to the company, and the industry generally, to get one with meeting contractual obligations.

    That sort of co-operation is what the EU is for.
    But that still leaves Brexit Britain W-A-Y out in front.

    "If we can't stop the vaccines - can we stop the needles?"
    Yes the UK has done very well. Given our health structure I suspect we'd have done just as well if we'd still been in the EU.

    We'd have been a significant partner in the EMA too, of course. That would have moved more smartly.
    Utterly deluded.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 24,136

    Bright sunshine, Chiffchaff singing near the window - winter is now but a faded memory.

    Snow is forecast for Friday apparently
    Possible light rain here then, with temperatures just getting into double figures (C, of course!)
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 41,201

    US AZ results out - works among over 65s as well as younger people and 100% effective against serious illness seventy something against symptomatic infection.

    If Frau Dr van der Leyen has any sense she'll issue a statement along the lines of 'We've had concerns over the AZN vaccine, but as a scientist I've realised these were groundless. It should be part of the range of vaccines being used.'
    And leave it to the company, and the industry generally, to get one with meeting contractual obligations.

    That sort of co-operation is what the EU is for.
    But that still leaves Brexit Britain W-A-Y out in front.

    "If we can't stop the vaccines - can we stop the needles?"
    Yes the UK has done very well. Given our health structure I suspect we'd have done just as well if we'd still been in the EU.

    We'd have been a significant partner in the EMA too, of course. That would have moved more smartly.
    The alacrity of the EMA moving out of London - 1st March 2019, well before Brexit - didn't help. It was a reduced body as a result.
    True; there was a reason give for the haste, but I can't recall what it was! IIRC it was our idea, but that could be wrong.
    We offered to extend their time here. The EU was behind the headlong rush - and consequent loss of expertise.

    (Interesting: they couldn't decide whether to move it to Amsterdam or Milan. So they drew lots!)

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/09/03/eu-medicines-regulator-struggles-coronavirus-pandemic-staff/
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 41,201

    Bright sunshine, Chiffchaff singing near the window - winter is now but a faded memory.

    Snow is forecast for Friday apparently
    Thanks for that, Donnie Downer!

    Although not in Devon beyond the Dartmoor tors, I suspect.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 33,666
    Barnesian said:

    IanB2 said:

    An unusually silly lead from Herdson. Yes, the way SV limits second preferences is flawed, but having a second preference is better than none, and ensures both that fewer votes are wasted and that the winner has the support of at least half of the voters, which FPTnP doesn’t do. His suggestions that votes aren’t wasted under our current system is absurd. Indeed every flaw he seeks to call out under SV is worse when there is no second choice at all.

    Agreed. More votes are wasted in FPTP. So a nonsensical argument.
    But I also agree with David that this is a distraction from more important issues.
    People who aren’t the first choice prefer a system that gives them another chance
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 33,666

    King Cole, I thought we'd offered to retain it until they had time to sort things but the EU wanted to take the EMA out quickly.

    Could be, although I recall going to a Retired Pharmacists meeting in Nov 2018 where a speaker, a retired EMA scientist, urged us to lobby out Govt. to keep the EMA as it was.
    We wanted to keep it and proposed that we be an associate member.

    They said no, broke their lease and moved. Over 1/3 staff said they would rather stay in London
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 24,136

    US AZ results out - works among over 65s as well as younger people and 100% effective against serious illness seventy something against symptomatic infection.

    If Frau Dr van der Leyen has any sense she'll issue a statement along the lines of 'We've had concerns over the AZN vaccine, but as a scientist I've realised these were groundless. It should be part of the range of vaccines being used.'
    And leave it to the company, and the industry generally, to get one with meeting contractual obligations.

    That sort of co-operation is what the EU is for.
    But that still leaves Brexit Britain W-A-Y out in front.

    "If we can't stop the vaccines - can we stop the needles?"
    Yes the UK has done very well. Given our health structure I suspect we'd have done just as well if we'd still been in the EU.

    We'd have been a significant partner in the EMA too, of course. That would have moved more smartly.
    The alacrity of the EMA moving out of London - 1st March 2019, well before Brexit - didn't help. It was a reduced body as a result.
    True; there was a reason give for the haste, but I can't recall what it was! IIRC it was our idea, but that could be wrong.
    We offered to extend their time here. The EU was behind the headlong rush - and consequent loss of expertise.

    (Interesting: they couldn't decide whether to move it to Amsterdam or Milan. So they drew lots!)

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/09/03/eu-medicines-regulator-struggles-coronavirus-pandemic-staff/
    Ah, OK. Seem to recall there was some discussion over senior staff preferences for the site, plus availability of support staff.
    I think, but, again am prepared to be wrong, that some Brit staff are commuting to Amsterdam.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 39,172
    Really not sure I get this argument. Why is a vote "wasted" if I don't choose one of those who get through to the final round but not "wasted" when I vote for someone that loses in FPTP?

    We certainly have more important things to worry about, on that I agree.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 9,755
    ClippP said:

    I thought I was not going to agree with David Herdson, because Conservatives are always wrong when they talk about voting systems. But then I read his piece, and I was persuaded.

    If this system was introduced in 2000, then it was under a Labour Government, and they are almost as corrupt and self-interested as the Tories.

    But inept since the first London Mayor was an independent who beat the Labour candidate. It was only later that Ken Livingstone (re-)joined the Labour Party.

    I do not know why the government is changing the voting system but one imagines its team of weirdo misfit superforecasters identified an advantage to the Conservative Party.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 56,668
    Mr. L, aye. Not sure why it's a great cause for celebration if my 9th choice candidate beats the 10th placed chap.
  • Do Londoners have an issue with the current voting system? Seems to me that yet again the Tories are imposing changes on a city that has run them out.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 56,668
    F1: Verstappen favourite to win in Bahrain on Betfair. 2.74 versus 2.8 for Hamilton.

    Hmm.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 39,172
    Charles said:

    King Cole, I thought we'd offered to retain it until they had time to sort things but the EU wanted to take the EMA out quickly.

    Could be, although I recall going to a Retired Pharmacists meeting in Nov 2018 where a speaker, a retired EMA scientist, urged us to lobby out Govt. to keep the EMA as it was.
    We wanted to keep it and proposed that we be an associate member.

    They said no, broke their lease and moved. Over 1/3 staff said they would rather stay in London
    And they had to pay up for the broken lease. Even went to court about it.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 41,201

    US AZ results out - works among over 65s as well as younger people and 100% effective against serious illness seventy something against symptomatic infection.

    If Frau Dr van der Leyen has any sense she'll issue a statement along the lines of 'We've had concerns over the AZN vaccine, but as a scientist I've realised these were groundless. It should be part of the range of vaccines being used.'
    And leave it to the company, and the industry generally, to get one with meeting contractual obligations.

    That sort of co-operation is what the EU is for.
    But that still leaves Brexit Britain W-A-Y out in front.

    "If we can't stop the vaccines - can we stop the needles?"
    Yes the UK has done very well. Given our health structure I suspect we'd have done just as well if we'd still been in the EU.

    We'd have been a significant partner in the EMA too, of course. That would have moved more smartly.
    The alacrity of the EMA moving out of London - 1st March 2019, well before Brexit - didn't help. It was a reduced body as a result.
    True; there was a reason give for the haste, but I can't recall what it was! IIRC it was our idea, but that could be wrong.
    We offered to extend their time here. The EU was behind the headlong rush - and consequent loss of expertise.

    (Interesting: they couldn't decide whether to move it to Amsterdam or Milan. So they drew lots!)

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/09/03/eu-medicines-regulator-struggles-coronavirus-pandemic-staff/
    Ah, OK. Seem to recall there was some discussion over senior staff preferences for the site, plus availability of support staff.
    I think, but, again am prepared to be wrong, that some Brit staff are commuting to Amsterdam.
    No doubt they are being royally rewarded if so.

    But there will soon be a need for plenty of senior pharma figures here, when the production moves to the safer shores of the UK....
  • RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 1,442

    US AZ results out - works among over 65s as well as younger people and 100% effective against serious illness seventy something against symptomatic infection.

    Well done Macron and co. Idiots
  • MattWMattW Posts: 9,376
    2 on-topic questions:

    Why was this system used in London in the first place?
    (Was it like modified d'Hondt in Scotland an attempt to wire in a Lab majority?)

    Would any Mayoral results have been changed by this?

    For me, I think this is deckchair-rearrangement for all it's practical impact.

    My one reflection is whether this is groundwork for a review of all devolution systems - which would make sense democratically (?) because they are mainly ready for a review and rather broken, and perhaps politically because an overall thing might be cover for whatever will be done in Scotland. There is also the reality that perhaps it needs to be evened across parts of the country.

    God knows how they will do that latter, mind.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 16,223
    Charles said:

    Barnesian said:

    IanB2 said:

    An unusually silly lead from Herdson. Yes, the way SV limits second preferences is flawed, but having a second preference is better than none, and ensures both that fewer votes are wasted and that the winner has the support of at least half of the voters, which FPTnP doesn’t do. His suggestions that votes aren’t wasted under our current system is absurd. Indeed every flaw he seeks to call out under SV is worse when there is no second choice at all.

    Agreed. More votes are wasted in FPTP. So a nonsensical argument.
    But I also agree with David that this is a distraction from more important issues.
    People who aren’t the first choice prefer a system that gives them another chance
    Of course in FPTP the “winner” is usually the first choice of only a minority.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 16,223
    @MattW are you suggesting that Westminster will unilaterally change the voting system of the Scottish Parliament?

    Inflammatory to say the least...
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 15,358

    Just say no.

    Johnson's cabinet need to hold the line on this. No bloody foreign holidays this summer. Having such a holiday is very nice but it is a First World thing. People can live without it.

    Who is going to be the first cabinet member to get caught sneaking abroad?
  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,385
    moonshine said:

    US AZ results out - works among over 65s as well as younger people and 100% effective against serious illness seventy something against symptomatic infection.

    Is it correct that the US could meet Biden’s new vaccine target without AZN? But with it they have a whopping surplus? Interesting. Most interesting...
    The US stockpile of AZ is only about 30 million I think. Oxford /AZ seems to be a good vaccine but the production of it seems to be much more difficult than Pfizers jab given the millions more of that which has been produced. An inherent problem with the vaccine or just AZ not being used to vaccine manufacture?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 17,595

    ClippP said:

    I thought I was not going to agree with David Herdson, because Conservatives are always wrong when they talk about voting systems. But then I read his piece, and I was persuaded.

    If this system was introduced in 2000, then it was under a Labour Government, and they are almost as corrupt and self-interested as the Tories.

    But inept since the first London Mayor was an independent who beat the Labour candidate. It was only later that Ken Livingstone (re-)joined the Labour Party.

    I do not know why the government is changing the voting system but one imagines its team of weirdo misfit superforecasters identified an advantage to the Conservative Party.
    It's not the absolute worst system. That has to go PR of the party list type. Where politicians can arrange to become utterly invulnerable to the voters.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 42,972
    Helen Wheatley doing a valiant job on R4 of holding to an agreed line that is not helpful to speculate over the AZ situation and EU.
  • eekeek Posts: 14,212

    ClippP said:

    I thought I was not going to agree with David Herdson, because Conservatives are always wrong when they talk about voting systems. But then I read his piece, and I was persuaded.

    If this system was introduced in 2000, then it was under a Labour Government, and they are almost as corrupt and self-interested as the Tories.

    But inept since the first London Mayor was an independent who beat the Labour candidate. It was only later that Ken Livingstone (re-)joined the Labour Party.

    I do not know why the government is changing the voting system but one imagines its team of weirdo misfit superforecasters identified an advantage to the Conservative Party.
    It's not the absolute worst system. That has to go PR of the party list type. Where politicians can arrange to become utterly invulnerable to the voters.
    I think any party list system has to be way worse than any other system. The German system is insane - the very popular politicians run to represent the constituency with the most popular winning the seat and because of the way the system works the losers end up there via the party list top up system.

    In reality the choice is a simple one - do you want the most popular candidate out of X (in which case it's possible that the winning candidate is only supported by just over (100/X)% of the vote or do you want a system where the candidate is the preferred choice of 50+% of voters.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 39,172

    @MattW are you suggesting that Westminster will unilaterally change the voting system of the Scottish Parliament?

    Inflammatory to say the least...

    Just not politically possible and highly undesirable in any event. You only need to look at the result of the Westminster FPTP system in Scotland to show the risks. Do we really want to risk an opposition to the SNP government of 3? Given that a significant minority spread across the country (with modest soft spots in the borders and the NE) support independence this would guarantee massive SNP majorities.

    Indeed, I would go further. Rather than some smart super forecaster finding some Tory advantage this focus on FPTP elections is a bungle that should be quietly forgotten about as soon as possible.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 16,223
    DavidL said:

    @MattW are you suggesting that Westminster will unilaterally change the voting system of the Scottish Parliament?

    Inflammatory to say the least...

    Just not politically possible and highly undesirable in any event. You only need to look at the result of the Westminster FPTP system in Scotland to show the risks. Do we really want to risk an opposition to the SNP government of 3? Given that a significant minority spread across the country (with modest soft spots in the borders and the NE) support independence this would guarantee massive SNP majorities.

    Indeed, I would go further. Rather than some smart super forecaster finding some Tory advantage this focus on FPTP elections is a bungle that should be quietly forgotten about as soon as possible.
    Whilst I know your opinion on voting systems is nuanced with a preference for more proportionate systems the more "local" the government, with all due respect it does seem a little hypocritical to support FPTP at Westminster while opposing it at Holyrood for the main reason (possibly sole?) that it would likely give the SNP massive majorities...
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 39,172

    Scott_xP said:
    Just say no.

    Johnson's cabinet need to hold the line on this. No bloody foreign holidays this summer. Having such a holiday is very nice but it is a First World thing. People can live without it.
    It really is a no brainer. Not only is there the risk of variants but we urgently need to boost our domestic leisure industry and help get it back on its feet after 18 disastrous months. There are hundreds of thousands of jobs at stake. Plus some improvement in our balance of payments. Plus reminding our oh so good friends in the EU what the UK brings to the party.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,006
    Scott_xP said:

    Just say no.

    Johnson's cabinet need to hold the line on this. No bloody foreign holidays this summer. Having such a holiday is very nice but it is a First World thing. People can live without it.

    Who is going to be the first cabinet member to get caught sneaking abroad?
    Quite a few of them are doing it as part of their job at FCDO...
    Are they all getting COVID tested on arrival?
    I suspect we will soon find COVID tests are for the little people.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 39,172

    DavidL said:

    @MattW are you suggesting that Westminster will unilaterally change the voting system of the Scottish Parliament?

    Inflammatory to say the least...

    Just not politically possible and highly undesirable in any event. You only need to look at the result of the Westminster FPTP system in Scotland to show the risks. Do we really want to risk an opposition to the SNP government of 3? Given that a significant minority spread across the country (with modest soft spots in the borders and the NE) support independence this would guarantee massive SNP majorities.

    Indeed, I would go further. Rather than some smart super forecaster finding some Tory advantage this focus on FPTP elections is a bungle that should be quietly forgotten about as soon as possible.
    Whilst I know your opinion on voting systems is nuanced with a preference for more proportionate systems the more "local" the government, with all due respect it does seem a little hypocritical to support FPTP at Westminster while opposing it at Holyrood for the main reason (possibly sole?) that it would likely give the SNP massive majorities...
    You say hypocritical, I say pragmatic.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 42,972
    Interesting...

    Scientists Say They Found Cause of Rare Blood Clotting Linked to AstraZeneca Vaccine

    German, Norwegian researchers say rare autoimmune reaction is behind several cases of brain blood clotting, and suggest a possible treatment for it

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/scientists-say-they-found-cause-of-blood-clotting-linked-to-astrazeneca-vaccine-11616169108

  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,186

    I am flabbergasted that confidence in the Oxford vaccine has declined in the EU after they subjected it to more totally unproven allegations.

    At least they want to save us from using the 100% effective non blood clot causing medication

    Our EU overlords are indeed benevolent
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 8,718
    If only the Remoaners would do the same.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 9,376
    edited March 22

    @MattW are you suggesting that Westminster will unilaterally change the voting system of the Scottish Parliament?

    Inflammatory to say the least...

    No - I'm suggesting that a measure of reform in the current setup in Scotland may prove to be necessary, given how eg separation of powers is not strong enough, and Parliamentary Privilege vs Crown Office is clearly insufficient. Would anyone disagree with that?

    I call that a "25 year service". And it is critical for the enquiries to be completed, and really no one outside Scotland in Govt has even commented afaik. Yet the Holyrood system is still very obviously inadequate and ready for a refresh.

    How that would happen is politically interesting, as it would need to be specifically *not* "Westminster unilateral". However is it not basically a Westmnister competence under the Scotland Act?

    I'm suggesting that most of the other aspects of devolution - including the decision to swerve the issue in English Regions as people did not like the suggestion - are also suboptimal, and that looking at it all at the same time might be sensible.

    Perhaps "political cover" is the wrong phrase !!
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 16,223
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    @MattW are you suggesting that Westminster will unilaterally change the voting system of the Scottish Parliament?

    Inflammatory to say the least...

    Just not politically possible and highly undesirable in any event. You only need to look at the result of the Westminster FPTP system in Scotland to show the risks. Do we really want to risk an opposition to the SNP government of 3? Given that a significant minority spread across the country (with modest soft spots in the borders and the NE) support independence this would guarantee massive SNP majorities.

    Indeed, I would go further. Rather than some smart super forecaster finding some Tory advantage this focus on FPTP elections is a bungle that should be quietly forgotten about as soon as possible.
    Whilst I know your opinion on voting systems is nuanced with a preference for more proportionate systems the more "local" the government, with all due respect it does seem a little hypocritical to support FPTP at Westminster while opposing it at Holyrood for the main reason (possibly sole?) that it would likely give the SNP massive majorities...
    You say hypocritical, I say pragmatic.
    Sure. It is pragmatic. But it does certainly lend support to the idea that the main and dominant reason Conservatives really like FPTP at Westminster is because it benefits them.

    There is a significant minority spread across the country (with modest soft spots in the major cities) that support the Conservative Party...

    FWIW I have always supported PR, even during the last Labour government. In fact it is my biggest criticism of Tony Blair, other than the Iraq War obviously, that he failed to follow through with the manifesto commitment of changing the voting system.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 11,023

    Scott_xP said:
    Just say no.

    Johnson's cabinet need to hold the line on this. No bloody foreign holidays this summer. Having such a holiday is very nice but it is a First World thing. People can live without it.
    Decide on the basis of evidence in the summer. Saying yes or no now are both very poor answers given we will know far far more in June about the prevalence and vaccination in various countries for the summer than we do now.

    Too much talking not enough waiting.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 2,741

    Scott_xP said:
    Just say no.

    Johnson's cabinet need to hold the line on this. No bloody foreign holidays this summer. Having such a holiday is very nice but it is a First World thing. People can live without it.
    This is a risk we should take. With tests at the airport and a few days later it is manageable. There will always be some danger of infection, but we can't put normal life on hold forever.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 16,223
    MattW said:

    @MattW are you suggesting that Westminster will unilaterally change the voting system of the Scottish Parliament?

    Inflammatory to say the least...

    No - I'm suggesting that a measure of reform in the current setup in Scotland may prove to be necessary, given how eg separation of powers is not strong enough, and Parliamentary Privilege vs Crown Office is clearly insufficient. Would anyone disagree with that?

    I call that a "25 year service". And it is critical for the enquiries to be completed, and really no one outside Scotland has even commented. Yet the Holyrood system is still very obviously inadequate and ready for a refresh.

    How that would happen is politically interesting, as it would need to be specifically *not* "Westminster unilateral". However it is basically a Westmnister competence.

    I'm suggesting that most of the other aspects of devolution - including the decision to swerve the issue in English Regions - is also suboptimal, and that looking at it all at the same time might be sensible.

    Perhaps "political cover" is the wrong phrase.
    Westminster could impose changes via a referendum ratification process. It would be tough for the Scottish Government to object if a majority vote for it in a referendum in Scotland.

    Although I can imagine the UK government want to avoid talk of Scottish referendums...
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 32,748
    I predict that the US population will be larger than China's within the next fifty years.

    https://twitter.com/davidpaulk/status/1373845330765115393
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 16,223
    Nigelb said:

    I predict that the US population will be larger than China's within the next fifty years.

    Well the Dakotas do need populating.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 39,172

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    @MattW are you suggesting that Westminster will unilaterally change the voting system of the Scottish Parliament?

    Inflammatory to say the least...

    Just not politically possible and highly undesirable in any event. You only need to look at the result of the Westminster FPTP system in Scotland to show the risks. Do we really want to risk an opposition to the SNP government of 3? Given that a significant minority spread across the country (with modest soft spots in the borders and the NE) support independence this would guarantee massive SNP majorities.

    Indeed, I would go further. Rather than some smart super forecaster finding some Tory advantage this focus on FPTP elections is a bungle that should be quietly forgotten about as soon as possible.
    Whilst I know your opinion on voting systems is nuanced with a preference for more proportionate systems the more "local" the government, with all due respect it does seem a little hypocritical to support FPTP at Westminster while opposing it at Holyrood for the main reason (possibly sole?) that it would likely give the SNP massive majorities...
    You say hypocritical, I say pragmatic.
    Sure. It is pragmatic. But it does certainly lend support to the idea that the main and dominant reason Conservatives really like FPTP at Westminster is because it benefits them.

    There is a significant minority spread across the country (with modest soft spots in the major cities) that support the Conservative Party...

    FWIW I have always supported PR, even during the last Labour government. In fact it is my biggest criticism of Tony Blair, other than the Iraq War obviously, that he failed to follow through with the manifesto commitment of changing the voting system.
    For me, as we discussed yesterday, the best features of FPTP at national level are its tendency to produce decisive governments and to discourage fragmentation. I would not want a Belgian style situation where it takes a year to form a new government.

    @Pagan2 also made the point yesterday that PR systems with fragmented parties means that you vote for a manifesto that you like but it doesn't get implemented. All the power to decide what a government actually does is taken from the electorate to the politicians in what these days are no doubt well ventilated rooms away from the public gaze. I don't see that as an improvement.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 35,361

    If only the Remoaners would do the same.
    I think you'll find that the Labour by-election campaign will be a single issue "vote to give the nurses more than 1%!" campaign.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 4,217

    I am flabbergasted that confidence in the Oxford vaccine has declined in the EU after they subjected it to more totally unproven allegations.

    Neighbours of mine are antivaccers, the force with which they present their ludicrous arguments is staggering. We now have even more reason to avoid them as they are a risk to everyone else.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 35,361

    Scott_xP said:
    Just say no.

    Johnson's cabinet need to hold the line on this. No bloody foreign holidays this summer. Having such a holiday is very nice but it is a First World thing. People can live without it.
    The SA variant is already here, and shutting the door after the horse is long gone simply magnifies the economic damage and misery of lockdown needlessly.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 35,361
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    @MattW are you suggesting that Westminster will unilaterally change the voting system of the Scottish Parliament?

    Inflammatory to say the least...

    Just not politically possible and highly undesirable in any event. You only need to look at the result of the Westminster FPTP system in Scotland to show the risks. Do we really want to risk an opposition to the SNP government of 3? Given that a significant minority spread across the country (with modest soft spots in the borders and the NE) support independence this would guarantee massive SNP majorities.

    Indeed, I would go further. Rather than some smart super forecaster finding some Tory advantage this focus on FPTP elections is a bungle that should be quietly forgotten about as soon as possible.
    Whilst I know your opinion on voting systems is nuanced with a preference for more proportionate systems the more "local" the government, with all due respect it does seem a little hypocritical to support FPTP at Westminster while opposing it at Holyrood for the main reason (possibly sole?) that it would likely give the SNP massive majorities...
    You say hypocritical, I say pragmatic.
    Sure. It is pragmatic. But it does certainly lend support to the idea that the main and dominant reason Conservatives really like FPTP at Westminster is because it benefits them.

    There is a significant minority spread across the country (with modest soft spots in the major cities) that support the Conservative Party...

    FWIW I have always supported PR, even during the last Labour government. In fact it is my biggest criticism of Tony Blair, other than the Iraq War obviously, that he failed to follow through with the manifesto commitment of changing the voting system.
    For me, as we discussed yesterday, the best features of FPTP at national level are its tendency to produce decisive governments and to discourage fragmentation. I would not want a Belgian style situation where it takes a year to form a new government.

    @Pagan2 also made the point yesterday that PR systems with fragmented parties means that you vote for a manifesto that you like but it doesn't get implemented. All the power to decide what a government actually does is taken from the electorate to the politicians in what these days are no doubt well ventilated rooms away from the public gaze. I don't see that as an improvement.
    Given that our system gives majority power to minority opinion, it pretty much guarantees that most people will not see the manifestos they voted for implemented.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 16,223
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    @MattW are you suggesting that Westminster will unilaterally change the voting system of the Scottish Parliament?

    Inflammatory to say the least...

    Just not politically possible and highly undesirable in any event. You only need to look at the result of the Westminster FPTP system in Scotland to show the risks. Do we really want to risk an opposition to the SNP government of 3? Given that a significant minority spread across the country (with modest soft spots in the borders and the NE) support independence this would guarantee massive SNP majorities.

    Indeed, I would go further. Rather than some smart super forecaster finding some Tory advantage this focus on FPTP elections is a bungle that should be quietly forgotten about as soon as possible.
    Whilst I know your opinion on voting systems is nuanced with a preference for more proportionate systems the more "local" the government, with all due respect it does seem a little hypocritical to support FPTP at Westminster while opposing it at Holyrood for the main reason (possibly sole?) that it would likely give the SNP massive majorities...
    You say hypocritical, I say pragmatic.
    Sure. It is pragmatic. But it does certainly lend support to the idea that the main and dominant reason Conservatives really like FPTP at Westminster is because it benefits them.

    There is a significant minority spread across the country (with modest soft spots in the major cities) that support the Conservative Party...

    FWIW I have always supported PR, even during the last Labour government. In fact it is my biggest criticism of Tony Blair, other than the Iraq War obviously, that he failed to follow through with the manifesto commitment of changing the voting system.
    For me, as we discussed yesterday, the best features of FPTP at national level are its tendency to produce decisive governments and to discourage fragmentation. I would not want a Belgian style situation where it takes a year to form a new government.

    @Pagan2 also made the point yesterday that PR systems with fragmented parties means that you vote for a manifesto that you like but it doesn't get implemented. All the power to decide what a government actually does is taken from the electorate to the politicians in what these days are no doubt well ventilated rooms away from the public gaze. I don't see that as an improvement.
    To be honest, we've done the arguments in favour/against FPTP to death.

    All I will say is that to get those "decisive governments" there is a democratic cost. Whether that is worth it is a matter for opinion.

    On the coalition front — we already have coalitions. They are simply hidden from the public.

    Under FPTP the public has no say over which half of the Conservative Party has the most sway and the same is true with Labour.

    Already under FPTP policy is formulated in well ventilated rooms away from the public gaze. Under PR the people have a direct say over who has the most power in these well ventilated rooms. You can't get away from it.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 24,136

    Fishing said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Just say no.

    Johnson's cabinet need to hold the line on this. No bloody foreign holidays this summer. Having such a holiday is very nice but it is a First World thing. People can live without it.
    This is a risk we should take. With tests at the airport and a few days later it is manageable. There will always be some danger of infection, but we can't put normal life on hold forever.
    Pop Quiz: do you prefer:

    a) UK life largely back to normal for 2021, very limited risk of more lockdowns, social life back to having no limitations, pubs, theatres, cinemas, restaurants all open, freedom to holiday anywhere in the UK - just not foreign holibobs until 2022;

    or

    b) foreign holibobs for Brits allowed from June 2021, but that comes with a material risk that a new variant comes into the UK to which our vaccines are far less effective. Consequent risk of lockdowns and closures.

    I know where I stand.
    You may be surprised to learn Mr M, that I agree with you.

    Apart from the fact that I want to go to see my family in Thailand, probably early in 2022. Of course, Thailand is practically Covid-free.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 42,972

    I am flabbergasted that confidence in the Oxford vaccine has declined in the EU after they subjected it to more totally unproven allegations.

    Neighbours of mine are antivaccers, the force with which they present their ludicrous arguments is staggering. We now have even more reason to avoid them as they are a risk to everyone else.
    They will gain protection (probably) through the rest of us doing the work and bothering to get vaccinated. Annoying to say the least.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 51,014
    JonathanD said:

    moonshine said:

    US AZ results out - works among over 65s as well as younger people and 100% effective against serious illness seventy something against symptomatic infection.

    Is it correct that the US could meet Biden’s new vaccine target without AZN? But with it they have a whopping surplus? Interesting. Most interesting...
    The US stockpile of AZ is only about 30 million I think. Oxford /AZ seems to be a good vaccine but the production of it seems to be much more difficult than Pfizers jab given the millions more of that which has been produced. An inherent problem with the vaccine or just AZ not being used to vaccine manufacture?
    AIUI the AZ vaccine is "grown" like a crop so its difficult to predict yield - the UK started working on improving yield months ahead of the EU, which - apart from agreeing contracts earlier, is another reason why we're ahead.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 30,319

    Fishing said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Just say no.

    Johnson's cabinet need to hold the line on this. No bloody foreign holidays this summer. Having such a holiday is very nice but it is a First World thing. People can live without it.
    This is a risk we should take. With tests at the airport and a few days later it is manageable. There will always be some danger of infection, but we can't put normal life on hold forever.
    Pop Quiz: do you prefer:

    a) UK life largely back to normal for 2021, very limited risk of more lockdowns, social life back to having no limitations, pubs, theatres, cinemas, restaurants all open, freedom to holiday anywhere in the UK - just not foreign holibobs until 2022;

    or

    b) foreign holibobs for Brits allowed from June 2021, but that comes with a material risk that a new variant comes into the UK to which our vaccines are far less effective. Consequent risk of lockdowns and closures.

    I know where I stand.
    As someone who can't wait to get away to a beach in Greece or Italy I think putting our domestic unlockdown at risk would be completely idiotic. Until we can be sure that our vaccines protect us to a high degree from the variants out there we should hold firm on overseas travel and keep our domestic economy open fully.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 19,637

    Fishing said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Just say no.

    Johnson's cabinet need to hold the line on this. No bloody foreign holidays this summer. Having such a holiday is very nice but it is a First World thing. People can live without it.
    This is a risk we should take. With tests at the airport and a few days later it is manageable. There will always be some danger of infection, but we can't put normal life on hold forever.
    Pop Quiz: do you prefer:

    a) UK life largely back to normal for 2021, very limited risk of more lockdowns, social life back to having no limitations, pubs, theatres, cinemas, restaurants all open, freedom to holiday anywhere in the UK - just not foreign holibobs until 2022;

    or

    b) foreign holibobs for Brits allowed from June 2021, but that comes with a material risk that a new variant comes into the UK to which our vaccines are far less effective. Consequent risk of lockdowns and closures.

    I know where I stand.
    You may be surprised to learn Mr M, that I agree with you.

    Apart from the fact that I want to go to see my family in Thailand, probably early in 2022. Of course, Thailand is practically Covid-free.
    I'd suggest your bigger concern would be about whether or not Thailand will let you in (they may do as I guess their economy is suffering badly from no tourism).

    That's what I don't get about this whole debate. It's all well and good focussing on our government and what they think, but who wants to go to a country that's in lockdown?!
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 11,747
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    @MattW are you suggesting that Westminster will unilaterally change the voting system of the Scottish Parliament?

    Inflammatory to say the least...

    Just not politically possible and highly undesirable in any event. You only need to look at the result of the Westminster FPTP system in Scotland to show the risks. Do we really want to risk an opposition to the SNP government of 3? Given that a significant minority spread across the country (with modest soft spots in the borders and the NE) support independence this would guarantee massive SNP majorities.

    Indeed, I would go further. Rather than some smart super forecaster finding some Tory advantage this focus on FPTP elections is a bungle that should be quietly forgotten about as soon as possible.
    Whilst I know your opinion on voting systems is nuanced with a preference for more proportionate systems the more "local" the government, with all due respect it does seem a little hypocritical to support FPTP at Westminster while opposing it at Holyrood for the main reason (possibly sole?) that it would likely give the SNP massive majorities...
    You say hypocritical, I say pragmatic.
    Sure. It is pragmatic. But it does certainly lend support to the idea that the main and dominant reason Conservatives really like FPTP at Westminster is because it benefits them.

    There is a significant minority spread across the country (with modest soft spots in the major cities) that support the Conservative Party...

    FWIW I have always supported PR, even during the last Labour government. In fact it is my biggest criticism of Tony Blair, other than the Iraq War obviously, that he failed to follow through with the manifesto commitment of changing the voting system.
    For me, as we discussed yesterday, the best features of FPTP at national level are its tendency to produce decisive governments and to discourage fragmentation. I would not want a Belgian style situation where it takes a year to form a new government.

    @Pagan2 also made the point yesterday that PR systems with fragmented parties means that you vote for a manifesto that you like but it doesn't get implemented. All the power to decide what a government actually does is taken from the electorate to the politicians in what these days are no doubt well ventilated rooms away from the public gaze. I don't see that as an improvement.
    How did you feel about a Labour "majority" in 2005 with 36% of the vote? Outraged at the unfairness? Quite right too.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 33,666
    That’s meaningless without context

    I would say Brexit is important but COVID is the top issue facing the country. It’s what is more important than brexit that matters
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 33,666
    DavidL said:

    Charles said:

    King Cole, I thought we'd offered to retain it until they had time to sort things but the EU wanted to take the EMA out quickly.

    Could be, although I recall going to a Retired Pharmacists meeting in Nov 2018 where a speaker, a retired EMA scientist, urged us to lobby out Govt. to keep the EMA as it was.
    We wanted to keep it and proposed that we be an associate member.

    They said no, broke their lease and moved. Over 1/3 staff said they would rather stay in London
    And they had to pay up for the broken lease. Even went to court about it.
    I believe their argument was it was our fault they had broken their contract... hmm that sounds familiar
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 51,014
    edited March 22
    AZ Press release:

    The AstraZeneca US Phase III trial of AZD1222 demonstrated statistically significant vaccine efficacy of 79% at preventing symptomatic COVID-19 and 100% efficacy at preventing severe disease and hospitalisation.

    This interim safety and efficacy analysis was based on 32,449 participants accruing 141 symptomatic cases of COVID-19. The trial had a 2:1 randomisation of vaccine to placebo.

    Vaccine efficacy was consistent across ethnicity and age. Notably, in participants aged 65 years and over, vaccine efficacy was 80%.

    The vaccine was well tolerated, and the independent data safety monitoring board (DSMB) identified no safety concerns related to the vaccine. The DSMB conducted a specific review of thrombotic events, as well as cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST) with the assistance of an independent neurologist. The DSMB found no increased risk of thrombosis or events characterised by thrombosis among the 21,583 participants receiving at least one dose of the vaccine. The specific search for CVST found no events in this trial.


    https://www.astrazeneca.com/content/astraz/media-centre/press-releases/2021/astrazeneca-us-vaccine-trial-met-primary-endpoint.html
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 16,223

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    @MattW are you suggesting that Westminster will unilaterally change the voting system of the Scottish Parliament?

    Inflammatory to say the least...

    Just not politically possible and highly undesirable in any event. You only need to look at the result of the Westminster FPTP system in Scotland to show the risks. Do we really want to risk an opposition to the SNP government of 3? Given that a significant minority spread across the country (with modest soft spots in the borders and the NE) support independence this would guarantee massive SNP majorities.

    Indeed, I would go further. Rather than some smart super forecaster finding some Tory advantage this focus on FPTP elections is a bungle that should be quietly forgotten about as soon as possible.
    Whilst I know your opinion on voting systems is nuanced with a preference for more proportionate systems the more "local" the government, with all due respect it does seem a little hypocritical to support FPTP at Westminster while opposing it at Holyrood for the main reason (possibly sole?) that it would likely give the SNP massive majorities...
    You say hypocritical, I say pragmatic.
    Sure. It is pragmatic. But it does certainly lend support to the idea that the main and dominant reason Conservatives really like FPTP at Westminster is because it benefits them.

    There is a significant minority spread across the country (with modest soft spots in the major cities) that support the Conservative Party...

    FWIW I have always supported PR, even during the last Labour government. In fact it is my biggest criticism of Tony Blair, other than the Iraq War obviously, that he failed to follow through with the manifesto commitment of changing the voting system.
    For me, as we discussed yesterday, the best features of FPTP at national level are its tendency to produce decisive governments and to discourage fragmentation. I would not want a Belgian style situation where it takes a year to form a new government.

    @Pagan2 also made the point yesterday that PR systems with fragmented parties means that you vote for a manifesto that you like but it doesn't get implemented. All the power to decide what a government actually does is taken from the electorate to the politicians in what these days are no doubt well ventilated rooms away from the public gaze. I don't see that as an improvement.
    How did you feel about a Labour "majority" in 2005 with 36% of the vote? Outraged at the unfairness? Quite right too.
    The logical conclusion is that a strong SNP majority on 36% of the vote in Scotland should be seen as a good thing.

    Strong governments are better remember.
This discussion has been closed.