Thanks to Mike for this report …
The latest in the series of hustings took place in Abingdon’s Guildhall on Wednesday, 15 April. Organised by the Church In Abingdon it saw attendance from Nicola Blackwood for the Conservatives,
Sally Copley, the Labour Party candidate, Nick Foster for the Socialist, Layla Moran for the Lib-Dems, and Larry Sanders for the Greens. Harriett Salisbury did a sterling job representing her sister, Helen of the National Health Action Party who was unwell. Alan Harris of UKIP wasn’t present. Also of note was that Nicola and Sally had a pact to wear colours appropriate to their parties on the night.
Unlike the CPRE event, the Abingdon hustings were extremely well moderated by Chris Bryan who took questions that had been submitted prior to the event. These ranged from the economics of the Abingdon Hydro scheme to replacing the Trident missile system, while other topics included the need for continuing austerity and a one on the acceptability of the various parties to one another in the likely event of a hung parliament. This variety thankfully allowed the candidates’ mettle to be tested on topics other than planning and housing issues.
Despite the apparent non-functioning of the soon to be re-vamped Guildhall’s air conditioning system, the audience were extremely well behaved after Chris Bryan stated he wanted 21st century manners, and not those of the 18th when hustings began and often ended in a riot. Hecklers were threatened with a mandatory obligation to see every Oxford United match of the season which served to keep interruptions in check. However, it would have been nice to see more young people turning out.
All of the candidates made some good points although the best spontaneous applause of the night went to Sally Copley when she wished that Prime Minister’s Question Time could actually feature sensible debate rather than political point scoring.
In his closing remarks, Chris Bryan reminded the audience that it was only three weeks to the election. Oxford West and Abingdon is a key marginal and, with the polls close, the political atmosphere can only get hotter.
Seeing every Oxford United match of this Season would put most hecklers off. I just wonder if United can improve under whatever new Government comes in.
At least they’re doing better than London Welsh Geoff 😉
I am in my 20’s. I had been considering voting green. However Layla Moran’s slapping down of the barmy socialist candidate over the hydro project really impressed me. The labour candidate surprised me, a good candidate. If she had any chance of getting elected here I would of considered her but I think I will tactically vote Lib Dem now. The whole thing was much more interesting than I imagined it would. I would encourage people to head to one before its too late
…tactical voting won’t get you what you want, it will only not get you what you don’t want. That is absurd. Vote for who you want to win.
daniel – that depends on what is most important to you. Some people have a clear idea of what they do want, and find a party that represents that view and will vote for it. Some people are much clearer about what they definitely don’t want. If you are someone who likes some of what the Lib Dems say and some of what Labour says but you are 100% certain you don’t like what the Tories say, then voting tactically for whoever is best placed to beat the Tories is perfectly sensible.
…so, it is more important to you to be in power, than be there because people want you to be?
People hate you and everything that you stand for….but less so than someone else….? How can you ever, ever say that you have any kind of mandate to represent people…when, in your World, people have only voted for you because you aren’t as bad as someone else.
As a status quo, It simply represents everything that is wrong.
Like I said, totally absurd.
…I’m not suggesting people hate you! I’m just aghast at where your thinking can lead, as an example. 🙂
If only the chance to have PR hadn’t been thrown away we wouldn’t have yo have this discussion.
Neil, didn’t the Lib Dems used to say, “if you want a Lib Dem to win then vote Lib Dem”?
Now that’s what Natalie Bennett is saying. If it was right for Lib Dems then, it’s right for the Greens now, and for any party whose policies you have most sympathy for.
I haven’t suggested for a minute that Natalie Bennett doesn’t have the right to make that case!
I don’t have a problem with some people voting for me because they prefer me to a Tory. I’d rather they voted for me because they were fully signed up to my social liberal principles, but I’ll settle for them voting for me because they share some of my principles even if not all of them.
People vote for all sorts of reasons. I’ve had people vote for me because we are from the same area, or because we like the same music, or because our kids go to the same school, or because of some particular local issues I’ve worked on.
And every party is a coalition anyway. The Labour Party includes everyone from Marxists to Blairites. A Labour voter isn’t necessarily voting for someone they completely agree with even when they vote Labour.
My mandate comes from the fact that they did choose to vote for me. Their reasons for doing so are up to them.
I should add that in my experience the people who hate me and everything I stand for tend not to vote for me, even tactically!
Not saying you are Neil, but the tactical message says it. I’m not even saying its wrong to urge tactical voting, but it is desperately wrong that that’s what people are driven to doing
….if everyone just voted for who they want to win, then the winner will be the person who most people wanted to win. Isn’t that a good idea? No one needs to try and bend and weave and manipulate figures to try and imply what people thought they think they thought by who they voted for as their second best. Its just more smoke and mirrors.
Tactical voting also perpetuates the belief that a party “can’t win here” – those bar charts the others trot out would look very different if there hadn’t been tactical voting at past elections….
Town council, or District council, (i vote for the person- I know one who was hoping to stand as independant, but now as LibDem). General Election is the person who helped during the year. (Unfortunately at the moment – None of Above).
“….if everyone just voted for who they want to win, then the winner will be the person who most people wanted to win. Isn’t that a good idea?”
Not really, the first past the post system doesn’t work like that. At the last election there were MPs who were elected by less than a third of the votes cast, in other words twice as many of their electorate didn’t want them to win as did.
Ultimately it is up to each person to choose. Some will choose positively and vote for a particular party or person, others will vote against a particular party or person.
There are a lot of people who are more than happy to be represented by a number of parties. There are certainly a lot in our patch who would be happy with a Lib Dem, Labour or Green representative as long as they don’t get a Tory. They just want to know how to use their vote effectively to achieve that outcome.
Surely people have the right to choose to vote for their second choice if stopping a particular party is more important to them?
Hester is quite right about tactical voting perpetuating itself. It is the nature of a first past the post system that most constituencies become two party contests and others get squeezed out, although that often reflects the underlying demographics of each seat. Nationally the two main parties are also trying to do the same. Only when there is a major shock to the system, like the current SNP surge in Scotland, does the position tend to change.
But if everyone across the country, just for once, voted for their actual party of choice we would get a true picture of each of the party’s support.
More people would understand just how wrong the FPP system and that might force electoral reform.
Wishful thinking?
Most do. A relatively small proportion of voters vote ‘tactically’, those who would otherwise support a third or fourth party in marginal seats.
Every general election has produced a result where a party has won a majority on a minority of the vote, expect the last one. It didn’t persuade most people of the need to change.
Even in the 1997 Labour ‘landslide’ only 43% voted Labour.
…I have no particular enthusiasm for any system…but I kind of feel your explanation works against you…
“Not really, the first past the post system doesn’t work like that. At the last election there were MPs who were elected by less than a third of the votes cast, in other words twice as many of their electorate didn’t want them to win as did.”
How many of those twice as many were duped into tactical voting?
And yes, of course people have the choice to vote for whoever they like – we are indeed lucky…but I just feel, that if it were me…I would want to know people voted for me….not for me by default. I wouldn’t be a politician to do what *I* wanted….I’d be a politician to do what others wanted me to do. How could I ever do something, fight for something, argue a POV, knowing that I have no mandate to push that view as it may…or may not be what the people I represent want. How can I ever know!?
It does seem that both systems we have are defunct as some people vote for who they want to win and some vote tactically….with a sum total of an unrepresentative outcome. Still….I guess if all you are worried about is the outcome…so what?
Would you rather represent 100 people who believe in you….or 1000 who don’t?
It is certainly a dilemma….