UNHOLY ALLIANCE: David Cameron (left)
and Nick Clegg.
UPDATE: Predictably, the Tories (largest party, but well short of a majority) have persuaded the hapless Lib-Dems to help them form a government. Tory leader David Cameron is Prime Minister with Lib-Dem leader Nick Clegg (whom Cameron once called a "joke") as his deputy.
This unholy alliance has immediately launched savage cuts in front-line public expenditure (education, health, policing etc).
Did one single Lib-Dem supporter vote for any of that?
General Election: yet again
figures prove our daft
system is grossly unfair
by Sue Davies
Well, another British General Election rolls by and once again, there was not much to choose between the three main Westminster parties - Labour, Tories and Liberal-Democrats. They all looked and sounded the same.
A close look at the results, though, reveals what a cock-eyed electoral system we have in Britain.
David Cameron's Tory Party achieved 10,706,647 votes to win 306 seats (gaining 97 but 20 short of an overall majority - the so-called “hung parliament”). That's 36.1% of the votes cast, averaging 34,989 votes per seat.
Gordon Brown's Labour Party gathered in 8,604,358 votes to win 258 seats (losing 91). That's 29% of the votes cast, averaging 33,350 votes per seat.
Nick Glegg's Liberal-Democrats, who now hold the balance of power, totalled up 6,827,938 votes to win 57 seats (down 5). That's 23% of the votes cast, averaging 119,788 votes per seat.
In other words, Tories and Labour MPs needed to attract just 34,169 votes between them to win their seats while the Lib-Dems had to work more than three times harder to win their 57 seats.
If the Lib-Dems had needed just 34,169 votes for each of their seats (6,827,938 divided by that figure) they would have 199 seats.
I don't have a lot of time for Mr Clegg or his wishy-washy party but I completely understand why they regard Britain's electoral system as grossly unfair and why they want fundamental reform, the only Lib-Dem policy I wholly support.
By the way, just for the record, there is one parliamentary seat in England still to be decided. A candidate died during the campaign and so the whole election there will have be run again.
Meanwhile, in Cymru...
In Cymru where 40 seats were up for grabs, Labour lost four seats to end up with 26 seats. The Tories closed with eight, up five. Plaid Cymru won the largely new seat of Arfon (with Bangor included it was expected to go Labour) and so have three seats (gaining that seat didn't stop the biased BBC describing Plaid's performance as “disappointing”). The Lib-Dems dropped to three, surprisingly losing the “safe” seat of high-profile MP Lembit Opik.
Again, the detailed figures tell the story. Labour had 531,601 votes - an average of 20,446 votes per seat. The Tories had 382,730 - an average of 47,841 votes. The Lib-Dems had 295,164 - an average of 98,388 votes. Plaid Cymru had 165,394 votes - an average of 55,131.
In Cymru, a total of 1,466,690 votes were cast, an average of 36,667. So Labour and the Tories needed well below the Welsh average for each of their seats, while Plaid and the Lib-Dems needed well above the average.
Britain's “first past the post” system is simply not fair. Based on the Welsh average, how would the parties have fared under a fairer system. Labour would have 14 or 15 seats, the Tories 10 or 11, the Lib Dems eight and Plaid Cymru four or five. So the three smaller parties would each have gained at the expense of Labour - even the Tories, who oppose any sort of electoral reform!
Of course, I would hate to see the Tories with that many seats but it could be very different if we had a PR system - ideally, the simple single-transferable vote. People would be thinking far more carefully about where to put their second vote.
To underline what a strange place Britain is, on the same day the Tories trounced Labour in the General Election, England also held local authority elections - with Labour thrashing the Tories and the Lib-Dems by a big margin. Labour gained 420 councillors while Mr Clegg's party lost 144 and Mr Cameron's party lost 123.
Thousands couldn’t vote...
Labour would have had 421 councillors but when one of their candidates tied exactly with his Tory opponent, the Returning Officer produced a pack of cards and the Labour candidate lost out on a cut of cards! It turns out this stupidity is entirely within the law!
As for the national disgrace where thousands were unable to vote after being were turned away at numerous polling stations which couldn't cope, perhaps there is a case for International Observers to be drafted in a future British elections.
And so to my own ward, Cardiff North, where the incumbent Julie Morgan (Labour) lost her seat to Jonathan Evans (Tory) by just 194 votes. Labour says she was denied a second recount which she was entitled to and there are dark mutterings about the result being challenged.