Friday 9 December 2016

My hopes for the EU from the outside

I was one of the 48%, and I offer no apology on what were my beliefs ahead of the June 23 Vote.  I didn't and still don't, consider a British identity and a European identity to be incompatible.

What I posted on social media in the aftermath of the result is though still very much my view nearly six months on.  That was being of course that the result must be respected.

And let's be clear- I am not interested and have not at any stage since June 24 been interested in any Second Referendum!

We should now take the road to leave the EU.  The referendum on June 23 was the highest electoral turnout since 1992.

Of course I want the closest possible relationship with my fellow Europeans, and I don't rule out supporting a re-entry bid into the EU in say a generation's time.

I do though want the EU to reflect on what has happened this year.  I would like the EU to consider doing one of two things.

They could go down the painful route of engineering a reversal of the Euro, at least for some countries.  Subsequently, the EU could become a looser Union.

Or instead, they could go down the route towards further integration, to allow a Common Fiscal Policy, and ultimately become One Sovereign State.

I believe that the lack of a Common Fiscal Policy, is a firm reason why we hear of all the troubles facing some of the Southern European economies.

After all, the old East Germany (as an ex-Communist State) was once a poorer country economically.  But, do the East Germans (now as part of a re-united Germany) have an economic struggle today which is comparable to the Greeks?

Ex-Tory eurosceptic Michael Portillo has mentioned on the odd occasion how the Euro Zone needs to either split up or become one country.

If the EU goes down the route towards further integration, I will re-iterate my point of identity.  That being, I am proud to be British and European.

Of course, I  consider it unlikely the UK would ever in my lifetime re-join the EU on such a model, unless we really were struggling economically.

Should the EU go down the route of a looser union, then of course it does make a re-entry in my lifetime more realistic.

However, I do want to stress that my viewpoint is not comparable to that of the SNP on a new Scottish Independence Referendum; it is my view that a so-called material change of circumstances should not be a case to revisit the EU Membership subject anytime soon.

My viewpoint is more comparable to those Norwegian politicians who support EU entry, but respect that their citizens voted against EU entry for the second time as recent as 1994, and are probably wary of a third referendum a generation on which they have no guarantee of winning.

Ultimately, whatever the EU does decide, with us Brits out of the way, I hope that the key leaders will be able to take a totally fresh viewpoint about what is right for Europe and EU citizens.

The world has moved on a fair bit since the end of World War II, and that is especially true for Mainland Europe.  Watch this space.  I know I will be.










Thursday 8 December 2016

Ranil Jayawardena MP completely wrong on First Past The Post!

Hampshire Conservative MP Ranil Jayawardena is suggesting that all UK elections should be conducted under the controversial First Past The Post (FPTP) electoral system.

Jayawardena argues how simple and easy FPTP is, compared to other voting systems.  Now, I am going to explain why he is wrong.

English Police Commissioner and Mayoral Elections

These elections are currently conducted under what is known as the Supplementary Voting System, where voters rank their first two choices.

If a candidate does not get 50% of the vote on first preferences, very simply the candidate with the fewest votes drops out, and the second preference votes for that candidate with the fewest votes are subsequently re-distributed to other candidates still in the running.

This process continues until one candidate reaches 50% support.

As I say, all the voter does is rank their first two choices.  They do this by putting two crosses in the respective columns for first and second preference.  As far as simplicity or complexity for the voter goes, is Mr Jayawardena seriously suggesting this system is twice as difficult for the voter as First Past The Post, by virtue of marking two crosses?

If FPTP were introduced for any of these elections, there would quite clearly be some victors who don't have the support of the majority of electors!


Devolved National Parliamentary Elections, including Scotland

These elections are conducted under a Mixed Member System known as the Additional Member System (AMS), in which voters have two votes.

In one vote, a voter elects a local representative.  For the second vote, a voter votes for a party.  This second vote determines an overall proportionality in which the total number of representatives returned closely reflects a party's share of the party vote.

The 2016 Scottish Parliament election will give a clear understanding.  Due to the excellent performance of the Scottish Nationalist Party (SNP) in the constituency vote which returned 59 MSPs, their 41.7% share of the party vote saw them obtain only a further 4 MSPs from regional top up lists.

By contrast, both Labour and the Conservatives performed poorly in the constituency vote, and most of their returned MSPs were elected by the regional top up lists.

Ultimately, the SNP only obtained about 48% of all seats for the Scottish Parliament, thus fell short of an overall majority.

Now, lets compare this election to the election twelve months earlier in Scotland for the UK Westminster Parliament.  The SNP won 56 out of 59 seats which were all contested under FPTP.  This was despite the SNP only having a little over 50% of the total vote in Scotland.

First Past The Post is hardly in line with the basic principle of fairness.  But once again, as with the English Mayoral and Police Commissioner Elections, is Mr Jayawardena seriously saying that the AMS system is twice as difficult for the Scots than FPTP is, due to having to mark a cross twice?