Michael Connarty Being Curt with Non-Labour Voting Constituents #LabourFail #LEF

Strange to think that only last Thursday Michael Connarty was being as nice as pie to the people (well with the possible exception of Tam Smith) representing the votes cast by over half the constituents in Linlithgow and East Falkirk.

A concerned constituent has forwarded an email that was sent to him from Connarty over the issue of forming a coalition. Indeed he was urging him not to form a minority or rainbow coalition. The additions in red are my own corrections and comments.

Strong words Mr X,

Why should the Lib Dems be in any government when their vote fell, to 24% actually Michael this was an increase from 22% That means 76% of those who voted , voted AGAINST them, and their main platform of proportional representation So 24% vote and less that 10% seats is proportional? Also as you heard me debate three times you know there was more that that to our main platform. Indeed in our own coinstituency [sic] their vote FELL from 15% to 12%.Tsk 15.3% to 12.8% and also to your and your agents surprise, well done on that squeeze message over the last two days.

Indeed as an avowed Non Labour voter, do you not think it a bit odd and inappropriate to write to me to 'urge' me to do anything? I thought an MP was elected to represent the people not merely those that voted for him. Even Ian Paisley always represented his Catholic constituents. Would it not be more appropriate to write to the leader of the party for which you did vote to URGE them to do something. Well seeing as the Liberal Democrat representative at the election has been informed I'll leave that up to Michael as to whether I'll be passing the message on or not.

I am a graduate Economist you know that was one line I never used against Michael's constant use of it despite it being true and have been elected to various levels of representation for over 30 years. I am actually quite capable of analysing the situation for myself and assessing what would be best in the interests of the people of Linlithgow and East Falkirk. So in other words people of Linlithgow and East Falkirk if you have a concern it will fall on the deaf ears of your elected representative as he is clearly more than capable of working out all your concerns without hearing from you.

I am certain the Queen* will find it of great interest if you decide to write to her. Rather a smug sign off from someone who is an elected representative of over 30 years.

Michael Connarty MP

So there you have it folks we have elected an MP who argues that he needs two offices so that he can hear from the people he represents and serve them over two local authorities, two health trust, two police boards but he is capable of making up his own mind without hearing from you. Now that is a waste of opportunity. Something I'll be letting the people of Linlithgow and East Falkirk before we meet again, and I think we will, across a ballot paper Michael.

As I've already started answering concerns of the people of Linlithgow and East Falkirk once again it looks like I'm ready to take on the concerns of the local residents and challenge Michael when he continues to fail to meet those expectations. Maybe next time the people who turned to Labour in the dying days away from considering Liberal Democrat won't be so easily swung back.

* Actually seeing as the constituent has military experience and threatened to resign their commission and fight against an unelected Government by peaceful means shows a depth of feeling.

Decision Time

I'll have to admit a referendum on AV which one part of a coalition is free to campaign against is the not the ideal way to bring about new politics, however I doubt that this is the only concession that the Conservative team have given away. I suspect that there are also retractions on just how must they are going to cut in the first year as well.

You also have to look at some of the things that we have agreed upon.

Education

There is plenty of scope for agreement, the Tories are also looking at a pupil premium and freeing up schools to do what they want. One contentious issue will be over homophobic bullying and teaching of same sex education as part of the curriculum, even in faith schools.

Taxation

The Conservatives had intimated that they will look at the lifting of the personal tax allowance to see how this can be afforded. This is an encouraging sign for the lowest paid in our society. This may allow room for manoeuvre to get rid of the inheritance tax cuts for the super rich possibly to tax them instead on their properties. We shall wait and see but the Tories have intimated movement to make taxation fairer.

Civil Liberties

The Tories are with us on cutting the surveillance state, scrapping the ID card scheme that has been the Labour puppy for so long. Also part of this is loosening up red tape for businesses.

The Economy

There is a basic agreement in what needs to be done the real debate is over the time scale. There is a desire from both sides to get the banks lending, to cut the deficit over the term of this parliament and give Britain a greener and sustainable economic future.

Political Reform

Voting system aside there is movement to fixed term parliaments not set at the whim of the incumbent, the right to recall a corrupt MP and cutting the size of the House of Commons.

I know there will be people who said that they didn't vote Clegg to get a Conservative government, however more people in this country did vote for the Conservative MP than any other party and they returned more MPs. The Conservative government that would exist with a Liberal Democrat coalition partner would have a greenness to it, an inbuilt social conscious as well as a desire for new politics. Yesterday's Guardian cartoon showed Cameron crushing the cricket of wooden boy Clegg's conscience, however the Lib Dems in coalition with the Conservatives would act as a social conscience for the larger partner. Look at the promise to look at the poorest end of income tax above for a start.

If people voted Liberal Democrat to get electoral reform and their views to be expressed in Westminster more vocally then you have to realise that there is agreement between us and both the main parties in some areas and disagreement with both on others. I think Nick Clegg and the negotiating team will be looking at what offer is best to fulfil the nation's interests, that includes stability and economic recovery first and foremost. We have to show that coalition government can work here in the UK if we are to move for true proportionality. Only if it works and we can show we work with a party that is not the natural bedfellows will both the two main parties realise that there is hope of a future for them.

We were right to talk with the Tories as they had the best mandate from the people. We are still right to talk with them and try and come to some sort of agreement to best serve the people.

That Extra Mile

Last night William Hague described the upped offer to the Liberal Democrats as 'going the extra mile' so what must have been lacking before?

His statement said:

"In the interests of trying to create a stable, secure government, we will go the extra mile and we will offer the Liberal Democrats, in a coalition government, the holding of a referendum on the alternative vote system, so that the people of this country can decide the best electoral system."

It appears that before that statement the Tories may only have been seeking an 'confidence and supply' agreement, why else would Hague add the phrase in a coalition government after the word offer? If a coalition was already the default position surely this would have appeared in the phrase a stable, secure, coalition government at the top of the statement?

Then there is also the move from a conference on electoral reform to the Pauline conversion of the Damascus Road of offering a referendum on AV. Why is it that both of the two old parties are most fixated by AV*? The simple answer of course is that while it is electoral reform it is most like the current system and still offers them some hope of forming a majority government on less that 40% of the popular vote.

Both Labour and the Conservatives wish they were still in a two party system are are delusional about conceding any ground the multitude of other parties that have fought hard to make small inroads under FPTP. They still are thinking it is their right to govern are are willing to concede the littlest option but not the fairest.

So was it really an extra mile or merely a jump of panic?

* To be fair the latest wooing from Labour is a referendum later on STV after whipping through AV.

Has Dave Blown It?

Is Dave, or more to the point the Conservative Party about to blow their chance of power for the second time in this election?

In the hour it has taken me to get from work to home there is a faltering in the talks between the Tories and Lib Dems. Gordon Brown has wasted no time in removing himself as an obstacle in potential talks with Labour. The talks with Labour are starting tonight so is the clock ticking on a Cameron premiership? Is there going to be a rainbow over Westminster?

But hang on just as I'm typing this George Osborne has just offered a referendum on AV. But as both Labour and the Conservatives are aware, that is not the preferred option as outlined in the Liberal Democrat manifesto the preference is for single transferable vote. As the Guardian pointed out earlier AV is only marginally more proportional that first past the post.

William Hague has just tried to cast off his Damascus road conversion to proportional representation as letting "the people decide the best system". If you really want the people to decide the best system why not offer them the best system, the one that balances up a local accountability with proportionality.

Earlier we learned that agreement had been made on reducing the number of MPs, the Lib Dems being more radical than the Conservatives on that cut, that would need a redrawing of the boundaries anyway. If that is the case what is stop asking the boundary commission to draw up multi-member STV constituencies instead.

AV on constituencies, like we have now, may be disproportionate to the Tories as second preferences may go to the 'progressive alliance' but STV will at least reward them for strength where they are considerably strong. Maybe it is time for the Tories to truly wake up to what is the best and fairest way of electoral reform.

What Will the Next 24 Hours Bring?

As I resume post-election blogging I'd like to start by pointing out that even as a candidate in last Thursday's election I have no more access to the information of what is being discussed in London than any other party member. Therefore what I am about to type is based purely on the media reports of the last few days.

The statements last night from Danny Alexander and William Hague both focused on how the talks were working through the economic questions. This is the key stage of supporting any Government forward from this point. It is possible that the Liberal Democrats could agree to support a sound policy to deal with the deficit without entering a formal coalition. If this area can be resolved it would be possible that Cameron could lead a minority administration without the need for further support. It would also put the banks and markets at rest over what they see as uncertainty.

However that would then leave him requiring support on other issues and policy implementations when they come up. I'm sure that other areas of dispute, as Alex Wilcock put it the other day the other 3 key principles of our manifesto are up for discussion. All through the election Nick, myself and all our candidates emphasised that these four elements of fairness were the core of what we were standing for. Many of you have expressed to me your opinions on that going forward. These could well be the deciding points for how formal or informal the relationship between the Conservatives and the Lib Dems might be.

Somebody has raised the issue with me of have the Conservatives got the right to law down the law over Scotland. That may be one place where our 11 Scottish Lib Dem MPs may end up having a say. But we were voting in a UK wide election just the Conservatives have lost the trust of the Scots since the Thatcher years.

Whether there is a full blown coalition or a deal of "confidence and supply" one thing does appear clear a deal with Labour is off the table as Nick Clegg said last night that such a deal would be illegitimate in the public's eyes.

One possible scenario could be however, a confidence and supply agreement with the Tories and using the first opposition day to get a vote on proportional representation (if the Tories do not give on this) if Labour back that, Caroline Lucas, the Northern Irish parties and Scottish and Welsh Nationalists would also leading to a majority in the house on the issue.

Giro d'Italia Stage 1

It is day one of the Tour of Italy, the Giro d'Italia so welcome to the Netherlands.

Today the peleton gets underway with an 8.4 km time trail around the streets of the Dutch Capital Amsterdam. Starting and finishinf at the Van Gogh Museum


Being Amsterdam it is obviously an incredibly flat time trial so expect to see the time trailists in the race

Value of Your Vote

On May 6th 2010 it took on average

• 33,350 votes to elect each Labour MP
• 34,989 votes to elect each Tory MP
• 55,131 votes to elect each Plaid Cymru MP
• 81,898 votes to elect each SNP MP
• 119,788 votes to elect each Lib Dem MP

Yes there were hundreds of people disenfranchised across the country due to the queuing issues, but the figures above show a far larger disconnect between the value of the vote based on who you vote for. Time for a change and a fairer politics, time for electoral reform to include proportional representation or else the two old parties will continue to shore things up for their own benefit and not that of the people.