Sure - I accept all that. But whats the point of representation if it never delivers?

Because of Scotland this advantage doesn't really exist any more. Labour are going to lose 4 times as many seats to the SNP as they will votes. That basically resets everything to an almost equal status with the Tories.

Both parties are going to need to get above 37% to get a majority.

Ask people who vote Labour?!

I have just heard Yvette Cooper on the radio explaining how she is going to control immigration - the conclusion of the interviewer and I expect the rest of us was that she can't inside the EU but she just couldn't be honest. Apparently they are bringing back exit controls too - and who got rid of them?

Same with housing - apparently the party that saw house prices rise 400 per cent in a decade, delivered only 3 per cent of the council housing even Thatcher did and saw buy to let landlord numbers rise ten fold are going to solve the housing crisis.

I know they didn't deliver last time but this time it will be different!

In your example it will deliver. The 15 odd percent of the country that backs UKIP will have a 15% of the MPs representing them in parliament. This will be able to make speeches, propose legislation, ask questions, vote on issues.

However the majority of people in the country who fundamentally disagree with UKIP policy will have a block of MPs who are committed to preventing them from ever implementing their policies. That's how democracy should work. If UKIP ever wanted to achieve any real power they would need to convince a majority of the public to either vote for them or another party who is sympathetic to their aims.

The reason the Tories/Labour can govern without a majority is because their politics aren't so toxic that other political factions avoid them.

Also important to note he mentioned about shy conservatives.....where as Labour supporters tend to be more vocal and into activism.....you cant say that about most tories and this might have some significance yet......

They also don't want to give a figure on how many should be allowed in......all that I understand about both Labour and UKIP policies is when/if they get in power they wont include seasonal workers and foreign students in the migration figure....so that helps then with 150,000 a year for starters.....so fiddling figures seems the order of the day.

Sorry, that makes 327 then, which minus Sinn Fein and the Speaker (who votes with the government in the event of a tie) gives a working majority of 9, but I fear the swingback to another Con/Lib Dem coalition is already underway.

Prospect of Labour-SNP coalition makes one in four voters less likely to support Ed Miliband, says survey

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-10208223.html

People who intend to vote Ukip were most likely to be put off by the prospect of a Labour-SNP deal. Some 29 per cent of them said it would make them less likely to back Labour, while only 7 per cent said it would make that more likely. The prospect is not putting off most Labour supporters: 31 per cent said a link-up with the SNP would make them more likely to back Mr Miliband’s party, while 16 per cent said it would make it less likely. Among Liberal Democrat supporters, a Lab-SNP deal would make them 27 per cent less likely to back Labour and only 13 per cent more likely.

Quite a lot of UKIP voters for the Tories to target....

Can you seriously, honestly, openly imagine a coalition with all left wing parties really ever taking off? There would be weeks upon weeks of deals, negotiations and so on, because the further left you go, the more demanding it gets. Labour would largely disagree with any extreme left view which would destabilise thge negotiations and prolong it.

The reason the ConDem coalition worked was simply because, according to the LibDem negotiators, "The Tories were surprisingly co-operative and were more open to compromises than Labour were prepared to be" (or words to that effect).

i think when you have a coalition of two totally different parties like the Tories and LibDems, it is easier to come up with a workeable partnership because both sides can dilute the worst policies of the other side and reach some common ground on the policies that are conflicting.

Latest TNS-BMRB poll (26 - 30 Mar):
CON - 33% (-)
LAB - 32% (-)
UKIP - 16% (-1)
LDEM - 8% (+1)
GRN - 5% (+1)

The polls appear to be ever so slightly shifting in favor of the Tories but we need another 3-4 before I'm sure on that.

March?

Britain Elects ‏@britainelects 8m8 minutes ago

TNS-BMRB Poll (23th - 27th April)
CON - 34% (+2)
LAB - 33% (-1)
UKIP - 15% (-)
LDEM - 7% (-1)
GRN - 5% (-)

LOL!!! twitter has been slow but never that slow sorry about that.
it popped into my timeline as "instant"

It would be enough for a Labour Queen's speech, but the key to remain in power as a minority government is to make sure all the opposition parties don't vote against you at the same time. On some issues like Trident Labour would be supported by the Tories, on others they might try to win over the Lib Dems, they wouldn't always be reliant on the SNP.

quite a few polls with the tories ahead now? Do TNS normally have lab ahead?

Seriously you are going with that? what is the score at the moment on Tory broken promises U turns and failures to meet targets?
let's not forget that the beloved leader actually gave quite clear instructions that we should vote him out if he fails on one particular target, a target he didn't even come close to reaching, I am only doing as the beloved leader commanded.

be very very careful because I am certain that 'someone' will be along quite soon to accuse all Tory supporters of wetting their nick nicks every time they get a 1% lead, as well as pointing out that 1% is well within the margin of error,

Oh!! hang on...... that's only true when it's Labour supporters,

I don't doubt that under PR, UKIP will be fairly represented in Parliament. My point is that the representation will count for nothing. No other parties will support their prime objectives. So, why bother with PR if, potentially, representation doesn't deliver? Why swap one system that doesn't deliver for another that also doesn't?

I've never accused you of anything and I wasn't saying that I was just asking people

But surely, true representation only comes when a party can attract a sufficient amount of supporters?

Perhaps when/if the SNP can win independence in Scotland, this might spark new interest in UKIP and make them more appealing as a party than Labour and Conservative? To be truly represented you must first attract the masses. Isn't that the whole point of PR? That the parties get allocated seats based on their popular vote? So if you are the least popular you will get the least amount of representation?

Sorry, it wasn't aimed at you, although I see how it might appear that way, I thought that me emphasising 'someone' in my previous post was me indicating that I didn't mean you,
there are one or two Tory supporters on here, one in particular, who any time a labour supporter or two makes a comment as neutral as yours, will insist that "all" Labour supporters wet themselves every time they have a 1% lead in one poll,

Nate Silver said the party in power always do better on the polls then they do on the actual night

But there are "2" parties in power. Which one will suffer the worst?

Indeed and when the 15-odd% that are currently telling pollsters they're voting UKIP, hopefully come to their senses and realise it's a wasted vote, that will lead to a disastrous Miliband's Labour win, they'll return to the fold.