Changes

447 bytes removed ,  15:20, May 18, 2013
→‎2011 referendum: Not in ref and not so-called alternative vote.Removing pro-labour bias
Line 14: Line 14:  
The party's terms for a coalition have always included introducing [[proportional representation]] for elections, and their terms for the 2009/10 election include: to reform government by capping private donations, reducing the number of MPs, having a 100% elected [[House of Lords]] (it is currently made of bishops, party appointees, and hereditary peers), and having a written [[constitution]] and a [[Bill of Rights]], as current UK constitutional law is confusingly spread out over parts of several legal documents.<ref>http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/mar/10/liberaldemocrats.nickclegg Clegg's terms for deal in hung parliament</ref>
 
The party's terms for a coalition have always included introducing [[proportional representation]] for elections, and their terms for the 2009/10 election include: to reform government by capping private donations, reducing the number of MPs, having a 100% elected [[House of Lords]] (it is currently made of bishops, party appointees, and hereditary peers), and having a written [[constitution]] and a [[Bill of Rights]], as current UK constitutional law is confusingly spread out over parts of several legal documents.<ref>http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/mar/10/liberaldemocrats.nickclegg Clegg's terms for deal in hung parliament</ref>
   −
== 2011 referendum ==
+
== 2011 referendum ==  
−
There is a growing consensus that the Liberal Democrats have no real policy goals at all, or if they do they are irrelevant. Part of the deal with them going into partnership with the Tories was a referendum on the so called alternative vote, this was rejected by the UK voters<ref>http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13297573</ref>.
+
Part of the deal with them going into partnership with the Tories was a referendum on the alternative vote, this was rejected by the UK voters<ref>http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13297573</ref>.
   −
Had this passed it would have gave the Lib Dems the whip hand, as under this system it is unlikely that either the Conservative or Labour parties would ever win an overall majority in The House of Commons, giving the Lib Dems the balance, far more power than they will ever be mandated to hold.  With this power they would be able to support, and withdraw support to either of the larger parties at a whim, being able to switch sides whenever it suited them, thus becoming the most powerful force in British politics and undermining British democracy.
+
Had this passed it would have gave the Lib Dems the whip hand, as under this system it is unlikely that either the Conservative or Labour parties would ever win an overall majority in The House of Commons, giving the Lib Dems the balance.
    
==Funding==
 
==Funding==
133

edits