How would I vote on Tution Fees?

If I was an MP, how would I vote on Tution Fees, I'd vote Aye.

In principal, I believe in free university education but the financial incompetance of the last Government means that Universities need more funding and the Government can't afford to provide extra, and has to impose cuts to sort out the deficit.

I think that the Government's Proposals are balanced. While the amount you pay is increasing, you also don't have to pay it back until you earn £21,000(rather than £15,000) at the moment, there will be more scholarships and there is an increase in maintainance grants which all balance it off.

It was never going to be popular but neither were Tuition Fees to start with, but we still saw an increase in University uptake and having debt isn't the end of the world.



The Lib Dems shouldn't of promised to scrap fees at the last election, quite simple, they knew we couldn't afford it.

In Scotland, I'm all for keeping free University education because we've budgeted for it and can maintain it and I hope one day, once our finances are back on track, we can begin to extend free university education to England and Wales.

Its time for those in opposition to fees to come into the real world, we can't afford it and by smashing up London, all you do is create a negative image of young people, and destroy your own argument.



In principal I'm for free University Education but we simply can't afford it at the moment. Vince Cable has put together the best plan that he can and I support it 100% because practically, its the only way to go.

Oh, and hello blog world. I've been away for a wee while :).

Kyle :).

N.B. Lets not forget the Labour Party presided over higher youth unemployment than ever before. Can you really trust two-face Labour on University Funding?

Red Ken is back again

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-11403674

You'd think Labour would have learned from the past. Socialist candidates do not win elections even during times of cuts. Evidence for this? Michael Foot.

Red Ken's latest crusade to regain his crown as wrecker of London will no doubt be music to Boris Johnston who ousted the 2 term for MP as Mayor in 2008.

London Labour members didn't have much of a choice though. Ken or Oona King. A woman who managed to go into an election with a 10,000 majority and lose and not just to anyone but to George Galloway. Now that, is poor politics.

At least Conservatives can relish in that Boris will have a good chance against Labour's Old Boy and a Lib Dem Welshman(Lebit Opik.

After all, we'll be http://www.backboris2010.co.uk backing Boris for 2012! If for nothing else but to ensure we get to see his colourful character in the media!

Vote NO to AV. Lets ask for STV(a PROPORTIONAL system).

While it is a while away until the waste of money that is the AV Referendum, I've decided to blog about why I believe that a NO vote to AV should happen and of course, what I would really like to see.

AV or the Alternative Vote is a system in which you rank your candidates for example 1st, 2nd and 3rd. Votes are then counted and if there is a candidates who receives 50%+ of the votes in 1st Preferences, then they win the seat. If not, then the last place candidate is knocked out and those who votes for the last place candidate as their 1st preference who then have their 2nd preference votes added to all the candidates and then if one candidate gets 50%+ they then win. And this goes on until a candidate wins(or they run out of preference votes).

This, you might think is a propotional system. WRONG.

Infact, this system is LESS proportional than First Past the Post(the current system). For those who don't know what we mean by proportional, it is where the percentage of votes cast more equally represents the number of seats the party has.

The BBC quite nicely prepared a projection of what this system would have done to election results from 1983 onwards. As you can see http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8506306.stm. The system would have given the Conservatives less seats in every election than they actually got, completly unfair. It would have given Labour more seats in 1997, 2001 and 2005 than they got. The 2005 Election I would like to focus on. Labour got less votes than the Conservatives got in the 2010 election, however under AV they would have gotten MORE seats than they got in 2005. Showing that it is a grossly unfair system which exacerbates trends.

So, you don't like AV and you think that FPTP is unfair aswell, what do you suggest?

I suggest the Single Transferable Vote system. A more propotional system. It is much like AV, you rank your candidate, they get knocked out e.t.c but with the difference of Multi-Member constituencies. This allows for people in a wider area than current constituencies to let their votes count because it isn't just the majority winner who gets elected but the three most popular candidates are. Allowing for more proportionality. You can find out about it at http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/article.php?id=48.

And as you may guess, I support STV. It would in Scotland, my native land, give the Conservatives 7 MPs, and reduce Labour to 28 MPs. Much more proportional, much more FAIR.

I urge you all to vote against AV if you can. While First Past The Post may be unpropotional, it is LESS unpropotional than AV. Send the signal that we want REAL change rather than as Nick Clegg called it a, "watered down version" of STV.

Its the 21st Century. The case for Electoral Reform is here, Coalition Goverments will result from it but as we've seen, it isn't actually that bad. Maybe after 5 Years of Coalition, we will stop our fear factor of comprimise in Government.

We want Proportional Represenatation, not even LESS proportional system. Get the message Nick and if you care to listen to the people and your own manifesto, Votes@16 would be quite nice. Although, one step at a time.

Tell me David, what exactly IS this Big Society?

I think I made the right move when I made my hair a ligher shade since I seem to be having trouble getting my head around the big society, am I the only one?

From what I can see it is all about people coming together and taking control but there seems to be nothing about local devolution of powers but more about just taking over services. That seems a bit strange.

How exactly will this all be funded? Can it all carry on from money taken from dormant bank accounts? There is free voulenteering but you still have costs.

As far as I can make out its all about people coming together and about Government being in your lives less. I'm all in favour of that but it seems that there are too many what ifs, too many buys and too many how does this work?

I'm finding it hard to get my head around the Big Society and I like to think I'm a little bit intelligent, so how on Earth is the common man supposed to get his head around it?

We need details David. Details.

Think Again Theresa

I'll make this one short folks.

After being informed of all the facts, mainly that they have been living in the UK for SEVEN YEARS, I have changed my view on the Florence and Precious Mhango Case. The way that they have been treated is disgraceful.

To live and contribute in this country for seven years should surley allow you the privilage of staying in this country.

While it was no-suprise that a Labour Government wouldn't do anything about it, I urge the Con-Lib Coalition and especially the Home Secretary, The Right Honourable Theresa May MP to intervene and stop this nonsense.

Let them stay. Its just common bloody sense.

Scottish Conservatives should be more Scottish and support referendum.

As the Scottish Conservatives are examining their role in modern Scottish politics maybe they(we) should take a look at the more successful Welsh Conservatives.

The Welsh Conservatives should be held up as a success story for the Scottish Conservatives to look to. From the 1997 wipeout, the Tories in Wales have built themselves back up to the point where the Conservatives topped the European Election poll in 2009 which has to be a fantastic achievement for a party that returned no MPs only 12 years previously.

But how did they do it? As I can see it, a factor in their success was that they simply became a bit more Welsh. I'll put it another way, they shrugged off all the talk of British this and British that and they were saying Wales this and Wales that.

That brings me to the Scottish Tories. We've been slowly recovering some ground in Scotland but at a very slow rate. The General Election result must be a wakeup call to the party that we need to do something different and being on the ground during the election talking to people, I got a broad message from it. They feel that the Scottish Conservatives are just the English with a different name. The talk of British General Elections and British Parliaments simply just makes the majority of Scots feel uncomfortable, it always has since 1707.

So what can we do? Simply, lets become a bit more Scottish. There are many ways that we could approach this but I'd like to discuss just one method, lets support the idea of asking the Scottish people their view in a referendum. As we should, we would be campaigning for a NO vote to Independence but we should support more powers for Holyrood as outlined by the Calman Commission.

It is my firm belief that by doing this we would show to the people of Scotland that we DO trust them to decide their own future, that we are confident that there will be a pro-union vote and that Scotland IS a devolved nation able to make its own choices on its home affairs and that it should be given greater flexibility.

Such a move would help the Scottish Tories to shrug off the words of electoral death in Scotland(Margaret Thatcher) and also to reduce the feeling that the Scottish Tories are just the English in disguise.

There is a saying that comes to mind when writing this, “Fortune Favours the Bold”. Well, if we do what I'm suggesting, we'll be being very bold but we may also just help save our electoral chances in Scotland from terminal decline.

Glasgow's Young People Won't Forget- Labour were the ones who cut their futures

I was watching television yesterday and I saw someone from the Labour Party, I can't remember who but they were saying Labour were for young people.

I'd disagree with that anyway but it got me thinking about whats happening in my city, Glasgow, which is ruled by Labour.

The Labour Council cut Education and Social Work last year quite significantly.

Two Services which deal with young people directly and mainly.

Then, this year, they are cutting £3.4 Million from Culture + Sport Glasgow. The body which looks after Youth Services, Libraries, Museums and which runs youth services.

This is leading to 12 Community Centre closures across the city, this is leading to a cut back in Youth Services.

Schools can no-longer afford supplies, they can no-longer afford to hire enough teachers to teach, they can't afford to photocopy, they can't afford to run after-school clubs and they can't afford to repair schools.

Glasgow's young people are coming to their senses, they're seeing all these doors being closed, they're seeing their schools falling apart and their seeing their youth club at their local community centre being closed.

Labour in Glasgow City Council are attacking the three things that Young People use the most that they fund. Education- Used by every under 16, Social Work- Works with the most vulnerable children and teenagers and Culture and Sport provide facilities and things to do for young people.

And when they look to see who's done this to them, behind all the lies and spin, there is one group of people to blame, the Labour Party.

Here's an idea for the Council big-wigs. Young People will take their fair share but spread the cuts to all ages in the city. Don't just target young people, don't disable Glasgow's future.

And nationally, Labour has shown that its not interested in young people. They're cut university places and they're allowed Youth Unemployment to be the highest ever in this recession.

The Last Generation said Maggie didn't do anything for young people.

This generation won't have short term memories, we'll remember who didn't put our interests first, we'll remember who uses young people for political gain, we'll remember Labour's rein of terror against young people.

Here's a slogan for Labour: A funfair future.....for everyone over 18