Joensuu

'Strong majority' government tend to mean that every time the governments change all of the diputed policies are reversed. If you need concesus to get a law passed, you essentially need to pass a law the majority find acceptable. As such, while more extremists are in PR parliaments, only the most balanced of laws tend to be passed. For example, under PR we would have been far less likely to have entered Iraq. I'd rather have a rational, considered, balanced, representative government, than a 'strong' one.

One where the number of representatives elected is in proportion to the number of votes cast. I.e. fair.

Works fine across the majority of Europe. Why not here?

Personally, national STV, with a democratic method (preferably public vote) of determining party lists. Consitutencies don't have many advantages. If your local MP opposes an issue you hold dearly, you can't find representation in the Commons; if there were no consituencies you could look towards any MP to support your local cause. Contary to belief, removing consituencies could actually increase the ability for politicians to address local issues.

Largest number of Liberal votes and the highest % of liberal votes in over 80 years, and you think the inaccurate pre-election polls are important? Whether it succeeds or not, this is the best chance in generations for the country to get a fair democratic system.

Agreed. The electoral system is broken. Lets force the big parties to accept the democratic change that they are so reluctant to give us.

PR might, just might, be possible via a Lib-Lab pact. It won't be easy, but its certainly worth taking the chance, because if it's successful it will give our country a taste of democracy. Yes, the coalition will collapse, and yes the swing voters might try to give the Lib/Lab/SNP/PC/SDLP parties a bloody nose. But if they have introduced PR it really won't draw blood.

Good points. But it really is the only way the Liberals can force the introduction of a fairer voting system. There are many Labour MPs in favour (only the most extreme 'Labout till I die' MPs would publically dare to vote against needed reform). The DUP, and some of the more liberal Tories are also in favour of introducing PR. Also if the public has voted in a referendum, it would a brave party to then block the legislation. If they get PR, then the "rainbow" parties don't need to even care about spending anything on the next election. If they each loose all of their swing voters they will increase their number of seats. Job done. 12 weeks is admittedly optimistic. Ideally if the big parties were fair, the country could wait longer while the reform was planned and introduced. Unfortunately the big parties continue to put retaining power above democracy.

Get real. This election had Tory win all over it. The fact Cameron has failed can only mean one thing. The public don't want a Conservative government, but would prefer it to having Brown as PM. If the Labour party had gone to the electorate with virtually any other leader they would probably have gained the majority of the votes and seats. Had the public wanted a conservative government, they would have voted one in (and not opted for the hung 'none of the above' option).

You would need to assume, that as a 'rainbow' coalition won't last long, that one of it's founding statements would be that they will put PR vote to the country, and once past call a new election (with PR) withing 12 weeks. In the meantime manage the economy in the best interests of the country. If the public are told of the gameplan, then there won't be pressure on the coalition to hold, as it's already established it's own end date.

Disagree. Whatever Clegg does will be fraught with risk. But joining the Tories will discredit him with his own voters and party. If you look at Lib Dem opinion polls, they are indicating a very high percentage of Lib Dems would be disgusted with any Tory deal. In short, going with the Tories would be the end of Cleggs effective leadership. I can see his party rebelling and voting against any Tory Queen's speech. On the other hand, if he goes with Labour (but removes Brown), the Tory voters will be miffed, but the majority of Lib Dems, and the majority of the country will be much happier. Oh, and he would also get a realistic chance of putting PR to a public vote (albeit having to combat Ashcroft's undemocratic millions which would flood the country in an attempt to undermine democracy). Clegg's hands are tied.

The three strategies for dealing with the economy were broadly the same. The cut now, cut later stuff was just rhetoric. The Tories would (will?) take months to understand the books before they make serious cuts. And both Labour and Lib Dems would have had to have brought the cuts in earlier than their own voters would have liked. Essentially, the economy will be tackled in broadly the same way whoever governs. If we take that as a starting point, lets think about the next big issue, reforming the process of electing our government so that it's even vaguely democratic.

Blimey, you sound genuinely concerned. I'd say that 5% who wanted to vote Lib Dem gritted their teeth and were forced to tactically vote Labour. Either way, the majority of the electorate voted to keep the Tories out, despite the worst Prime Minister, the worst recession in 50 years, unpopular wars etc... It just goes to show how unpopular the Tories actually are.

I hope for sake of democracy you're wrong. Clegg has to play his card right, but if he settles for anything less than a public vote with capped campaign budget, and the campaigning support of whichever party he agrees to join, he will have let down his party and lost millions of voters.

Perhaps if I ignore him he'll stop mistaking me for a Catholic choir boy and quit making the inappropriate advances?

Absolutely. And despite being ignored by the cabinet, the only people in government pointing out the excesses of the banking world were the Lib Dems and the Labour back benchers. The Tories were all in favour of Blair and Brown's soft touch regulation.

Is Whitey married to Debbie McGee?

However, if Cameron gets his way we are about to be run even more frugally than Lowe ever dreamed possible. Isn't the plan to sell off all of the staff and players, and ask the 'Big Society' whether any of them have their own boots and are free on Saturdays? Wonder if we will stay in the Division?

The only thing giving this rumour momentum is the lack of a denial. Cortese has had about 40 hours to crush this speculation. His silence suggests there might be a fire behind this smoke.

Assume he means Authoritarians not Marxists. Authoritarians, whether left or right will do anything they can to retain power, hense their support of the biased FPTP system.

Barking & Dagenham. BNP currently have 19 councillors nationally, last week they had 45. Bizarrely, in the local elections people swung away from both the Lib Dems and Tories to Labour. Labour gained 15 councils and 420 councillors last week.

Clegg won't last long as party leader if he doesn't get PR. The members of the Lib Dems dont' care about having cabinet members, or agreement on any other issue. Only getting PR passed as law will be enough. The Liberals need to get not just the flimsy agreement to throw a referendum, they need the party agreeing to the concession to be whipped into supporting both the public campaign, and the passage of the law through the commons. Don't forget all the nationalists want PR too, so the SNP, PC, SDLP and Liberals will all agree to the same concession from a Labour government - ensure PR passes into legislation. Clegg has too much to lose from allowing Cameron to govern.

In England: Con 39.6% of the vote vs 55.8% of seats Lab 28.1% of the vote vs 35.9% of seats Lib 24.2% of the vote vs 8.1% of seats

Didn't realise he'd passed 20 today... That's superb! Congratulations Adam. (that's reassurred me loads!)

I left the game more concerned than before about Adam. He was superb today, clearly the best prospect in the league. He will have undoubtably attracted attention from bigger clubs, and I'm just a bit worried about how much he celebrated, how much he wanted a goal today, the way he wanted to take the penalty, it all just seemed that there was something special about scoring today, in a meaningless game. Why did he want to score today so much more than he seemed to in previous games? Then he seemed to walk a bit behind the other players when doing the lap. I'm probably reading too much into it, but I'm still a bit worried.