No Confidence in Lib Dem Defence Plans

An open letter was published in today's Time from a number of defence experts savaging the Lib Dems plans to leave Britain undefended. The experts, including Peter Clarke, the former National Counter Terrorism Co-ordinator, Sir Richard Dearlove, former head of the Secret Intelligence Service, and General Lord Guthrie of Craigiebank, former Chief of the Defence Staff, said that the Lib Dem's plans would leave Britain weakened on the world stage and vulnerable to terrorism.


Above: General Lord Guthrie of Craigiebank


These gentlemen have attacked the Lib Dem's plans to scrap control orders and the uncertainty of the Lib Dem's Trident plans and have stated that the Lib Dem's plans had escaped proper scrutiny. They also went on to say that the Lib Dem's confusion over the mission in Afghanistan left it outside the broad consensus of the two parties.

The Lib Dems have since responded to these attacks by stating that they were merely "scaremongering". Does this arrogant, high minded response not stink of Labour when they refused to listen to the experts on the mission in Afghanistan with regards to helicopters and shortages of equipment? The answer is yes, and it shows that the Lib Dems, should they be part of a coalition with Labour, will continue to harm the country and continue to harm HM Armed Forces just as Labour has done over the past 13 years.

One of the Few Good Things About the Lib Dem Surge

The X Factor TV Debates has seen a ridiculously unprecedented and unscrutinised surge in support for the Lib Dems without anybody really knowing what they stand for (letting petty criminals off, giving rapists, paedophiles and murders the vote and
selling us to the EU). It would obviously be a poor result if these anti people policies were ever allowed to be implemented.

However this surge does have one good result and it might be to stop that nutty communist, Dr Caroline Lucas of the Green Party, from becoming an MP in the Brighton Pavilion Constituency. I just give a quick explanation about how this woman previously had a chance of actually getting in so you don't just switch off in disgust. Basically in 2005 election their candidate, Keith Taylor, came third in this constituency pushing the Lib Dems into forth place. The Greens realised that the Lib Dem supporters had abandoned the Lib Dems and were voting for the Greens instead and so focused on trying the get more and more Lib Dems on their side. It was widely regarded that in Brighton Pavilion this General Election t was very much going to be a two horse race between the Conservatives and the Greens, in fact the Conservative candidate said as much on the Daily Politics show.

However now the Lib Dems are all popular again and riding, in most polls, in a comfortable second place. I am now pretty sure that with this Lib Dem support and Clegg's goodish performance in the debates, all those Lib Dems who were voting Green back in 2005 will go back home to their candidate, the left wing vote will split and the Tory will kick out the Labour MP. Well, let's all hope so anyway.

The Problem with PR

Many people along the Political spectrum cite proportional representation as the only true democratic form. They say it is the only form of voting which produce legitimate parliaments (and through them Governments) because it represents all the views of the electorate across the political spectrum. Now let ME tell you why this is a lie.

Here in Great Britain there is a real chance of a Hung Parliament, meaning that Nick Clegg will become the King-Maker to either Labour or the Conservatives. At present the Lib Dems are scoring between 18 - 20% of the vote in the opinion polls and if they did become the King-Makers in a hung Parliament then at least they represent a large amount of the electorate. However in democracies that use proportional representation then we find that the King-makers are not large parties with a large amount of support, but they are small parties with only a tiny amount of the people voting for them. For example look at Germany with its Free Democratic Party (FDP), this party only holds 5% (an average, currently at 14%) of the vote, yet has held on to the Foreign Ministry for decades. Is it fair that such a small party, with so few supporters should decide which party should lead a nation?

PR gives us small parties with a disproportionate power over the government. It also allows those small parties to force the larger parties that they have crow-bared into government to implement their policies and to make concessions.

In conclusion PR gives you weak governments, governments not representative of the people and political parties that have to make changes so that they betray the voter. Overall PR supporters are the enemy of democracy, trying to make Governments unaccountable to the electorate!