Comments by "Andrew Sainsbury" (@andyinsuffolk) on "Labour could introduce PR for English local elections" video.

Richard is talking about entrenching party politics at the local level -- I would prefer to keep party politics out of the management of bin collections. The value of party members as Police Commissioners looks like something from the USSR or China.
1
The government of the day, but especially a party, imposing constitutional change on the electorate is authoritarian and undemocratic. In a democracy the devolved governance systems would be chosen by the members -- as should the national system. Some municipalities might prefer an executive manager/mayor others might prefer a board of 'directors' others a Party/PR model. Richard keeps talking about the percieved benefits for his party -- democracy is NOT party power.
1
FPTP is a problem but imposing voting systems (or any constitutional change) because they benefit your cause is obviously undemocratic. Follow your own logic and work toward a one-party state and then you don't have to worry about voter preferences -- much more honest than manipulation of the system.
1
@lindabastable3021 You contradict yourself -- 'I never thought of introducing PR by the stealth route of local elections first' -- FPTP and PR are both systems that concentrate power in the tiny few that wish to rule and belong to private special interest groups (modern aristocracy - the reverse of democracy).
1
@lindabastable3021 - Parties are small groups of people who wish to dominate the society with their values & preferences and rule them. Democracy is the shift of power from the few to the many (the opposite). FPTP/PR are systems that parties force on their population to concentratete power amongst their tiny number and remove power from the many - although they don't do as much open empowerment of their families and clans, if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck it probably is aristocracy. The whole of parliament is 650 the few with real power 25 (?) -- this is really closer to monarchy than people power, most(?) of whom will have their votes discarded or choices ignored by the system that the parties have imposed.
1
@lindabastable3021 -- Ok, when you next hear (particularly) office-holders or members of a party having a party pow-wow remember your argument - 'they just want to influence their society' - if they are talking voting systems it will all about how they will get to dominate in the future; just as Richard did in the vid -- cheers
1