The Tories love to blather on about "rewarding success", but this policy will create a situation where people stand to lose their house if they get a job. How on earth is that rewarding success?

The Tories also love to blather on about the cost of administrating the public sector, but this policy will inevitably require a heck of a lot of administration and that ain't going to pay for itself.

I think it's a question worth asking. Could the Lib Dem's credibly continue as part of the coalition if that happens?

And wouldn't their credibility as a political party be shot to pieces if they fail to deliver electoral reform?

I've been watching people in places like Twitter and SheffieldForum.co.uk and it is notable how things are breaking down at present.

You've got Tories and Lib Dems who have become loyal supporters of the coalition.

You've also got Tories and Lib Dems who don't like the coalition and perhaps think it's a bit of a sell out from their own sides point of view.

You've also got Labour activists who are very keen on calling Clegg a sell out, even though the exact same people were happily cheering Tony Blair over Iraq, ID cards, PFI and so on. Whilst they have lots of fair comments to make it might just help if they recognized the failures of their own side. As it stands a lot of Blairites are acting as if the general public has the memory of a goldfish.

It has to be said though, that the general view I hear outside of the internet is that people are OK with the coalition for the moment. Whether or not that will still be the case after the budget is another matter but there you go.

Firstly, Labour and the Lib Dems despise each other at local government level. Admittedly the Tories also despise the Lib Dems at local government level but all the same there is bad blood. A lot of people in the Labour party would have found the Lib Dems untrustworthy.

Secondly the arithmetic is against a Lib-Lab coalition. They would need SNP and Plaid Cymru votes as well, which really would make attempting to pass legislation as difficult as herding cats.

Thirdly, there are policy differences on issues such as ID cards where the 2 sides were from what I've heard unwilling to budge. Why Labour can't admit that ID cards are a terrible idea is beyond me but there you go.

Finally, it's quite obvious that a lot of Labour folk have concluded that a spell in opposition would do Labour some good. They could renew and regroup under a new leader while the Tories and Lib Dems make unpopular decisions and possibly start fighting between themselves over policy. It may not take much for the progressive wing of the Lib Dems to get disillusioned by the Con-Lib coalition and the result could be a lot of disaffected Lib Dems returning to Labour.

It involves Ranmoor Halls of Residence, where my dad worked as a caretaker in the 70's. If he were alive today he would be livid at how Sheffield is turning itself into a bannana republic.

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=545...

http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/ELECTION-Hun...

Given that these problems have affected Sheffield Central, where Labour only won by 165 votes, and the problems were worse in the Lib Dem areas of the constituency I am afraid to say that I will not consider Paul Blomfield to be a legitimate member of parliament until the election is re-run.

I'm not impressed with any of the candidates to be honest. They were all too keen on simply reciting their manifestos Rather then engaging with the audience.

The UKIP candidate came off worst. His name is Bush and whilst he seems a nice enough guy his politics are as bad as his American namesake. The difference being that the American Bushes can think on their feet, unlike this chap who was almost totally reliant on simply reading straight from his parties manifesto.

The Labour MP Natascha Engel is a real waffler. She will not give a simple yes/no answer over a 5 minute rambling one that doesn't really answer the question. I think she was trying to bore the audience into voting Labour.

The Conservative candidate is a typical Tory boy. I found him unremarkable, not interested in doing anything for the worse off and he's quite obviously something of a careerist.

The Lib Dem candidate (called Bull, appropriately) is a doctor and has a doctor's manner. However, he also was too reliant on simply reciting his parties platform, which meant he really struggled when the question of business policies came up. I also felt that the Lib Dems are making a lot of promises on taxation and spending which they really can't keep.

I asked a question myself about recall elections. This is in all the parties manifestos but only the worst candidate (the UKIP one) supported it with any degree of sincerity. They others were all very unenthusiastic in supporting their parties manifestos. I get the impression that they would only vote to introduce recall elections with a 3 line whip. I personally would like to see a little more sincere support myself.

IMHO what this constituency really needs is a good strong independent candidate rather then the party lickspittles we have standing for election. As it is North East Derbyshire is going to get a rubbish MP whatever happens.

Now I'm pretty certain there aren't any local elections on May 6th where I live but elsewhere there are local authority elections on the same day as the general election.

Please feel free to comment if you have local elections due. You are also more then welcome to comment on the parties local election campaigns and what the local politics round you is anyway.

http://www.aboutmyvote.co.uk/default.aspx
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdo...
http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/news...

I think it's about time that I did a thread asking about the MP where you live as it's your local MP who you will be voting for or against rather then the party leaders.

My own MP is Natascha Engel, who I'm afraid strikes me as just another careerist party hack. Some links are below

Natascha Engel's website. I personally find her claim to be The Positive Choice For North East Derbyshire to be a bit of a joke as her election leaflets have been little else but negativity about the other parties.
http://www.nataschaengelmp.org.uk /

Wikipedia page
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natasha_Engel

TheWorkForYou profile
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/natascha_...

Guardian profile
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/person/...

...that aside from last night's debate (which I didn't watch) I don't actually think that the Lib Dem's have been running all that brilliant a campaign.

Mind you, I don't think any of them have been fighting a good campaign if truth be told. There's far too much negative campaigning and too much emphasis on trivial rubbish for my liking.

I'm not referring to Stuart MacLennan, who's been deselected as Labour candidate for Moray after calling Cameron a twat, Clegg a bastard and Diane Abbot a fucking idiot on twitter.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/ele...

No, what has annoyed my is the election bumph that I've had from Labour. This included a postal vote application which had a freepost address for Labour in Newcastle, not the electoral comission or the local council.

It doesn't take a genius to work out that postal applications might not be processed by Labour "by accident" if they think that the applicant might not be voting Labour.

Postal voting is far too open to dodgy practices if you ask me.

I used the 38 degrees website on Tuesday to e-mail the candidates in my constituency to ask them to pledge to protect the BBC from overly harsh cuts and saving BBC 6 music.

UKIP didn't let their candidate answer the e-mail, but instead sent out a bizarre Littlejohn-esqe rant from their central office, essentially arguing that the BBC should be more like a low-budget faux news.

It's not the loony views of UKIP that annoy me, so much as their insistance that central office deals with all queries rather then the people actually standing for election who would be supposed to represent constituents if they ever get elected!

So it's confirmed that the election will be on 6 May

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/ele...

I will get out and vote come what may, but I'm not looking forward to what I expect to be a poor campaign from all sides. I'm not looking forward to the next government either. I'm also kind of expecting the next government to be a bad one whoever gets in, what with all the expected cuts.

I think I may repeat some of the UK Parties threads and the Who's Your MP? thread from the last election though.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/20...

For anyone of a progressive bent, the prospect of the Tories returning to power is profoundly depressing. However sick of Gordon Brown people might be, David Cameron is hardly an appealing alternative. So at one level it is cheering to see the Conservatives' poll lead melt away with the winter snow. While a narrow Tory victory remains likely, according to political betting markets, it is not in the bag. But while keeping the Tories out would be heartening in the short term, Gordon Brown's re-election would most likely be disastrous for Labour in the longer term.

Some election victories are a poisoned chalice. With hindsight, it was fortunate for Labour and catastrophic for the Conservatives that John Major won in 1992. Sterling's ejection from the ERM shredded the Tories' reputation for economic competence, and five years of in-fighting, blunders and scandal consigned the Conservatives to the political wilderness after 1997. It seemed for a while as if the party might never win office again. The Tories would surely have bounced back more quickly if they had lost in 1992. Conversely, a Labour victory in 1992 could have been fatal. Had the pound plunged within months of Labour taking office, the party's chances of re-election would have been remote. The Labour government would have marked a brief progressive interregnum between long periods of Conservative dominance.

While we do not have the benefit of hindsight, 2010 feels a lot like 1992. Most people are fed up with the government but unconvinced by the opposition. The ruling party has become too comfortable with power and often seems bereft of purpose. The prime minister is at best uninspiring, more often dismal. Most importantly, the economic outlook is unpromising – and there is a growing chance that a run on the pound will wreak havoc with the recovery and the government's plans. Even if catastrophe is avoided, running Britain in an age of austerity will be a thankless task, especially for politicians who believe in active government.

Tax hikes, spending cuts, curbing public-sector pay, cutting public-sector jobs – does Labour really have the stomach for it? Do Labour politicians want to spend the next five years undoing a lot of what they have achieved over the past 13? Do they honestly think voters will look kindly on them next time around if their sales pitch is that their cuts were "kinder" and more reluctant than the hypothetical cuts voters might have suffered under a Tory government? Even if the economy stages a phoenix-like recovery, will voters thank Labour for it? If Labour scrapes through in 2010, there is a good chance it would face a 1997-style electoral oblivion in 2015. To put it another way, if the choice for Labour is between either an unrewarding extra term in office followed by several terms on the margins or a narrow defeat, a period of renewal and a good chance of returning to government within five years, surely the latter is preferable? Surely only those whose political lifespan is nearing its end, those who depend on Gordon Brown for their advancement, and those who cling to the trappings of office would prefer the former?

And feel free to post on here as well!

http://38degrees.org.uk/page/s/tbiraqqs

Early next year former Prime Minister Tony Blair will give evidence, in public, to the Chilcot Inquiry. Tony Blair made the decision to take us to war in Iraq: this is our chance to shine a light on the decisions and actions that led to his choice.

Blair might try and dodge answering difficult questions by claiming there are security issues: we need to make sure that doesn't happen by demanding that he address questions to which we want the answers in public.

We need to show future leaders of the UK that they will be held accountable for the decisions they make about going to war. The Iraq Inquiry is our chance to put an end to politicians believing they can take decisions without having to address the consequences.

You'll have a much better chance of winning in the first place?

I think we need to start a campaign for a World Cup Haka! Maybe we can get David Beckham to do Morris dancing as response to the Haka as well?