If It Ain't Broke...

I won’t be getting Election Fever this year. I’ve been innoculated against it by 41 years of hype and disappointment. However, since I’m going to have to live with the outcome of this ruddy debacle, I suppose I’d better get involved with it.

Yesterday’s election theme was “Electoral Reform”. A lot of people seem to be getting excited about Proportional Representation. (I know... get a life!)

Personally, I think it’s a daft idea. After all, wasn’t that the electoral method that made Nick Griffin MEP for the North West? I wouldn’t mind but he’s not even from the North West! (They come over here taking our jobs...)

That’s the problem with Proportional Representation. It tends to give a slice of power to exactly the kind of people who should never have it – the kind of people you wouldn’t leave in charge of a pan of hot milk, let alone a nation.

The only sensible people who want Proportional Representation are the Lib Dems. And fair enough – in the long run, it’s the only way they are ever going to have a proper say.

The other two main parties don’t like it though.

Despite constantly telling us that they want “Change”, the Tories are fairly keen that the electoral system stays just the way it is. And who can blame them? Short of them getting a credible leader or some actual policies, the First Past the Post system is probably their best chance of being elected in future.

Labour don’t want to change it either. It’s the last thing they want. But they have to pretend to be a bit flexible just in case they need to do a deal with the Lib Dems after the election.

Anyway, the point is that, for once, I think that Labour and the Conservatives are right. So here are four good reasons not to adopt Proportional Representation.

Reason 1: The Scottish National Party

Scotland has got lots of oil. If Scotland became independent of Britain, they could lord it over us in the same way that the oil-rich nations of the Middle East do today. That means they could do anything and we would have to carry on being nice to them. The Scots might well follow other oil barons and buy up all our best football clubs. (Let’s face it – theirs are crap.) Before you know it they’ll have enormous yachts, racehorses and an atrocious human rights record. And we’ll have to grin and bear it.

Reason 2: Plaid Cymru

The Welsh have no oil. They used to have loads of coal but those days are sadly over. Now they have to eke out a living running caravan parks and down-at-heel fun fairs. And all in the pissing rain. They don’t really want power as such. What would they do with it? But a bit of sympathy wouldn’t go amiss. And they do like a good moan.

Reason 3: The British National Party

Although they are not a racist party, and have no links at all to Nazi ideology, they still want anyone who is not pinky-white to go and live somewhere else. They also don’t like gay people, although it’s unclear exactly what they would do with them. Send them back to Queerland, probably.

The BNP don’t have a clue about running the country or representing their constituency. They are also a bit shaky on History. And facts. But what they lack in actual knowledge, they make up for in enthusiasm. At least their supporters will bother to vote.

Nick Griffin is rumoured to be stepping down after the election in favour of someone who doesn’t come across as quite so much of a snivelling fascist worm. It will probably be a nice, cuddly, middle-aged woman with a respectable husband and well-behaved children. I’m guessing this time they will go for someone who has never been filmed doing a Nazi salute or gone on record as saying the holocaust never happened.

Reason 4: The UK Independence Party

They want us to get out of Europe and they want to make sure we keep the pound. I’m not sure how either of these things would help us. But it would certainly make the UKIP people feel better about life. UKIP seems to be made up of extremely posh old men who wish they were still living in 1929. Some people suspect that UKIP share the BNP’s hatred of everyone who is black, or gay, or who speaks with a funny accent. But unlike the BNP, the UKIP chaps are far too decent to make such a song and dance about it. They might be bonkers, but they are not vulgar.

So there you have it. The First Past the Post system has one simple advantage over Proportional Representation – it protects the sane majority against the lunatic minority. It’s a kind of filter through which extreme Nationalist views have so far failed to pass.

And, frankly, thank goodness for that.

Money Troubles

Yesterday I decided to try and be all clever and grown-up and listen to the Budget.

I know! What was I thinking?

Actually, some of it was good. I liked the shouty bits where everyone starting laughing and jeering. I even joined in a couple of times.

But the talky bits... well... they weren't so good. "Tax Relief... blah blah blah... Stamp Duty... blah blah blah... ISA's blah blah blah blah blah..."

I'm 41, I'm a dad and I have a university degree. I probably ought to be interested in all this stuff. But, in truth, I'd rather watch seven hours of golf. And I hate golf.

The only good bits were when they started having a bit of a barney about whose fault everything was and what they were going to do about it. But even that felt a bit like listening to your mum and dad have an argument.

All married couples know that financial problems are the source of many a good row. We've all stood there in the kitchen with our loved one, arguing the toss about who spent what and where all the credit card debt came from. He wants to invest the savings in a new flat screen TV - she wants to blow it all on shoes for the kids. And food. And the gas bill.

Well, the Budget was a bit like that. And, like all marital tiffs, it wasn't pretty. I mean I know Cameron was a bit upset but I couldn't help feeling that a lot of what he was saying wasn't strictly fair or even true. But then Darling did seem a bit shifty - like a man who's been caught watching the next door neighbour sunbathing. In the end I felt like a confused child, waiting for the break-up and wondering who I was going to end up having to live with.

At first, Alistair "the husband" Darling tried the old soft soap approach. He admitted that times were going to be a bit hard - not that that was anyone's fault - times were hard for everyone. But he said that, basically, it would all come out in the wash and there was nothing to worry about. We just had to leave it to him and everything would be alright. "It's not all doom and gloom," he said (I'm paraphrasing here, but sod it - I'm not Hansard), "there is some good news too." And he went on to tell us some things about mortgages and stamp duty and such like. (OK I admit I drifted off at that point).

Anyway, he said his piece and sat down and, for a minute at least, he seemed to have got away with it.

But he should have known better. Wifey Cameron went ruddy ballistic. "HAVE YOU SEEN HOW MUCH WE OWE?! One hundred and seventy five billion zillion squillion English pounds! And you want to go buying more stuff?!"

"But..but...'" stammered Darling, "... we need to invest in the country so people don't all lose their jobs."

"Oh, right!" yelled Cameron, "And where are you going to find the money for all that? Down the back of the sofa?"

"Well we could take out another loan...?"

"WHAT?!! No, I'm sorry. We have to tighten our belts. You're going to have to sell that record collection of yours. And a few hospitals... Actually, you know what? Why don't you just GO! Me and the kids will be better off without you. You can leave us to clear up your mess! As usual!"

(Which, to anyone who remembers the 80s, might seem a bit rich.)

Anyway, I don't think I'll bother listening to the budget again. I think I'll do what everyone else does and wait for the newspapers to explain it the next day. Somehow they manage to sum it all up in a paragraph: "Petrol's up. Alcohol's up. But if you've got seven kids, a donkey and you were born on a Tuesday, you can claim tax relief on any income earned from juggling fire, as long as you can be bothered to fill in a 72 page application form and queue for six hours."

I'll read the first few sentences of that. Then I'll turn to the sports pages and forget all about it.

Vote For Change?

I was very excited yesterday when I received a letter from David Mowat, our Conservative candidate, telling us all about why we should vote for him.

"Give me five minutes of your time and your vote," he said, "I will give you five years of mine."

Well, that sounds very generous!

But hang on a minute. There's nearly two hundred thousand people in Warrington. If we each give him five minutes of our time, that's a million minutes. Which is actually nearly two years. So we'd be giving him two years of our time.

That seems a lot less dramatic than the "five minutes for five years" originally offered. But even so, we're getting five years in exchange for two. So we're still getting a good deal.

Or are we? Apparently not. It turns out that David isn't giving us his time at all. He actually wants paying for it. He isn't, as first seemed, offering to perform the role of MP for nothing. He's kind of hoping to get about £325,000 for his trouble (although the prospects for prodigious expense claims are not what they used to be).

Change

Of course, we, the voters, won't go empty-handed either. In return for the million minutes we collectively spend voting for him, he promises to give us CHANGE.

David likes "Change". He talks about it a lot. There's a basic assumption that "Change" is good.

But I'm not sure if "Change" is good. It all depends a bit on what it is he's thinking of changing.

Having read his letter, I'm still not really sure what he's got in mind. And, to be honest, he doesn't seem at all sure himself. Or, if he is, he's decided to keep it a secret for the time being. Perhaps he wants to give us all a little surprise later on.

Surprise!

But, just like "Change", surprises aren't always welcome. If it was surprises I wanted, I probably would have voted for Jeremy Beadle. Jeremy would at least have spiced up Prime Minister's Question Time. "Oh my God, there's a suicide bomber in the Chamber! Oh no...ha ha ha...it's just the Home Secretary wearing a rucksack and a funny false beard!"

But I'm a bit worried about David Mowat. I'm worried in case he changes things that I would rather not change.

What if he changes all the road signs and replaces them with huge sticks of Peparami? What if he changes our hospitals and turns them into jungle-themed fun parks complete with performing animals? What if he repeals the law of gravity and we all float into space? Speaking personally, those are changes I wouldn't want to see.

Then, on the other hand, he might have some great ideas for change. What if he wants to change the rules of cricket so that the players all have to wear enormous rubber boots like they used to on It's A Knockout? That would be marvellous! Or he might be thinking of changing the way we experience time so that we can go backwards as well as forwards! That would be cool. Although it could be quite confusing, I suppose.

Anyway, whatever these CHANGES turn out to be, we are assured that life will be better for families. And the poor. And the sick. And young people. And old people. And... well... everyone. Particularly David Mowat. He will be cockahoop with his swanky new job. Blimey. He already writes to us every month. What will he be like if he actually gets elected? There'll be no shutting him up!

Why Vote for Change?

David assures us that he won't be the only one with a new job. There'll be more jobs for us too. (Phew! Thank goodness.) And the economy, well, that will be brilliant.

He will also give us better local healthcare. Although - like the five years of he time he said he'd give us - he doesn't mention that we might have to pay for it.

But How Will This Miracle Happen?

So how will all this be achieved? Well, David doesn't go into details. He probably didn't have enough space to fit it all in - after all, this latest mailshot is only 4 tabloid-sized pages long.

But who knows. Maybe someday David Mowat and his chums will get around to telling us what they are actually going to do.

Now that would make a "Change".