OT Olympic stadium etc.

I expect once all the bollocks is over, it will all be demolished. The council round here wants to close the swimming pool so no chance for that lot.

Reply to
harryagain
Loading thread data ...

The government may well intervene to save face on a lot of it, who knows. they need some kind of smoke screen to try to hide the fact that they want to reduce the number of mps so its easier for a conservative vote to get them elected, and need some diversionary measures.

Brian

Reply to
Brian Gaff

In the last election that New Labour won, it was widely predicted beforehand that an even turnout of voters would put them 66 seats ahead in Parliament.

In the event, Labour got about 22 percent of the vote with the Conservatives on a very similar amount, and Labour got its 66 majority.

Perhaps the Conservatives are only moving back to a level playing field.

Terry Fields

Reply to
Terry Fields

The government may well intervene to save face on a lot of it, who knows. they need some kind of smoke screen to try to hide the fact that they want to reduce the number of mps so its easier for a conservative vote to get them elected, and need some diversionary measures.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The reduction in MP's is not to make it easier for them to get elected, it is to save money for the economy.

(Admittedly, the associated boundary changes are to make it easier for them to get elected, but they only need to do that because the previous incumbents gerrymandered the constituencies to make it easier for *them* to get elected. At least the new Tory proposals are objectively fair for both sides.)

tim

Reply to
tim.....

Correct.

This is also essentially true, although to be fair we've never had active gerrymandering in this country (unlike in the US). What has happened is that in recent years there's been a drift of population from the old urban centres (typically Labour-held [1]) into the countryside (typically Tory-held [1]). The Boundary Commission (BC) is tasked with making changes to even out the constituency sizes, based on the most recent census. This is quite a slow process, so the changes that came in for the 2010 election were based on the 2001 census.

When I was living in Cambridgeshire, there were 85000 electors in SE Cambs, compared to 70000 in some urban ones. Thus it was that the Tories in 2005 got more votes than Labour in England IIRC but still less seats.

All that can be said that Labour did was to drag its feet slightly in putting the 2010 changes through Parliament. Usually all sides accept the Boundary Commission changes as fair (there's lots of consultation) and they go through on the nod. This whole process can be seen as being part of the way our Constitution works. [2]

I find it amusing that the LibDems, usually so keen on making the electoral system "fairer", are going to oppose these changes when finally proposed by the Boundary Commission.

[1] but not always, obviously. [2] Anyone who says we haven't got one is invited to read the Wikipedia article on my .sig.
Reply to
Tim Streater

It's a prime case of cutting off ones nose to spite ones face. But if they didn't put their foot down with a firm hand over this they wouldn't be able to demonstrate how much influence they really hold in this coalition. (Insert witty remark here ---> )

Nick

Reply to
Nick Odell

Especially when you read the coalition agreement. All it does is to say that a committee will examine and bring forward proposals for an elected upper house. AFAIK this has been done.

Reply to
Tim Streater

Did anyone really believe that the Olympics would benefit anyone except glory seekers? Supposedly London (after all it is the London Olympics) were to benefit, but in reality even London has lost out. Normally we have a couple of days every Summer in London, but not this year, shudder. In fact I have had three emails from the hotel we normally stay at offering reduced tariffs.

Reply to
Moonraker

It's not necessarily anything to do with constituency size. Suppose in a two party system A wins six seats 6:4 votes and B wins four 3:7. In total A has got 48 votes, B 52 but A has the majority of seats. Much the same as happened in the 1951 general election which brought Churchill back as PM

formatting link

"In the event, despite Labour polling almost a quarter of a million votes more than the Conservative Party (and its National Liberal allies) - and more votes than in the 1950 election - it was the Conservatives who went on to form the next government." I suspect the Conservatives weren't complaining at the unfairness of this!

Reply to
Tony Bryer

All this talk about reducing the number of MPs and yet they are considering Having two MPs for the Isle of Wight. Deciding where the boundary will be will cause real trouble. Robbie>

Reply to
Roberts

I wonder if they will do that before or after it hosts the 2017 World Athletic Championships?

Reply to
ARWadsworth

On the plus side. the Aussies were not commissioned to build the Olympic Stadium or you would still be waiting for the 2013 London Olympics.

Reply to
ARWadsworth

I think each will have a chunk of the mainland too. You can check for yourself on the Boundary Commission website if you're bothered.

Reply to
Tim Streater

Multiplex built Wembley - though the delay in completion might just confirm your opinion.

Reply to
Tony Bryer

I think each will have a chunk of the mainland too.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No, that's exactly what the islanders (successfully) spent 18 months campaigning against. It's excluded from the general rules as are the Western Isle, Orkney and Shetland.

Though the islanders would have been more than happy with a single constituency, so will I accept the charge of Tory gerrymandering by giving it two

tim

Reply to
tim.....

Indeed, and quite a bit is temporary anyway (such as the basketball arena and the water polo arena, some of the others I think - hockey probably for another)) And velodromes and Olympic standard pool/diving aren't exactly thick on the ground so I imagine they will get used.

Reply to
chris French

And all the people who have enjoyed having them in this country, because they attended an event, or because they were a volunteer, or feel they have benefited because they worked there. Or maybe just because they liked them being here.

You should have taken advantage of the offer. From what I can see, central London wasn't really any busier than normal, other than maybe on some bits of the transport system at times.

Reply to
chris French

The Velodrome will be used as a national cycling centre, and the pool will also be used as a national training/ competition centre, both after the removal of most of the seating.

They're still arguing the toss over which (Or indeed any,) football club will take over the main stadium, which will be reduced from its current size to 20,000 seats. The problem is, if they put a standard size football pitch in there, the fans will need binoculars to see the players due to the size of the arena. It's not quite big enough for two pitches for shorter tournaments.

Reply to
John Williamson

Indeed, and quite a bit is temporary anyway (such as the basketball arena and the water polo arena, some of the others I think - hockey probably for another)) And velodromes and Olympic standard pool/diving aren't exactly thick on the ground so I imagine they will get used.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I presume you mean for holding competitions in?

That's not what happened in Montreal, though AIH the swimming arena is the only venue that is still used for sport, but not competitive sport.

It's just a municipal pool that residents can swim for 5 dollars (or whatever) a time

tim

Reply to
tim.....

Bayern Munchen managed to use the Munich Olympic stadium for almost 40 years before moving elsewhere.

Reply to
Martin

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.