Why are you voting Labour? - Another election poll

[E63eeeeee...]

LimaDelta said:

RizzoTheRat said:

Here in NL we have proportional representation, and they just formed a government this week after an election in November, so there's downsides to that too.

Genuine question - if the country can manage without a functioning government for eight months, then is it actually a downside?

Only if you need to change stuff or make decisions. Look at what happened in NI, for example. Belgium famously didn't have a government for over a year iirc. It tends to have less consequence in PR systems because they tend to be make smaller changes and you don't have the periodical lurching that you get with FPTP.

[LimaDelta]

RizzoTheRat said:

LimaDelta said:

Genuine question - if the country can manage without a functioning government for eight months, then is it actually a downside?

IMO, not much of one Belgium survived without one for nearly 2 years. However both NL and BEL have pretty strong regional/federal governments that can bring in provincial regulations so long as they comply with national law.

The problem is that while the system can keep ticking over nothing new can happen, so if you get a big issue like Covid or Ukraine crop up that's outside the normal expectations, they wouldn't have been able to deal with it.

I've often thought of the various governments we've had as two helmsmen, fighting at the wheel of an enormous super tanker. A bit this way, a bit the other way, but the vast institutional inertia of the various branches of the civil service just keeps the tanker plodding along on course. The whole joke of 'it doesn't matter who you vote for, the government always get in' is quite apt IMHO. Sir Humphrey is firmly in charge.

[E63eeeeee...]

LimaDelta said:

RizzoTheRat said:

LimaDelta said:

Genuine question - if the country can manage without a functioning government for eight months, then is it actually a downside?

IMO, not much of one Belgium survived without one for nearly 2 years. However both NL and BEL have pretty strong regional/federal governments that can bring in provincial regulations so long as they comply with national law.

The problem is that while the system can keep ticking over nothing new can happen, so if you get a big issue like Covid or Ukraine crop up that's outside the normal expectations, they wouldn't have been able to deal with it.

I've often thought of the various governments we've had as two helmsmen, fighting at the wheel of an enormous super tanker. A bit this way, a bit the other way, but the vast institutional inertia of the various branches of the civil service just keeps the tanker plodding along on course. The whole joke of 'it doesn't matter who you vote for, the government always get in' is quite apt IMHO. Sir Humphrey is firmly in charge.

I'm not convinced this is true, having worked for the last two. You only have to look at the difference between 2010 and now to see that in effect. Some governments are much better than others at working with the civil service and the broader public sector to get things done. But over a long enough time period, small steering inputs can make significant difference to where you end up. The Tories were much more overtly political in their senior public sector appointments, and policies and legislation do change the civil service and the service they provide. They certainly changed the culture of for example the Home Office quite profoundly, and that kind of thing also causes changes in who is willing to work there.

[LimaDelta]

E63eeeeee... said:

LimaDelta said:

RizzoTheRat said:

LimaDelta said:

Genuine question - if the country can manage without a functioning government for eight months, then is it actually a downside?

IMO, not much of one Belgium survived without one for nearly 2 years. However both NL and BEL have pretty strong regional/federal governments that can bring in provincial regulations so long as they comply with national law.

The problem is that while the system can keep ticking over nothing new can happen, so if you get a big issue like Covid or Ukraine crop up that's outside the normal expectations, they wouldn't have been able to deal with it.

I've often thought of the various governments we've had as two helmsmen, fighting at the wheel of an enormous super tanker. A bit this way, a bit the other way, but the vast institutional inertia of the various branches of the civil service just keeps the tanker plodding along on course. The whole joke of 'it doesn't matter who you vote for, the government always get in' is quite apt IMHO. Sir Humphrey is firmly in charge.

I'm not convinced this is true, having worked for the last two. You only have to look at the difference between 2010 and now to see that in effect. Some governments are much better than others at working with the civil service and the broader public sector to get things done. But over a long enough time period, small steering inputs can make significant difference to where you end up. The Tories were much more overtly political in their senior public sector appointments, and policies and legislation do change the civil service and the service they provide. They certainly changed the culture of for example the Home Office quite profoundly, and that kind of thing also causes changes in who is willing to work there.

I'm sure you're right, but as a layman outsider it feels that way sometimes.