- Fri Apr 21, 2017 9:38 am
To a degree there's some truth in that. As someone qualified to run public consultations (yes, you can qualify in such a thing), one thing you're taught is that there are three types of consultation:
1. Ask 100 people what they want, completely blank slate. Get 100 different answers.
2. Offer a series of distinct options. Better, but someone will offer an option outside the range, or argue that it's not a free choice and that's not fair, and then people will demand type 1 even if they don't know what to do with it if they get it.
3. Offer 1 option, and say "This is what we're planning to do, what do you think of that?" (or do what you want, then ask people what they think of it).
Thing about elections is that they ask rather complex questions. For a start, people might think that they like some things from party A's manifesto, and some things from party B's. But you can't under the present system vote for both. Then there's the next questions of how much is my vote going to count, and how likely is my preferred candidate to achieve any of this. That last one's always the minor parties' bane - you might love them but if they've only got 1 MP what's the point?
"It is not enough to succeed. Others must fail." - Gore Vidal.
"I proved that you're wrong. And if you're wrong, I'm right." - Aaron Eckhart.