Pros and Cons (and Libdems)

I'm still not quite sure what to make of the amazing events of the last few days, but a few thoughts:

1. I'm delighted that the Conservatives and Libdems are aiming high: a coalition rather than a laissez fair 'understanding', coupled with a fixed term parliament that will lock them into it for 5 years. There appears to have been some genuine give and take over policy. For a floating voter like me, who supported roughly 30-40% of each parties policies, this only way of getting a government which delivers a majority of stuff I agree with. Of course, it could go the other way and end up with all the policies I'd oppose, but early signs are ok: no Euro, no ID cards, progressive taxation, though I did think the immigration amnesty idea had something going for it.

2. This could be good news for Labour: as the only major opposition party left, if anything does go wrong then they get 100% of the benefits, as well as plenty of time to rebuild after the end of the Blair/Brown years. It is much more high stakes for the Libdems: this kind of coalition would be the norm under PR, so if they can't make it work, any argument for PR would be holed below the waterline.

3. There are a lot of cynical voices about the coalition, and maybe it's just my optimistic temperament, but I'm not one of them. In our parish there are 2 clergy, we're quite different from each other in many ways, but know that the best way to run it is to talk things through, agree a common approach, and run things as a team. This kind of thing happens all over the place. For politicians it will be a massive culture change, but the two leaders are themselves both quite new to all this (both entered Parliament this century), and perhaps a wholesale culture change is possible. If they manage it, great.

4. Will the 'New Politics' involve the rebuilding of the House of Commons? The chamber is organised for adversarial politics, unlike many more recently built chambers which are circular or multi-sided. Maybe they should move across the road to the circular Church House synod chamber - might generate some much needed rental income for the CofE.

5. Will the spirit of co-operation infect the media too? Like the House chamber, the press is based on adversarial politics. Come to think of it, not just the press: the spirit of Paxman lurks over everything from the Apprentice to Dragons Den to the X Factor, we love our bear pits. What happens if politics tries to move out of the bear pit and refuses to offer routine bloodletting for public entertainment? Will it be allowed to? Can journalists act like grown ups too? I would love to see a change of political culture - and culture in general - to something less adversarial. Perhaps that's enough to hope for. As Simon Parke puts it in his cracker of a book Desert Child

"The message... is that we turn our attention to the Great Possibility, the Grand Miracle, the Massive Moment, the Huge Resurrection"

"And what is that?"

"That we might actually do what we're doing with a little more kindness."

Pause

"That we might actually do what we're doing with a little more kindess?" Musselly was checking that he had heard aright. Peter, however, confirmed the astounding declaration.

"Indeed. That we might do what we're doing, only with a little more kindness."

The earth stopped revolving for a moment in shock as the two men considered the implications of the words just spoken; as the two men felt the fall-out from the bombshell just lobbed into the conversation. The visitor spoke first.

"Now that is a very revolutionary thought, my friend."

6. It's a good way to bury bad policies: there are a few duffers and vote-losers in there which can be quietly shelved in the name of compromise, on both sides. If both sides of an argument are represented within a government, then someone somewhere is right, and hopefully no party is arrogant enough to think it has all the answers.

7. It's important not to get carried away. Tony Blair wasn't the Messiah, at times he was just a very naughty boy, and neither are these two. There are some things that politicians can't fix: I was in a meeting recently over a local trouble spot, and the overwhelming feeling was one of impotence over the ability of local government, agencies, etc. to do anything significant to change things. Bill Hybels writes:

"For 8 years during the '90s I went to Washington DC every month to meet in the foremost centres of power with some of the highest elected officials in our country. What I discovered was not how powerful those people are, but how limited their power really is. All they can actually do is rearrange the yard markers on the playing field of life (I'm guessing that's an Americanism). They can't change a human heart. They can't heal a wounded soul. They can't turn hatred into love. They can't bring about repentance, forgiveness, reconciliation, peace. They can't get to the core problem of the kid I saw in the airport (an 8 year old boy punching his 5 year old brother in the face then bashing his head into the floor) and millions of others like him.

I scrolled through every other option I could think of, considering what they have to offer. Businessmen can provide sorely needed jobs. Wise educators can teach useful knowledge of the world. Self-help programs can offer effective methods of behaviour modification. Psychology can aid self-understanding. And all of this is good. But can any of it truly transform the human heart?"

So we carry on praying for our leaders, and I'll be praying that it works - that's partly the optimist in me that likes to see people trying something new, and partly the knowledge that if it doesn't work then that won't really do anyone any good.

Latest Opinion Polls: Part 2

A few more of the latest opinion polls, many of them commissioned by the Sun but never published (allegedly). I've left a few of the timings in, for a bit of context. Feel free to add your own in the comments, or join in the fun on Twitter

#latestopinionpoll Change, change change 35% turn, turn, turn, 27% Tora! Tora! Tora! 29% Oi! Oi! Oi! 1%

#latestopinionpoll seat projections - Con: Hot Seat, Lab: Ejector Seat, LibDem: Moral High Chair, Bercow: Naughty Step.

#latestopinionpoll chance of seeing: George Osborne 5% Vince Cable 6% Hazel Blears -5% Window Dressing 1% Charles Clarke 1% now, 90% on Sat. about 11 hours ago from TweetDeck

@gerrardus: #latestopinionpoll Dont Know 35% Dont Care 21% Dont Dare 16% Dont Count 75% about 12 hours ago from TweetDeck

#latestopinionpoll Bird in the Hand 66% Bird in the Bush 33%

theblogofkevin: HVIGNFY #latestopinionpoll for PM: Ian Hislop 20%, Paul Merton cheese and tomato, Libel Lawyers 30%, Weekly Guest Host 50% about 22 hours ago from web

RT @deiknuo: #latestopinionpoll too tired to put together a government on Friday? David Cameron 40% Gordon Brown 35% Nick Clegg 25% about 23 hours ago from TweetDeck

theblogofkevin: Quite Interesting #latestopinionpoll to run the country: Stephen Fry 40% Alan Davies 30% Jo Brand 15% Bill Bailey 10% any politician 5% 1 day ago from Twitterrific

#latestopinionpoll Who Wants to Be a Millionaire? 36% X Factor 30% Total Wipeout 26% CBeebieNP 2% 1 day ago from TweetDeck

latestopinionpoll swingometer 26% swing low sweet chariot 50% (0% in Scotland) swing and a prayer 24% swingeing cuts £75bn

#latestopinionpoll staying afloat 35% tactical vote 30% resignation note 25%

#latestopinionpoll Floating 20% Voting 68% Gloating 38% Emoting 23%

gerrardus: #LatestOpinionPoll Morris Men 35% Mori's Men 31% Mirror Men 28% 2 days ago from TweetDeck

@marvovox #latestopinionpoll flying fig 25%; flying pig 29%; flying the flag 10%; grounded by #ashtag 36%. Roll on Friday!

kouya: #latestopinionpoll Gorden Brown 5%, Golden Brown 25%, No More Heroes 50%, Go Buddy Go 20%

devil you know 20% devil you don't 20% deep blue C 20% supping with a long spoon 40%

Nick Robinson 5% Heath Robinson 25% Mrs Robinson 70% Swiss (tax exile) Family Robinson 0% rate

davidmkeen: #latestopinionpoll Blair? 20% BLAIR! 20% Blur 20% Back to normal 20% WMD contingency 20% 5 days ago from web

#latestopinionpoll Exclusive 36% Inclusive 31% Reclusive 25% Abusive 2% 5 days ago from web

Ordinandy: #latestopinionpoll Frankie Says Relax; Simon Says tap your nose; Confucius say Man who eat many prunes get good run for money. 6 days ago from web

Ordinandy: #latestopinionpoll Conservative supporters say Cameron 100% Lib Dems say Clegg 100% Labourites say Brown 100% 6 days ago from web

robinsons: #LatestOpinionPoll 155% Education 58% Education 239% Education 6 days ago from Tweetings

@gerrardus: #latestopinionpoll Liverpool Game 70% Rushden Game 25% Fulham Game 4% #LeadersDebate 1%


new labour 42% labour intensive 35% hard labour 27% new leader 22%


Sinner 22% Spinner 3% Sue 0% Sky -50% Casting the first stone 100% #bigotgate


@gerrardus Blue 34% Yellow 30% Red in the Face 29%

Election Day thoughts

Soul Politics has already had most of the thoughts I was going to have, excellent post and analysis of some of the key issues. So I'll save you time and not write anything.

Meanwhile the BBC has produced an election night party pack, if you were planning on staying up, and had any friends. I really hope the BBC gets its act together this evening, the last results show I watched on there was dreadful. I imagine Twitter will be a much better way of keeping up with what's really going on, but it doesn't have a decent Swingometer.

Vote with your Heart. Or perhaps your Liver.

It's make your mind up time

sources here, here, and here. Much better than real election posters.

On the subject of voting with parts of your body, apparently the Sun has an army of Page 3 girls on show today (scroll to the 9.15am entry), with the message that Labour and the Libdems may conspire to remove exploitation of the female body from mass market tabloids. Somehow this is a reason to vote for Cameron: Vote Tory, Get Totty. Don't Vote with your Head, Vote with your Genitals. No thanks.

Now, back to serious analysis of the issues.

Deciding Who to Vote For

Having trouble deciding who to vote for? There's sophisticated things like this* which show you whose policies you most agree with.

Or for something simpler:

Ht Mike Smithson

*mind you, I didn't go all the way through it so, being the Telegraph, it probably tells you to vote Conservative whatever your choices.

If Nothing Else, Name Me

Had lunch last week with someone who used to be a county councillor for one of the political parties. I mentioned that in some of our local election literature (guess who from), it refers to 'Tory' without naming the candidate, whilst referring to its own person by name several times.

He responded that one of the rules of campaigning where he'd been councillor was that you never referred to your opponent by name. It may make political sense, but I was quite taken aback. Naming is right at the core of creation - Adam and Eve are named to signify who they are, they are given the power of naming the creatures, and all through the Bible the names of the characters, not least of God himself, are more than mere labels, they say something deep and important about the people themselves. A name is a source of identity, revelation, personhood, dignity, value.

So to deny someone a name is dehumanising, it's a refusal to treat them as a person of equal standing with myself. To be created in God's image is to be named - singled out by our name as of unique value, singled out by our name as an indicator of our purpose, character, and hopes. At baptism we work on the 'christening' element by asking the father to name the child. That power of naming is a way of conferring identity, as an act of love, and a taking of responsibility for them.

And a political party which refuses to name, and therefore dignify, its opponent - what would they do to anyone else who dares to stand against them or disagree with them? It may be a trivial thing, but it's really bugging me.

Latest Opinion Polls - you heard it here first....

A few polls which haven't made the headlines, courtesy of Twitter:

#Marathon 2% Sofa 98%

kouya: #latestopinionpoll good for the garden 30% spoiled my weekend 30% the weather is back to normal 30% never believe the MET office 10%

#latestopinionpoll Change Britain Needs 39% Change of Strategy 32% Change of Trousers 29% Change of Leader 25%

All in this together 33% In the altogether 25% All for one and one for all 32% All in Wrestling 10%

@gerrardus: #LatestOpinionPoll Clowns 27% Jokers 33% Stuck in the Middle with EU 31%

@robinsons: #LatestOpinionPoll #NickCleggsFault 100%

@Bizarre57 #LatestOpinionPoll Compo 28% Clegg 33% Foggy 32% Norah Batty 7%

#latestopinionpoll Securing My Job 40% Changing What I Believe In 33% Changing Our Security £100bn

#latestopinionpoll Lies 25% Damned Lies 25% Statistics 25% Contingency 27%

Its Goodnight from Me 26% And Its Goodnight from Him 29% Nick Clegg 45%

@gerrardus: #LatestOpinionPoll Sauron 33% Elrond 32% Saruman 35% Elrond demands proportional representation for hobbits.

@sadbuttrue: #latestopinionpoll 87% of statistics are made up, and the rest are lying ;)

#LatestOpinionPoll Hung 0% Drawn 0% Quartered 25%, 25%, 25%, 25%

@gerrardus: #LatestOpinionPoll Rock 49% Hard Place 51%

@deiknuo: #LatestOpinionPoll Stay in Europe 23% Move GB to Australia 32% Become a South Pacific Island 45%

The Deep Blue Sea 45% Caught 30% The Devil 25%

#LatestOpinionPoll ComRes 25% YouGov 18% Populus 26% Opinium 21% Angus Reid only standing in Scotland everything points to a hung pundit.

Any failure to add up to 100% is down to random sampling error. Or something.

Yeovil Election Hustings: Update

Update: more discussion here: comment 5 gives the exact reasons why the debate is happening as it is.

there's been some amendment to the original format of the local hustings event on 30th April. Here's the final communique:

General Election Hustings Meeting, Friday April 30th (organised by The Town Centre Churches)
This is an open meeting to which all are welcome, beginning at 8.00pm at Vicarage Street Methodist Church. The only way we can hear from all candidates is for them to take the platform individually one after the other - the reasons for this will be explained by The Chair at the beginning of our time together.

Each candidate will speak for 2-3 mins and then respond to questions. If you have a question please write it down and submit it to a steward at the door on arrival. If your question is chosen you will be requested to ask it from the floor by The Chair. We are looking forward to this opportunity of hearing from all of our parliamentary candidates.

It's a great shame for voters that we won't get to see issues discussed face to face, and a great shame that the candidates haven't been able to work out a way to give us that opportunity. On the plus side, chairing the 'debate' on the night will be a lot easier!

here's a list of the 5 local candidates.

Is there a 'Christian' Vote?

Plenty of chatter around the blogosphere today about 'doing God' and the election:

BBC: 'Will Christians Swing the 2010 Election'? The headline oversells the article: the answer is almost definitely 'no', but it's an interesting survey of some of the issues. Some good comments, including one from a friend in Martock. Nice to see that Somerton and Frome candidates managed to share a platform for hustings, latest news is that the Yeovil candidates don't seem to be able to manage it, which is shocking. (though as Andy notes in the comments below, S&F don't have a BNP candidate, which makes things a lot easier)

Ekklesia think the idea of a 'Christian Vote' is a myth. V impressed by their 'General Election' news section, good way of keeping up with the issues without being sidetracked by the beauty contest.

This Telegraph piece picks up on an article written by Nick Clegg for the Church of England newspaper, and is sceptical about his claim that his views have Christian roots, given his declared atheism. Cranmer, unsurprisingly, weighs in. Ekklesias Jonathan Bartley points out that Clegg held the same views back in 2008, as recorded in a Third Way interview, and is sceptical about the Telegraph.

Meanwhile Nick Baines reflects on whether he agrees with his namesake, and ends with this: it is possible that the real bonus of a potentially higher turnout than was originally feared will be the marginalisation of the extremist parties (who do well when moderate voters stay at home)..

Other comment
'Letter from Mat' on how loving our neighbour translates into voting.

A poll taken by Premier before the campaign started, already looking quite dated, on how Christians intended to vote. Over 1/3 weren't yet convinced (the survey ended on 12 April) about any of the 3 main leaders. Comments on this at British Religion in Numbers, a recently launched site which will absorb/waste hours of times for stats geeks. Full data set for the poll here - the sample size is just over 400, but it's interesting to see what the top issues are.

Party Policies on Mental Health

Mental Health is one of a whole herd of elephants in the room at this General Election. (Others include the epidemic of absent fathers, the need for an economic model based on something other than consumer credit, housing and house prices, Europe, Iraq etc.). Roughly 1 in 4 adults have an episode of depression at some point in their lives, with 36 million prescriptions for anti-depressants issued in 2008 (up 2m on 2007), and 1 in 6 adults currently medicated for mental illness.

There is both a massive personal, emotional and relational cost to all this, as well as an economic one. It's one symptom of the 'broken society' which the Conservatives seem to have forgotten about (how do you build a Big Society out of broken pieces?)

So what can 17 million mentally ill adults hope for from the next Government?
Labour: We will pioneer better mental health care and tackle the scourge of mental illness. Over the next Parliament more than 8,000 new therapists will ensure access to psychological therapy for all who need it as we seek to change our society’s attitudes to mental illness. (4:4)

we will work to reduce the number of women, young and mentally ill people in prison. (5:5)

(in a section on military policy) We will continue to strengthen mental health provision in partnership with the Combat Stress charity, and roll out our Welfare Pathway to give personnel and their families better support and advice (10:4)

reform of the GP contract to help ensure those with late-life depression and anxiety are diagnosed and supported; and better services for those with dementia and Alzheimer’s so that every area of the country has access to psychological therapy, counselling and memory clinics (6:6)

• Access to psychological therapy for those who need it. is one of 5 highlighted goals for the NHS on page 4:2, and is repeated as 'step 20' of '50 steps to a future fair for all' at the end of the manifesto.

Liberal Democrat:
We will help the NHS work better with the money it has by using the savings we have found to protect front-line services, such as cancer treatment, mental health care, maternity services, dementia care and preventive medicine. (p33)

• Prioritise dementia research within the health research and development budget. (p41)

• Improve access to counselling for people with mental health problems, by continuing the roll-out of cognitive and behavioural therapies. (p41)

Because of the rising costs of treatments and an ageing population, there will be particular pressure on services like cancer treatment, mental health care, maternity services, and dementia care; only by going through this process of finding savings elsewhere can we protect these services in the coming years (p40)

Move offenders who are drug addicts or mentally ill into more appropriate secure accommodation. (p74)

the appendix forecasts a cut in 'the economic costs of mental health problems' of £425m ni 2011-12, rising to £605m in 2014-15. (p102)

Mental health is also included in the index, and the 4 references above are all covered.

Conservative: a search for 'mental' found dozens of references to 'departmental', 'fundamental' and 'environmental'. And these..
• enable welfare-to-work providers and employers to purchase services from Mental Health Trusts; and,
• increase access to effective ‘talking’ therapies (p49)

• pilot a mental health follow-up service for those who have left the (armed) services (p107)

Update: see the 3rd comment, where our local Conservative candidate gives a bit more detail of their policies on mental health - thankyou Kevin.

Comment: mostly common ground here, and more from Labour and Libdems than the Conservatives. The frustrating thing is that much of it is about dealing with symptoms - more therapy, more dementia support, more support for forces veterans. Labour is the only party to talk about attitudes, but only does so briefly. There are structural factors in our society which contribute to mental illness: family breakup, stress, consumerism, advertising, poverty, the abolition of a weekly day of rest, etc. We've had a historic opportunity, with the debt crunch, to ask questions about the kind of society and culture we want to be. But who is asking those questions?

other links:
Mental Nurse summarises policies from Libdems & UKIP, and Labour and Conservative. Worth a look as this is someone within the mental health sector.
Discussion board links to Green party policies, and some debate.
A summary of policies at Rethink, with links to other signifiacant party policy documents.

Hustings: Do You Invite the BNP?

Update: according to this 1 in 3 constituencies have a church-based hustings event going on. How many will have BNP representation?

Our local paper had a story last week of a local hustings event which was facing some problems: one candidate wasn't going to attend if the BNP were invited. As a 'hustings' is traditionally all the local candidates, there may well be others who won't attend if the BNP aren't invited. What to do? For churches, there's the added issue of giving the BNP a platform on church premises. Here's some thoughts from the CofE election/BNP guide:

Churches are under no legal obligation to include the BNP in election hustings meetings, or give space to such parties for public meetings, if they consider this ‘association’ could have detrimental affect on their reputation and activities (as charities).

It is open to charities to decline to invite to a public meeting a representative from a political party which advocates policies which are in contravention of the charity’s objects, or whose presence or views are likely to increase the chance of public disorder or of alienating the charity’s supporters. (Charity Commission Guidance, May 2009) (Charity Commission)

If candidates participate in an event that does not include all candidates in a constituency they need to declare this on their election returns. Organiser should be able to provide notional costings for the event which are split between the candidates participating.


…when a husting organiser invites candidates on a selective basis, the [Electoral] Commission considers that the provision of a public platform for those candidates who attend would constitute notional expenditure for the candidate … and also a non-cash donation, if valued at more than £50. (Electoral Commission)

More election hustings resources here and here. Both the Churches Together and CARE hustings guides point out that churches may be in contravention of their charity objects by inviting the BNP, though they point out that the norm is to invite all the candidates. I guess there may also be police advice to consider - if public disorder is likely, then churches may get police advice not to invite the BNP anyway. Mind you, there may then be demonstrations from BNP supporters, so this may cut both ways.

I'd be interested to hear what people are doing in other parts of the country. I know there is another hustings event being planned by some of our local churches, and no doubt they are running into this issue!

Party Manifestos - Not Doing God Either. Which is OK.

Here's what a search for 'faith', 'God', 'church', 'religion' and related terms gets you from this weeks 3 main manifestos:

Liberal Democrats (p36)
"We will.....Allow parents to continue to choose faith-based schools within the
state-funded sector and allow the establishment of new faith schools. We will ensure that all faith schools develop an inclusive admissions policy and end unfair discrimination on grounds of faith when recruiting staff, except for those principally responsible for optional religious instruction."

Labour (section 7 p6)
Faith is enormously important to millions of people in Britain, shaping their values and the way they live. We respect the importance of belief and welcome the contribution that people of faith make to our communities and society more widely. We will actively combat extremist groups who promote fear, hatred and violence on the basis of faith or race.

Conservative
nothing

for comparison:
UKIP

one passing mention of faith schools, and "oppose disestablishment of the Church of England"

"UKIP believes in civic nationalism, which is open and inclusive to anyone who wishes to identify with Britain, regardless of ethnic or religious background. We reject the "blood and soil" ethnic nationalism of extremist parties. UKIP opposes multiculturalism and political correctness, and promotes uniculturalism - aiming to create a single British culture embracing all races and religions" (p13)

"Religious school materials must not teach hatred of the western world and must be congruent with British values. Sharia courts must not override UK law" (p14)

Green Party: manifesto due out tomorrow.

Comments:
1. On one level, it's good to see that none of the main parties is blowing the religious dog whistle very loudly. This also makes it a bit more difficult for anyone trying to argue that it's a Christian duty to vote for one party or another, though some are having a valiant try.

2. The lack of a simplistic 'x party at prayer' makes for some serious debates about the relative priority of other issues which should exercise Christians - international aid; military and weapons policy; support for families and communities; wise and ethical finance; just taxation; promotion of a culture of love, justice and forgiveness rather than lust, greed and scapegoating; and so on. None of the traditional trump cards are available - for example no party has a stated policy on reducing the abortion limit, which has often been the Ace of Spades for Catholic leaders. The Conservatives are the only party overtly supporting marriage, but beyond the tax allowance there's not much: there's a minor commitment to relationship support in their manifesto, but no money or quantities specified.

3. Which all makes a hung parliament a more tempting result. If you only agree with some policies from each party, it's the only chance you have of getting all the policies you agree with put into action. Or none of them....!

Yeovil Election Hustings, 30th April

Update: there's been a tweak to the format.

Just had this through:

Just a note to say the Town Centre LEP are arranging an Election Hustings on Friday 30th April 8.00pm at Vicarage Street Methodist Church. We are inviting the three main parties. This is an open meeting for anyone in our churches (town centre and beyond) and members of the public. The meeting will be chaired by a clergy person. We would love to receive questions for the candidates - these are to be brought along on the night in written form (stating the name of the questioner) -given to a steward at the door - the questions will then be grouped into themes by a small team of people before the start time and given to the chair.

At the moment two of the three main parties have agreed to attend - we are awaiting a third response!

I've just had my first bit of electioneering, a Libdem at the door just as we sat down for tea. The leaflet about David Laws was fairly brief, and reasonably positive, but had the mandatory Libdem bar chart showing that Labour/Tory/UKIP/George Bush 'can't win here' (in our case it's Labour), and the claim that the local Conservative candidate lives in Kingston.

I checked this, and Kevin Davis (for it is he)'s blog bears it out. Having been selected in July 2007, it does seem to be taking a while to sell up and relocate. Kevin writes : They of course neglect totally that I have been trying to sell my house for two years during Brown's recession, that I have pledged to move her and have a home here (and I still will, win or lose), that neither Laws nor Ashdown came from this area. Kevin also comments below about his housing situation.

The blog is a real curates egg - all I'll say is that I much prefer reading people who are being positive about what they stand for, rather than just having ago at everyone else.

More Yeovil Election info:
David Laws site (sitting Libdem MP)
Lee Skevington (Labour candidate) twitter.
Kevin Davis on twitter
list of candidates (BBC)

Looking forward to the hustings, just need to think of some questions that the candidates won't have pre-digested answers to. Like how they'll promote immigration from overseas to the Yeovil area so that we can continue to have NHS dentistry.

Election Resources for Churches

There are probably loads out there, but here's a few for starters:

Evangelical Alliance page, with ideas on how churches can play a role, and summaries of the key policies of each party - that bit is evolving, but will save a lot of trawling through manifestoes.

Make the Cross Count run by Care, helpful prayer leaflet and some Bible study resources to get people thinking.

Christians in Politics including a resource pack for a 'Politics Sunday'.

There'll no doubt be other resource sites out there - if you spot any, let me know....

At the moment I'd vote for a hung parliament, because that's the only possible chance of getting all the policies I agree with. There's no one party which really convinces me, though the issues are different with each one. But that's a different post...