Sandi Toksvig's forms a new political party

Well I've signed up for further info from Sandi's party. Will await developments with interest.

Why single out the Tory party? They're all biased, that's the nature of political parties.

Just a tad worrying that one of the candidates in our council election didn't know about this.........

Mollie, are you saying that the Tory party is not biased?

Strangely enough, mollie65, that describes my thoughts and feelings exactly.
Did you think I didn't know what False Economy was about? I feel quite hurt at that!
Actually, Teetime, my son bought me an online photography course for my birthday last month. I'd rather get back to that than the knitting. His partner was quite surprised when she realised I could knit, and they've been together for 20 years!

sigh that's it then mollie65 has decided what we do and don't want - job done back to the knitting!

sigh
we don't need a women's party or any other sort of label party
DJ - you do know that this 'organisation' is biased and we should regard their 'facts' with a great amount of suspicion. from their website:
False Economy ' will grow and develop as the campaign develops, but we launch with these initial objectives:

To gather and map information and personal testimony about the cuts and their effects
To show that there are alternative economic approaches
To provide resources and tools for campaigners and campaign groups

False Economy is for everyone who thinks the coalition is cutting too much, too fast and wants to do something about it.'

This is why we need a women's party.

falseeconomy.org.uk/blog/how-85-of-tax-and-benefit-savings-have-been-at-the-expense-of-women

I'm hoping that its womens' perspective on all issues that the new party will address.

This could be very interesting, although I do hope that their agenda will not be too narrow.

I think she is a very clever and thoughtful woman and I don't think she will go down the route of patronising pink minibuses and the like. She is much too sensible and intelligent for that.

But she cannot run solely on women's issues; a party considering only half of the population will have limited appeal.

I think that men are welcome in her new party.

I'd join, because we already have, in effect, parties run by men where women have no voice.

We need to shake things up a bit. Go Sandi, go!

I have offered to help.

I got an email, too, Teetime. Seems they've been inundated with enquiries and offers to help and now they need help to deal with the enquiries! A good start.

I have joined their mailing list just to see how it develops.

It is an interesting idea and if nobody ever tries it, then we will never know what could be achieved. We have just spent 5 years being governed by a cabinet that contains hardly any women. There's Teresa May and then, um, well... there was baroness Varsi who got fed up with them and left ...and um... oh yes how could I forget, Nicky Morgan brought in a few months ago to sideline Gove and 3 more in minor posts. I make that 5 women and 17 men.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cabinet_of_the_United_Kingdom

Women make up more than half the electorate and there are many issues that may engage their interest, issues that affect them more than men. e.g. women use the health service more, women are more often left trying to bring up children in poverty, women are more likely to be victims of domestic violence and some other crimes, protecting the environment for their children and grandchildren.
Young women seem to be waking up to these inequalities after several decades of ignoring them. Many of them are not that entranced by the existing parties so...?
It is obviously too early to see a whole list of policies - it would be daft for one person to decide all that - it would make it the Sandi Tosvig Party, wouldn't it and I'm sure that is not her aim.

Just read this. George Galloway thinks he will have the casting vote in the next parliament.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/01/coalition-borgen-government

Careful what you wish for.

I agree with you, mishap, about single issue parties. Caroline Lucas did a lot of good in the last parliament working mainly in focus groups.

Just got a reply from the e-mail I sent thanking me and saying they have been inundated with people interested in what ST is setting out to do- I think this will all be very interesting.

I do not have a problem with one-issue parties, even if they do not have a full policy document on every issue. They act as pressure groups and draw the politicians attention to the fact that people are a lot about that issue.

I think it's a good idea. We no longer have a two party system so smaller parties stand a better chance of having an input. I don't think UKIP will ever run the country - in their present form. But they've certainly brought issues which the Cons and Labs had swept under the carpet to the fore.

He is probably right in monetary terms but I do not think this monetary deficit would have reached the same percentage of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) as that of Greece. The UK is a far larger country with a far larger economy.

A deficit that would be twice the size of the GDP in Greece, may only be 40% of the UK GDP. The extent of a country's indebtedness as a % of GDP is what defines whether it is in trouble or not, plus confidence in the economic management of the country, not the monetary value of the deficit.

It is just Cameron up to election chicanery again.

But Cameron has twice said that we were forecast to have a budget deficit worse than Greece during the last six weeks. He made sure that the comparison was in people's minds.

Lots of people think the NHA is a single issue party because its title suggests it. It has a fully worked out policy on everything the other parties have, because so much affects and is affected by our health. Still seen as a single issue party by many, if it is recognised at all.

Sandy Toksvig has five years to work out her policies.

Sorry, I wasn't clear. What I meant was; when deciding who to vote for in a general election we need far more information from a one issue party than just that issue.

What price the gender equality a party like that being set up by Sandi Toksvigs promises if, in the future, were she to get enough votes to form a government, or form part of a coalition, her party espoused policies that would, in my opinion, reduce us, for example, to being, economically a basket case like Greece etc etc (see my previous post). In those circumstances I would not vote for her, no matter how much I agreed with her on gender equality.

One of the problems UKIP has faced is that it was initially a one issue party, and they have found it very difficult to formulate policies on the economy, health, education etc because although its members all share a dislike of the EU and wish to get the UK out, beyond that they do not share a common view on other topics and Farage has often seemed to be formulating policy from speech to speech as he electioneers. Not that I need any more reasons for not voting UKIP, but being unsure about what their policies are apart from on Europe and immigration is certainly one of them.

I was not suggesting the UK was an economic basket case like Greece, we are not and never were.

But we were not like Greece when the Coalition took over, despite what Cameron said on Question Time.

fullfact.org/the-deficit-uk-and-greece/

I notice she says nothing about how she would manage the country's economy, social services, NHS, foreign affairs, education, defence etc etc.

I am all for social equality of all people regardless of gender, age, ethnicity and any other heading you may choose, but what use is complete equality if we are an economic basket case like Greece with a crumbling health service, unable to educate children properly, with the unemployed and elderly starving in the streets.