It isn't easy...

You may have guessed from past posts that I am not UKIP's greatest fan. You may also have guessed that I find professional politicians to be a depressing bunch; self-serving, dogmatic, inflexible etc. Hey some of us write blogs to utilise those parts of our character, rather than being paid by the public to do it.

And, yes, I accept there are some very decent, able and well meaning individuals in the wide political landscape (I include unions, campaigners and pressure groups here), even if their half-life in parliament seems a little shorter than you would wish.

But I felt the need to say a bit more, lest you view me as some sort of messianic Russell Brand-like figure, leading you in a Hamleinian Pied-Piperesque progress away from the Victorian voting booths (you see Russell - it's easy to use big words and tautology).

It is important that we all vote. I'm not one for mandatory voting like they have in Australia, because I don't like compulsion (dangerously libertarian argument there). But I think that the right to moan about it comes with the obligation to do something about it.

If you think a party represents a majority of your views across the spectrum (and the rest isn't egregiously nasty) then it may make sense to vote for them in everything. (If 'your' party represents all your views 100%, then you are either Vladimir Putin or you haven't really thought at all.)

But there is no reason why you have to sign up on the list for life. Different parties may appeal differently for different things.

 Let me give the example of me. It's a London-centric example, but if you don't like that, wait for a local sheep to write a blog and read that instead.

In an electoral cycle, I get to vote for:

• The UK parliament (once every five years or less)
• Wandsworth Council (once every four years)
• The Mayor of London (every four)
• The London Assembly (every four)
• The European Parliament (every five)

Take the Mayor of London. (Please, take him.) OK, take the election. The last two have really been a straight choice between a newt-fancying Evening Standard hating, Blur-song-narrating* leftie, and a Bullingdon, blond, cycling lothario. (Check for libel). A vote for the Libdems, or the Greens is a waste. My choice is, depending on your view and you can guess mine, either the candidate I like more, or the one I hate less. Ken or Boris, Boris or Ken. If I don't vote for my 'favourite' then I've increased the chances of the other winning.

Pretty much the same goes for my UK constituency - Labour - not safe but not marginal. Tories closish second, everyone else - don't bother.

But then look at Europe. All of London is one constituency, with 8 seats. Elected by Party List Vote (d'Hondt system if you care, which you don't). This basically means that you need to get one eight of the votes to get a seat. So if the Tories got 25% straight off and Labour got 37.5%, they would get 2 and three respectively. You then redistribute surpluses, eliminate the hindmost and reallocate quotas until you get to 8 elected. (I used to be a Students Union vote counter you know.)

So for, say, the BNP to get a seat they perhaps only need to get 12.5% to get a seat straight off, but can end up getting a seat with perhaps 8%. So your vote really can make a difference for smaller parties.

Which would allow you to vote with my conscience rather than using the Least-worst option discussed above.

This is a long post already. Next time, I'll extend this thinking to local elections, and might even discuss how I am thinking of voting (though there is a huge clue in this post for those who look). And if you put BNP? in the comments, f*ck off now.

*Ernold Same on the Great Escape

The BRITS - a middle-aged perspective

One of the perils of spending time occasionally with teenage children is that their habits do not coincide with mine. For the two who are currently on half-time, this means that they are operating on roughly Eastern US time (up about noon - bed about 3am). The only problem with this is that I either have to bow out of interesting conversations because I have to work in the morning, or I come into work exhausted because I didn't. Falls into the nice problems to have category.

On the downside though, I came in last night to find them watching the BRIT Awards. Something that I had long thought of as in my past. I remember Blur dominating with Parklife, Chumbawamba v Prescott, Jarvis etc. But I have outgrown that. I had planned to sit and read a little, and perhaps follow the BBC2 Folk Awards on the red button, but plainly that wasn't going to be allowed. And yes, I could have gone upstairs and kept myself to myself. But I do enjoy the boys' company. So instead I turned into my father. "Call that music?" "Oh, I know the original of that one ...." And there is some real talent out there. Nile Rodgers of course. Pharrell Williams also. But some I didn't know. The guy out of Bastille can really sing. So can Ellie Goulding but she sounded like she was outside her comfortable rang, so there wasn't enough power to compete with a thousand drummers.

And there were some entirely expected things too. Katy Perry without Autotune is not a good thing. And rockers from Northern cities who try to be sophisticated and cryptic come across as pretentious wankers. And comics trying to satirise the whole sleb-culture that they are part of tend to die on their arses - even if they have sorted out their tax affairs.

So, as you can tell, I ended up getting into the programme - and even more so Twitter's reaction to it. Catty, unpleasant, roaringly funny - it provided a splendid backdrop to the evening. So nice to know that in thousands of homes across the country, so many of us are doing the same and thinking the same - from wondering why Lorde came dressed as Edward Scissorhands to wondering why James Cordon. (Not why anything - just Why?).

So I can't say my evening made me feel particularly enthusiastic about the state of British music, but British humour is thriving, and we should all be thankful for that.