The UK has been wrapped up in a fairytale democracy in which for most people not one of the main parties standing in the election represented their views. They were therefore unable to elect a person to represent them in parliament. They have voted by default for one of the three main parties that had any chance at all of being elected. In effect, because all these main parties basically have the same philosophy, the voters all voted for the same thing; the very similar party lines on every issue.

There is not one of the main parties with any chance of election for instance that wish to leave the EEC. Two small parties grossly under funded did support this view and if they had policies on any other issue they were given no chance in our system of presenting them. This has been made far worse by the involvement of the BBC and their carefully planned party leader debates, when only the three main parties were allowed to take part. The public were guided successfully into making their choices between these very similar three; a very useful tool serving to maintain the status quo.
This was in itself an undemocratic decision that the BBC had no right to agree to. Any party having candidates standing in the election should have been represented. The BBC may not like some of them but democracy demands that they have the right to speak and that the public have a right to hear them speak. Couldn't one of the other channels have filled this important gap in their/our democratic rights

Of course the individual party members who stood for election may indeed have very different views on some issues from their respective parties. They could for instance have grave doubts to use the same example issue, our continued membership of the EEC but in effect they will all once elected, come under the party whip and be told what to vote for or against on any issue that the party chooses. To go against the whip they may well face party discipline and possible de-selection next time round. For this reason you are not and can never be represented by the person you elect to represent you.

As a result of our recent election we now find ourselves under a coalition government that nobody voted for made up of the Liberal and Conservative parties pledged as they say to reform the voting system. One thing is for sure, they have no intention of removing the whip system that makes representative government and therefore any resemblance of a true democracy a joke. We don't even have a manifesto to try to hold them to as they are a hotch potch of two different parties having to water down whatever they did promise as prospective governments to make a deal to prop each other up to form a government. Actually as a government they are looking very good and do have a lot of good ideas but representative they are certainly not.

If David Cameron and Nick Glegg are serious about handing over power to the people to shape their own future, surely it is not too much to ask that they also drop the party whip system that so effectively stops their representatives representing them. Now that would be a big step towards democracy but one I guess will be judged a step too far. If that is indeed the case then voting reform is pointless anyway and makes the point that they are insincere.

Personally I would love to see a truly democratic system introduced to the houses of parliament but I am not holding my breath for it to happen. The people are not I would suggest, fed up with politics but rather with the unrepresentative and undemocratic politics they are subjected to.