Yes, I completely agree.
I voted Conservative at the last election, but wouldn't have done so if I'd known they'd support £9000 tuition fees.
On that issue, NONE of the three main parties would have been the right choice. Labour initiated the Browne report likely to later claim impartial approval on raising them, and the other two voted for it, even Lib Dems who signed a pledge not to and were technically free to vote against it.
And since it hits the affected financially more than most tax rises or cuts ever could, it was an issue worthy of protracted debate and years of lead time so people could prepare (like the initial introduction of fees). But instead the coalition rushed the legislation through and made it come into force the very next application cycle.
If there is meant to be electoral choice, and this is a big and divisive issue that affects millions, why wasn't there a party that, if not opposed them, at least wanted moderation of the hike and a more open debate?
--
That's one example, but there are many other issues where a significant segment of the public opposes them but all three parties would allow the status quo to continue: Private Finance Initiatives, Trident, harsh terrorism measures, large bank bonuses by supposedly state-controlled banks, the Digital Economy Bill anti-piracy measures, ...
