sorry to start another one and hopefully it can stay as positive and enjoyable as the last
but what the hell does all todays shinanagans mean, i didnt understand the hung parliment or the colation stuff before so please correct me if i am wrong but the way i gathered it today is
that lib dems are putting pressure on conservitives to accept their point of view or they will do a pact with labour, they have told labour that ifr gordon quits they will have more of a chance to agree
the cons are offering a referendom on PR and labour are saying we will push it through without one.
is this right and if so is it not fairer to ask the general public what they would like rather than to bully it through
will they then do the same with the euro
i for one am fed up with the whole lot of it i dont get why they are making it so difficult and i dont want nationalists from scotland ireland and wales beingt the key to who governs the uk as i cant help but fear that it will cost the english taxpayer money
have i missed the point if so please let me know like last time
0
Comments
who is going to run the country when will it happen and why
The three parties are playing a bit of poker. So far it seems Clegg has played his short pile of chips well and has got some decent offers from labs and cons.
The game continues with some more haggling to come.
All sides will have to comprimise which may be/good.
Labour also shouldn't be able to cling to power.
Some sort of consensus needs to come about, I'm not sure how, but I'd rather see a Con/Lib pact rather than a Lib/Lab, as I actually agreed with a fair bit of the Lib Dem policies, although they have some major ones that I disagree with.
What is annoying is it's the seats that Lab won in Scotland that gives them so much power....when Scotland already has it's own parliament.
The Tories will only offer a referendum on PR - which they and their mates in the press and big business will then campaign against.
Labour will offer to install (via parliamentary vote) a new Alternative Voting system without a referendum - they argue that because there is no fundamental change to the parliamentary system that no referendum is neccesary.
Therefore, does Clegg take a bird in the hand (Labour) or one in the bush (Tories)?
A Lib-Lab-Nats coaliton only gets to 329 seats so there is not much wriggle room there.
For the Tories, it looks like Clegg has really busted their balls on this but they won't go any further than a referendum on the AV system being introduced.
The Tories fear that the only way they can ever win power on their own is via the current system and want it maintained.
But the argument will be that LibLab have say 57% of the vote between them, ergo a majority of the votes (if still not seats). If the Libs cant work with the tories, that's probably the only viable option, but they will have to get others to join them, and the parliament will be at the mercy of the tiny parties who will pick and choose when and where they support the coalition. Time will tell if it's beneficial or just a bugger's muddle.
As someone with just right of centre views, I'd almost like to see Lib Lab stitch up a deal, and carry on screwing up for another 12-18 months while all around them turns to ashes. This will happen whoever is in charge, but i think the longer term is better served by labour appearing to cling unjustly to power, incurring the wrath of the electorate, and having to clear up their own mess. I know it's not ALL their mess but they havent helped, and any government that gives a squeaky little hypocritical harridan like Hazel Blears a job should be ashamed of itself. Further, they all wanted to join the euro at one point - now looks as if they (and we) were very lucky that economic conditions were never sufficiently aligned for that to be possible. Greece's collapse will cost us a lot less as a result.
The last bloke to enter the houses of parliament with the right idea was Guy Fawkes.
The government remains the same until a new one can take over. Brown is still PM, Darling is stil Chancellor etc. and it'll all stay like that until a new government can take over.
It happens all the time in other countries. I'm sure this is unusual for Labour and the Conservatives, but they should've been planning for it ever since that first debate. Lib Dem politicians have been preparing for this since they first entered politics.
I'd rather see a move to more consensual politics though with greater debate and more balanced policies being passed.
Watching them at the despatch box argue like kids, with the MP's behind them jeering, laughing and abusing, it's a bit depressing nowadays.
ormiston
do you think it is fair that the voting system should be changed without asking the general public, is it not a bit conciepted of anyone to pressume that because the media that people do not know their own views, is that why labour didnt give us a referendum on europe.
i cant help but fear a government that refuses to ask its people on matters that count
What would be bad for the Labour party is to have a pact with the Liberals and then have all sorts of accusations thrown at them, and it would also be bad for the Tories too but I care less about that personally. Maybe all three parties should try to get common ground so that any legislation proposed is voted through in the house.
Or maybe the Green party should have the Prime Ministership, and she should select the ministers.
If we have another election now the result will be much the same, or if anybody benefits it will be Labour because of a new leader...anybody taking over now will have such a difficult job, that office will tarnish them and the opposition parties will have a field day next time the election comes round.
Cameron and Salmond pal up with a teensy majority (i havent checked this and cant be bothered), they unwind the act of union (another thing i cant be bothered to check) Alex legs it back over hadrian's wall with forty labour MPs now redundant. Voila! - instant tory majority.
Labour voters in Scotland can have a labour government, tory voters in england have a tory government, everyone's a winner (except the welsh, and who cares about them anyway)
Sometimes, I impress even myself.
No, I don't think it would be fair to change the voting system without a referendum, people should always have a choice over those types of issues.
The Tories and SNP (who are real Socialists) loathe each other.
Even if they teamed up they would only have 311 seats - 15 short of a majority.
I think FPTP suits Labour and the Tories as much as each other. Tories lose out in Scotland and the Northeast, but gain in the South and East. Labour are the opposite.
If PR does mean coalitions forever, that's not necessarily a bad thing. It could mean that parties agree on more and more, meaning (contrary to a lot of suggestions from the media) greater stability in politics. No more big swings from left to right and back again. That's if it happens, but so far, PR isn't on the table.
The Tories hate the removal of FTPT because it removes their only way of winning a MAJORITY government on their own terms with no need for co-alition deals with the Lib Dems.
The Tories loathe the Lib-Dems who they see as being even more left-wing than Labour - just look at their differences on Europe, immigration and taxation - they are miles apart.
PR would mean the Tories would never again govern on a right-wing agenda because their coalition partners would not wear it and they hate that fact.
Labour, given their rightward drift under Blair, are far more relaxed about PR - they are also desperate to stay in power!
i agree that it may not be a bad thing but i fear that the public those that bunked of school and som,e how have managed to get a job and a mortgage understood that when voting this time that this could be the outcome.
poxy politics
The Conservatives have moved back towards the centre since they had that vampire as leader. They're a party of power, they'll do what they have to do.
Labour and the Lib-Dems are basically centre-left parties and could govern together reasonably OK, although there would be some compromises obviously.
The Tories are the only centre-right party in the frame and would find it impossible to get their core policies (inheritance tax cuts etc) through any coalition deal that is formed either now or under PR.
Losing FTPT would deny Labour ever governing again by themselves - but they probably would not anyway for a good while anyway - but they would also achieve the pleasure of locking the Tories out.
Just look at the policies of Labour and the Lib Dems and then compare them to the Tories, on the key issues like Europe the Lib Dems and Labour are quite close whereas the Tories are further right.
Indeed, many Labour and Lib Dem MP's could inter-change between the parties whereas fewer of the Tories could do so.
That can't be right.
As already stated - Clegg is currently the most important man in the country
99% of the electorate don't even know what PR means and when it's explained it means that when you vote, instead of the candidate/party you voted for you're more likely to get some wishy washy fence sitter without a clue on true politics, the British voter will soon kick it into touch....
That's why that fat basterd Brown is quitting, he knew the boys in blue would gladly offer the oranges a referendum and so for him the jig was up...
It just shows how desparate these twats are to get into power...
As I said in another thread, UKIP would benefit from PR.
Also, if a Labour-Liberal coalition is popular over the years, then that would be the most appropriate government. Maybe the Tories won't like it, maybe they'll change their policies to be more electable. Maybe the Labour-Liberal government turns out to be bad and people change their opinions
RedZed, maybe you should find out what PR means. Most British voters also should find out what it really means, but you're the one giving your opinion on it here now.
They are all desperate for power.
Three days ago Cameron told Clegg that the Tories would not put PR on the table and offered him a "PR commission" - now they are offering them a referendum on it.
If the Lib-Lab talks go well then you can bet your bollocks that Cameron will offer the same deal to Clegg as Labour are offering - the introduction of AV with no referendum.
Power is a drug to politicians, they are all addicts.
Having the most votes is not the same as having a majority of votes.
That's like me owning 36% of a company's shares and telling the other three shareholders who each own 22% stakes that I should be the only one that controls the company.
In politics as in corporate life you need 50.1% of seats or votes to exercise power.
Simple scare tactics work every time....
• Guaranteed alternative vote for elections to Commons
• Possible future referendum on "full PR" of single transferable vote
• Full coalition with cabinet seats
• Broad agreement on deficit reduction
• New leadership for Labour once binding deal with Lib Dems agreed