Printable View
Its worth noting that not only are all major present Lib-Dems publicly supporting the attempts to get an agreement with the Conservatives, but so too are the past, more left-wing theoretically LD's who don't have to toe party line.
Even Paddy Ashdown is publicly supporting the negotiations. I wonder if a small part of Paddy is seeing this as payback to Labour for the way they shafted him in '97? He more than any knows the risks of trusting Labour.
I think there will be a fair amount of opposition amongst the grassroots members of both parties.
Entirely possible. Any coalition could result in a fair amount of opposition.
Interesting this 24 hour limit Clegg just set. Why a deadline if all is going well ?
By the way, the markets are not to be feared too much tomorrow; they decided that the rescue plan put in place by the EU was more relevant than the question if the UK has a government or not tomorrow.
well well well
The thing is that by resigning, Brown gives up the right for Labour to have the first shot at forming the government. Now the ball is in the Tory's hands. :noob:
This whole situation is really bizarre now. The Tory-Lib coalition is the only one that makes mathematical sense, but if they can't agree a compromise over electoral reform then it's going nowhere. And a lib-lab pact won't be able to get very much done, because they don't have a majority between them, which will probably mean another election inside a year (yay?).
I'm still hoping for a Tory-Lib pact right now. Britain needs a fiscally conservative chancellor for a few years, but I'm not too keen on many of the Tories other ding-bat ideas ("Big Society! Parent run schools! Elect police commissioners!" - shut the fuck up david), which hopefully the lib-dems would have had a moderating influence over.
You're going to have an election within a year regardless of what happens. If you get a Labour-Lib government, you'll probably end up with one much sooner than that. Anyone who thinks Labour can maintain the support of the Lib Dems, SNP, Plaid Cymru, and the North Irish Social Democrats at the same time is living in another universe. Hell, by even trying to do this, Labour is setting itself up for an overwhelming defeat in the next election. And if Ed Balls becomes the leader of Labour, I will personally try to nuke the place.
The SNP is going to be basically demanding hueg monies for Scotland in exchange for co-operation. Because we can definitely afford that right now.
Ed Balls is a massive cunt.Quote:
And if Ed Balls becomes the leader of Labour, I will personally try to nuke the place.
As will the Irish and the Welsh. And they'll try to blackmail Labour on every policy of importance by demanding even more money. And the Lib Dems will make some noises about not giving in to everyone's demands, while making their own demands. :bored:Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Glint
By the way, PR usually requires a party to pass a certain threshold before it can gain a seat in parliament. Even if you set the threshold ridiculously low, at 1% (it's usually 3% or 5%), then none of the Irish or Welsh parties will get any seats...
Well, those to two don't have the clout (seats) to do that, Plaid and the SDLP only have 3 each.
They do, because Labour can't rule without them. Assuming Sinn Fein decides to stay out, Labour needs 323 seats to rule. With the Lib Dems, they'll be 8 short. The SNP gives them 6. This means they need to get 2 seats from elsewhere, and that assumes no defections, which isn't out of the question. Labour can try to play the Welsh and Irish off each other to get a better deal, but any deal will still be a costly one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Glint
Also, tell me why the Welsh or Irish would support a PR system that would effectively block them out of the Commons? :noob:
Why ? He didn't resign as PM, he is stepping down as Labour's leader.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
It's funny to see how hysterical the British media react to the present situation; they act as if the heavens will come down just because it's taking political parties a couple of days to form a government. In most countries on the mainland it takes more time to start consultations about the negotiations. Here in Holland we go without real governments for months after pretty much every election and it never hurt us all that much. Nor does it really bother anybody. IIRC the longest it ever took overhere was 9 months. Actually I consider that quite a blessing, because usually it also keeps politicians from introducing unnecessary legislation.
Because the PM has to be the leader of the main party. The second he formally steps down as Labour leader, he stops being PM. That means Cameron gets a chance to form a government before Brown's successor.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hazir
And you really shouldn't be comparing totally different systems, Hazir. Your system is able to function because you have norms and institutions in place to let it work. Those norms and institutions don't exist in Britain, due to its history of majority governments.
The MP has to be appointed by the Queen on the recommendation of Parliament and stays PM untill he resigns. I don't recall Gordon Brown saying he resigned anything yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
He's the PM until Labour gets a new leader. The moment it gets a new leader, Brown loses the opportunity to form the next government, and his successor doesn't get the first crack at it because Labour isn't the largest party.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hazir
You are wrong, he is the PM untill a new PM has been appointed. And that will not happen untill Parliament has produced one. Which parliament will not do untill a coalition deal has been struck. The Queen will also not appoint a PM who can expect to lose a vote of confidence in Parliament.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
:(Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Glint
Not true. This was the only chance of Labour maintaining its filthy grip on power :(Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Agreed with it all. Please just set the CIA on Balls, I won't object.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
You're wrong about the "North Irish Social Democrats" though. The Social Democrat and Labour Party (SDLP) is Northern Ireland's version of the Labour party. They take the Labour whip already. All the time Labour has had majority government, the SDLP have sat on the government benches, not the opposition benches. SDLP MPs are Labour MPs already in all but name.
Exactly! Let the SNP and Scottish Labour set English-only law in exchange for more English money going to Scotland. Yaay Democracy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Glint
Massive cunts might actually have a purpose.Quote:
Ed Balls is a massive cunt.
All the while the English (with a working Tory majority) get screwed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
All proposals will have PR within each nation, not across the UK. So if you have pure PR then if the SNP get 25% of votes, they'll get 25% of Scottish seats. Ditto NI and Wales.Quote:
By the way, PR usually requires a party to pass a certain threshold before it can gain a seat in parliament. Even if you set the threshold ridiculously low, at 1% (it's usually 3% or 5%), then none of the Irish or Welsh parties will get any seats...
Wrong. The leader of the largest party doesn't become PM or get first crack at being PM. Whoever the Queen thinks can "command a majority of Parliament", and like all decisions by the Queen that is determined by the Prime Minister. If Brown goes to the Queen and says "I'm resigning, I think Ed Balls can command a majority in Parliament" then the Queen will call Balls to the Palace and he'll be our new PM, subject to being able to pass Confidence etc votes in Parliament. Largest party means nothing constitutionally.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
A constitution based on lore doesn't mean much either. When are you people going to put that shit in writting?Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
Those Mathematics in full:
Tory: 307 (assume Thirsk and Malton goes Tory)
DUP: 8
Total: 315
Lab: 258
Lib: 57
SDLP: 3
Total: 318
SNP: 6
Plaid Cymru: 3
Green: 1
Total: 28
Total: 327
It is in writing, it's just not in writing in one place.Quote:
Originally Posted by Being
Instead of making another post in this thread, why not take the time to do some background reading on the always tricky literal vs figurative dichotomy?
Alliance (1 NI seat) goes with Lib Dem Steely.
Breaking news: The Conservatives have come out in support of a referendum for Alternative Vote as an offer to the Lib-Dems. "Final offer"
Claim that the only offer from Labour is for Alternative Vote to be enforced without a referendum and that changing the way we vote without a referendum is wrong.
You've tried telling before when and where I'm allowed to post and as before you can stuff your demands.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Glint
Back on to the topic of your "constitution", important aspect of it are not written.
Which aspects?
The constitution is a living organism, from a variety of documents and case law. Same as yours. Tell me where the right to abortion is in your constitution - since SCOTUS ruling its part of your constitution.
Is there a constitutional option for: Queen rejects offers, dissasembles parliament, she has her government after all, God Save the Queen?
What do you mean disassembles Parliament?
Queen will never reject an offer, if someone can command a majority of Parliament then if they're the ones nominated they become PM. If no-one can at all, then the Queen dissolves Parliament and we have a new set of elections.
It was a joke to break the tension, Rand. A bad joke but still..... ;)
I can't help but thinking if making a move towards Labour was a lib-dem negotiating tactic.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
A referendum is a good thing. I hope they go for this deal, a lib-lab pact would cause more problems than it would solve, probably.
Historic times, potentially.
Royal Prerogatives, Constitutional Convention... I will however concede that it would be more understandable to use the term uncodified in place of not written.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade