|
06 May 10 - 05:53 PM (#2901574) Subject: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: GUEST,The Smiler How the F*** do they know that already? time 22:53 UK time |
|
06 May 10 - 06:04 PM (#2901584) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox exit polls |
|
06 May 10 - 07:06 PM (#2901630) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Gervase Chicken gizzards. |
|
06 May 10 - 10:45 PM (#2901740) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: mousethief Tea leaves. If they do fall short of a majority who will they form a coalition government with? Labour? LibDems? BNP? |
|
06 May 10 - 11:53 PM (#2901780) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: GUEST,mark-s(on the road) Just heard they might have a hung parliament in England. Wow - you Brits are tough. Wonder how we arrange something like that here! Mark (now waiting for a knock on the door from the thought police) |
|
07 May 10 - 04:39 AM (#2901847) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: GUEST,Allan "If they do fall short of a majority who will they form a coalition government with? Labour? LibDems? BNP?" BNP don't come into it as they have no MPs. Lib Dems would normally slide more towards Labour and the Tories have said they wouldn't countenance electoral reform so that looks unlikely. Outside of the various Ulster Unionists I can't really see who else would work with the Tories and it is unlikely that they would have a majority even with DUP support! Even though they are Labour's main rivals in Scotland I can't envisage the Scottish nationalists backing the Tories. Scoland has so turned its back on the Tories that Salmond surely couldn't countenance backing them and he has said they would vote on issues rather than go into any coalition. So I can't see the Tories getting a majority though it looks unlikely that any Lab-Lib coalition would have a majority either. Most likely eventual scenario if the Tories can't get the Lib_Dems to back them is perhaps Cameron running a minority govt! |
|
07 May 10 - 04:50 AM (#2901854) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Bonzo3legs Blue suit on today!! |
|
07 May 10 - 05:13 AM (#2901863) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: theleveller Well, looks like no-one won, but at least the Spawn of She-Devil Thatcher aren't going to get a working majority so they're unlikely to get the most repulsive of their policies through. Gordon Brown has the right to try to form a government first, if he can form an alliance with the Lib Dems. Watch this space! |
|
07 May 10 - 06:24 AM (#2901902) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Richard Bridge So far Old Etonians + Irish lickspittles (various) 300 Lab + Lib/Dem 303 So it all comes down to what the rag tag and bobtail will do - and most of them look pretty unlikely to fancy being "Dave"'s bumboys. |
|
07 May 10 - 06:28 AM (#2901904) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: peregrina constitutional convention (according to the papers) is that if there's a hung parliament, the sitting government stays, it's not the newcomer-with-most-seats-short-of-majority |
|
07 May 10 - 06:40 AM (#2901909) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Les in Chorlton As a member of the Labour Party who recognises that we have lost the respect and trust of lots of previous voters I am heartened that people didn't return the Tories to power and did not choose the Lib Dems much either. What happens now will be a bit interesting L in C |
|
07 May 10 - 06:43 AM (#2901911) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Leadfingers MOST voters were in favour of a Hung Parliament - And MOST voters think Hung is the same as Hanged ! But at least Nazi Nick got a bloody nose ! |
|
07 May 10 - 06:53 AM (#2901915) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: theleveller "But at least Nazi Nick got a bloody nose ! " As did the other neo-nazis, UKIP (quite literally in one case!) |
|
07 May 10 - 06:58 AM (#2901916) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox Bear in mind that the Tory share of the vote only increased by 3.9% The Lib Dem share went up by 1% So for David Cameron and all his supporters to talk about the resounding will of the public etc is a pack of lies. The Facts .. so far |
|
07 May 10 - 07:24 AM (#2901926) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: bubblyrat The Labour Party do NOT have the right to try to form a government first. That right belongs to the Conservative Party,who have won both the most seats and the largest percentage of the vote.However,they can only form a majority government IF they promise to A) govern in the interests of the country and B) promise to attend to both national AND Liberal Democrat issues regarding the efficacy of the current parliamentary voting system,in which case Mr Clegg,the Lib/Dem leader,has intimated that he might be amenable to reaching some sort of political accord or alliance. Mr Clegg ( I don't know him personally,thus I don't call him "Nick",as it would be both rude and presumptuous )has already indicated ,on TV earlier this morning,that he is sticking to his principle of putting himself and his party in the position of supporting,or at least being prepared to be approached by,the party that gains or has gained the most votes, which in this instance is undeniably the Conservative party. Mr Brown will doubtless try to do his utmost to remain as Prime Minister,and is unlikely to resign,however it seems likely that the final arbiter in this instance will be Her Majesty The Queen (God Bless Her),who will, presumably,ask him to state whether or not he is able to form a credible,workable,and legitimate government ; since it appears to be about 99% certain that he will have to answer "No", then that should be the end of that. Since we now have a "Hung" ,or as others euphemistically call it, "Balanced" parliament, it is very likely that another election will be called,perhaps within the next two years. Under those circumstances,the Liberal Democrats will,with an eye to future public opinion,be very cautious about just what they are prepared to offer or concede IF any agreement with the Conservatives is in fact reached. We live in interesting times !! |
|
07 May 10 - 07:33 AM (#2901930) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Howard Jones I'm not sure that's correct. The Conservatives have the most votes and the most seats, so arguably (and the other parties are arguing) they have a mandate, but they don't have the parliamentary arithmetic to form a government without some help. As I understand it, Gordon Brown is still the Prime Minister and has the right to try to form a new government. If he thinks he can command a majority in Parliament, he can carry on, until he's overturned by a vote of no confidence. However, he may decide he's got no chance, and resign. In either case the Conservatives could then try to form a government, and would themselves face the risk of a vote of no confidence. If it emerges that no one can command a working majority, we'll face another election. |
|
07 May 10 - 07:35 AM (#2901932) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox Constitutional convention allows Brown to have the first go. Clegg is playing hard to get. The Tories will not accept Cleggs Demands. But he will tease Labour until they offer a range of concessions that he is prepared to accept. Ultimately, Brown will form a Government with Clegg, and the next election will be PR. Then we can begin the business of democracy. |
|
07 May 10 - 07:36 AM (#2901935) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Murray MacLeod It's all down to the Queen now, basically ... |
|
07 May 10 - 07:39 AM (#2901938) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: theleveller "however it seems likely that the final arbiter in this instance will be Her Majesty The Queen (God Bless Her)," What a complete load of bollocks - old Lizzie Windsor has absolutely no say in the governance of this country (thankfully) and is just a useless anachronism - despite what her idiot son might think. What century are you living in, bubblyrat? |
|
07 May 10 - 07:44 AM (#2901944) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Dave the Gnome it seems likely that the final arbiter in this instance will be Her Majesty The Queen So it all could hinge on whether a rich woman with about as much idea of what goes in real life as I have of life in the Kalahari? Good grief. What a pity I am too old to get the next boat to Australia. Still, seeing as I am half Polish and don't really belong here, according to some people, I could always be forcibly re-patriated... DeG |
|
07 May 10 - 07:49 AM (#2901949) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: theleveller Just been talking to my son who's doing a history and politics degree and we agree that there will most likely be another election within 12 months. |
|
07 May 10 - 07:55 AM (#2901956) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Charley Noble Maybe we should send Bill Clinton over to mediate a grand coalition government. Cheerily, Charley Noble |
|
07 May 10 - 07:55 AM (#2901957) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: GUEST,Allan "The Labour Party do NOT have the right to try to form a government first. That right belongs to the Conservative Party,who have won both the most seats and the largest percentage of the vote." That is an opinion but that is all it is. Convention is that Brown as incumbant has the right to attempt to form a govt. The problem for him is that Clegg isn't playing ball with that - and how could he after he's already expressed his opinion that the party with the most seats should go first? So Brown can't initially form a govt if the Lib Dems won't talk but that doesn't mean he does not have the right to attempt it. No doubt if Clegg can't work with the Tories he may then go back to Labour without losing face with the electorate over his comments so far. |
|
07 May 10 - 08:09 AM (#2901964) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox Clegg is just playing hard to get. He knows Brown needs him and vice versa. Its a political Passo Doble - Clegg flirts with Cameron to increase Browns desire, but he's always looking over his shoulder ... ... The question is whether Brown has the balls to go up and 'win him back'. Brown and cameron are both salivating at the thought, but balancing it with a 'you ain't all that ...' attitude. I hope they don't show it till after the watershed ... |
|
07 May 10 - 09:11 AM (#2901996) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Richard Bridge Ratty, you display your ignorance. Constitutionally the convention is clear. The sitting PM has the first go. If he fails then the wily old constitutional lawyer on the gold chair, her maj (who has consistently shown better political nous than the parties, apart from her perfectly correct views about the church of Diana the Martyr in which she failed to grasp the stupid sentimentality about the "people's princess") should send for the person she judges most likely to be able to form a government - but for over 50 years (I'd have to look up the date) that crown prerogative has been exercised only on advice and not as a matter of political judgment. IMHO Clegg has now shown himself to be slimy and unprincipled public schoolboy (from Westminster) and if he buys into being "Dave"'s bumboy he will destroy the LibDems. He may have done it already. |
|
07 May 10 - 09:18 AM (#2902001) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox Richard - its a choice of the tories or Labour for clegg, and no matter which way he turns the losing side will make your complaint. And anyone else in his position would have to make the same choice. His circumstances say nothing about his character. He will fall in with labour, of that there is very little doubt, as his demands will be too much for the tories to stomach. But you can't expect him to give Brown what he wants without making him work for it. You watch how Slimy Gordon gets when he starts comes to Woo ... that will be equally unpalatable if not more so as he has considerably less charisma ... |
|
07 May 10 - 09:29 AM (#2902007) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Bob the Postman Clegg will not have to deliver his party to Cameron if several of his elected MPs deliver themselves. But if some LibDems look like crossing Clegg might think it expedient to keep his caucus intact by allying his party with the Conservatives. Could work the other way around, of course, but why would a self-interested unprincipled LibDem up-and-comer (I assume there must be one or two like that) want to hitch himself to Brown's tattered coat-tails? |
|
07 May 10 - 09:36 AM (#2902010) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Les in Chorlton If the Libs and Labour fail to makea deal Cameron could form a minority Govt and dare the rest to vote him down. The wouldn't do it straight away and whenever they did he would call another election and ..................................... L in C |
|
07 May 10 - 09:37 AM (#2902011) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Emma B Mini-lecture: A hung Parliament explained Professor Robert Hazell, Director of the Constitution Unit in UCL's School of Political Science, explains what a hung Parliament means for the UK including the role of a constitutional monarchy |
|
07 May 10 - 10:38 AM (#2902048) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Bonzo3legs So it all could hinge on whether a rich woman with about as much idea of what goes in real life as I have of life in the Kalahari? Good grief. What a pity I am too old to get the next boat to Australia. Still, seeing as I am half Polish and don't really belong here, according to some people, I could always be forcibly re-patriated... Inverted snobbery - 14 years transportation! |
|
07 May 10 - 11:09 AM (#2902071) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Dave the Gnome That'll probably see me through the next lot Bonzo:-) But it's nowt to do with inverted snobbery. I am a proper snob and know I am far better than you... :D (eG) |
|
07 May 10 - 11:51 AM (#2902099) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: mousethief This is all fascinating to an American like me since our systems are so very different. Perhaps to my shame this is the first time I've really paid attention to British elections. It's been a great education. |
|
07 May 10 - 11:57 AM (#2902103) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: GUEST,999 `Maybe we should send Bill Clinton over to mediate a grand coalition government.` Send Monica, she`ll change more votes. |
|
07 May 10 - 12:57 PM (#2902148) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Richard Bridge The LDs are kissing Cameron's arse already, maybe they'd kiss Clinton's dick as well. |
|
07 May 10 - 01:08 PM (#2902156) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Richard Bridge Well done "Dave", you converted a 28 point lead in the polls to proof that two thirds of the country don't want you or the rest of the Bullingdon club. |
|
07 May 10 - 01:11 PM (#2902160) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: GUEST,Paco O'Barmy Tee hee Hee! Bye bye Gordon. Maybe I wont have to buy the PC 'corrected' version of the Oxford English Dictionary after all. Tee hee hee et al. |
|
07 May 10 - 01:23 PM (#2902164) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Paul Burke There are two choices that amount to one: Libs support Labour. Majority paper thin assuming SDLP/ Alliance/ Green/ Plaid/ Scot Nats support Labour and DUP support Tories. Coalition will break up on budget. Libs support Tories. Majority of about a hundred, fairly secure, but coalition breaks up on budget. The best the Libs can hope for is to force through some electoral reform as part of a deal, but it's unlikely that any coalition will be stable enough to see it into law. If we'd had full PR (seats allocated according to vote share), the result might have looked something like (using figures from mid- afternoon): Con 234 Lab 185 Lib 148 SNP 12 DUP 5 UKIP 20 BNP 11 Green 6 Plaid 5 Sinn F 4 SDLP 3 Alli 1 UCUNF 3 Trad U 1 And, perhaps oddly, the result would have been very similar if the regions England, Scotland, Wales and NI had counted their proportions separately, though NI would have been less well represented overall. It seems that in this case, all else being equal, the Liberals could have chosen a stable coalition with either party, and the presence of the extreme nutters would have been annoying and distasteful, but little more. |
|
07 May 10 - 01:24 PM (#2902165) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Teribus OK Richard now tell us how much of the country does not want the unelected and obviously unelecatable Gordon Brown and ZANULiebour. What was it according to Lox's BBC facts: 29% of the vote and they lost 91 seats. Hardly a ringing endorsement is it. No I hope that Gordon does form his minority Government, or even better forms another Lib-Lab Pact. It won't last long, a matter of months, after all they got us into this mess they should stew in it a while longer, it should be quite amusing to see the lib-Dems floundering about with real problems to solve, something that their party has not had to do for almost a century, and something that none of their reduced Parliamentary Party is actually capable of doing. The fights, the squabbling and the incompetence will return a Conservative Government with a working majority sooner rather than later particularly if Gordon of Cartoon insists on remaining at the helm. |
|
07 May 10 - 01:40 PM (#2902172) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Les in Chorlton Please re-arrange this sentence: "The fights, the squabbling and the incompetence will return a Conservative Government " Best wishes L in C# |
|
07 May 10 - 02:06 PM (#2902190) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: mousethief The LDs are kissing Cameron's arse already, maybe they'd kiss Clinton's dick as well. And history tells us he'd like that. |
|
07 May 10 - 02:24 PM (#2902206) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Dave the Gnome I did the PR stats as well but decided that some of the minority parties would probably have had more because, in a PR scenario, they would have fielded more candidates. I think it would have to be linked to the constituencies where candidates were fielded. We would, therefore and in my opinion, need a higher deposit and a higher percentage at which the deposit is refunded. If, for instance, I could get 650 freinds (chance would be a fine thing!) to stand in every constituency I would bve almost sure to get some seats! I think some very careful thought needs to be put in to the reforms that are required. Like I keep pluggung. Benign dictatirship is FAR better and simpler. Me at the head of course:-) DeG |
|
07 May 10 - 02:29 PM (#2902211) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: MikeL2 hi dave Rest easy !!! The Queen has no responsibilty in this. It is completely left to the politions. When they have decided between them what the have to do the person and party(ies)selected will be invited by Her Majesty to be formally recognised. As I understand it it 25th May has been set aside for this formality but I hope that the politicians can sort themselves out quickly and get on with the job. In the meantime Gordon Brown and the Labour Party will act as temporary government. So your lack of knowledge about the Kalahari will not be reqired....lol cheers MikeL2 |
|
07 May 10 - 02:39 PM (#2902216) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: MikeL2 hi Now that the dust is settling one thing comes over very clearly to me....the TV debates and most of the high profile publicity made hardly any difference in the last month's run up to the election. Even Brown's gaff with the Duffy woman did not deter her constituency ( Rochdale) from voting for Labour. Makes you wonder don't it???? Cheers MikeL2 |
|
07 May 10 - 02:43 PM (#2902217) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox Its really simple folks. The libs are teasing Labour to force Brown to make the first offer BEFORE they negotiate. That offer, already on the table, is to immediately enact PR. The Government will not last long, but it will last long enough to get PR through. SNP and Plaid Cymru will support PR It will go through. The current tory party will not agree to it. But Cameron knows that if he doesn't agree to it, it will go through anyway under lib lab pact. It will save Lab and Lib Asses at the next election and will result in parties having to learn how to share power because the "threat" of a hung parliament will become the norm. No more elected dictatorships. No more unjust wars. Fingers crosssed. |
|
07 May 10 - 03:02 PM (#2902228) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: MikeL2 hi Cameron said he would consider a referendum on political reform but did not explain what he meant by that. We know that when politician's either avoid or are vague about something it is just the same as lying about promising to do it. Cheers MikeL2 |
|
07 May 10 - 03:37 PM (#2902252) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Anne Lister What Cameron said as far as I heard it was that he would set up an all party committee of inquiry into PR - not the same thing at all as a referendum. |
|
07 May 10 - 03:40 PM (#2902255) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Richard Bridge Actually, Terry, in the face of a one-sided press (gosh, are their proprietors rich? Did they want government by the rich for the rich?) Labour and Gordon Brown did very well to reduce a 28 point lead to the about 6% swing seen. It demonstrates the danger of press control. Still, I suppose it might give "Dave" the honour (dubious looking at the content of the channel) of being the first UK PM named for a TV channel. Nearly as squeaky-clean as Berlusconi then. Buggered if I can see what's wrong with calling a bigot a bigot. |
|
07 May 10 - 03:44 PM (#2902260) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Paul Burke As I said, Dave, all else being equal. The advantage FPTP has is exclusion of distasteful minorities, the price being the exclusion of constructive minorities. It has also probably inhibited the development of any radical left alternative, while allowing New Labour to shuffle rightwards without any rein to pull it back. I don't think the electoral system should be designed to keep out minorities whether good or bad; what's needed is the political vision that leaves the ultras unattractive. And there's no incentive for politicians to even try to do that with the present system. |
|
07 May 10 - 04:05 PM (#2902278) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox FPTP encourages far right parties as it contributes to the feeling of being disenfranchised that drives people into the hands of parties like the BNP |
|
07 May 10 - 04:39 PM (#2902300) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: McGrath of Harlow It doesn't require the go-ahead of David Cameron for the majority of MPs, who were elected on manifestos including electoral reform, to legislate for a binding referendum on making the electoral system fairer. After all, they outnumber the Tories. This is a different matter from who, if anybody, is able to set up a viable administration. |
|
07 May 10 - 04:41 PM (#2902303) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Bonzo3legs This is becoming all so tiresome, where's my unPCing the last 13 years manual. Right, let me see - change job centre to dole centre, send all chairs back to MFI and reappoint chairmen............ |
|
07 May 10 - 06:04 PM (#2902357) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Gervase change job centre to dole centre Very true! There won't be any jobs around as public and private sectors implode, so all there'll be is benefits - and for a limited period. Soup kitchens, anyone? As an aside, it's interesting that the British right-wingers here - Bonzo and bubblyrat most notably - appear to be the most ignorant when it comes to the constitution. Or when it comes to facts in general, come to that. Figures, really! |
|
07 May 10 - 06:14 PM (#2902365) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Richard Bridge I'm glad you say "interesting" rather than "surprising", Gervase. |
|
07 May 10 - 06:57 PM (#2902400) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: theleveller "Bonzo and bubblyrat most notably - appear to be the most ignorant " And the most desperate because their wet dreams of a Tory majority have come crashing down around them. LOL! OK, now's the time for PR, abolition of the monarchy, a proper constitution and an elected second chamber - in other words a move towards true democracy. If it takes a revolution, bring it on and bonzoboko and the bubblything will be first against the wall (well, after jug-ears Windsor). Don't you just love it?!!!! |
|
08 May 10 - 03:56 AM (#2902547) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: DMcG I wonder what this referendum will look like, if it ever appears. At the risk of being patronising, I'm not sure asking the general populus to choose between FPTP, AV, AV+ and STV stands much chance of getting a considered answer. But if I were asked to choose between FPTP and AV (which Labour were suggesting in the debates), I'm not at all sure AV is less flawed. Of late, though, Labour seem to be mentioning AV+ instead. |
|
08 May 10 - 04:16 AM (#2902551) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Acorn4 Gordon Brown is playing his cards very wisely on not appearing to want to hold onto power at all costs. The Labour vote did not collapse, and there is solid bedrock for a fightback. Although Blair went completely off the rails over Iraq, it has now been proved that a Labour government can run the economy, which was always in doubt before; now it's the Tories ability to do this that people are questioning, and that reflects the enormity and achievement of Blair and Brown. |
|
08 May 10 - 04:26 AM (#2902552) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Stu The plain truth here is most of the electorate voted for left or centre-left parties: Labour won 29% of the vote, the Lib Dems 23% - 52% of the vote excluding the smaller parties which are virtually all left of centre with the exception of the DUP. This means 52% of the voting electorate believe in socially democratic politics, as opposed to the 36% of Tory voters still clinging to the outdated politics of self. That is a mandate for a Lib-Lab coalition and I'm hoping that's how it will pan out. The utter rejection of right-wing politics is heartening, and I hope Clegg has the wisdom to see the time for a new progressive political system is here and he could never achieve that with the Conservative party. |
|
08 May 10 - 04:27 AM (#2902554) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Richard Bridge Oddly, jug-ears Windsor often talks a lot of sense, and the wily old constitutional lawyer on the gold chair nearly always gets it right! |
|
08 May 10 - 04:49 AM (#2902559) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: GUEST,Silas Old Cleggie will upset a lot of his voters if he jumps into bed with slimey dave - a lot of voted Lib Dem to keep the buggers out, not to put 'em in! |
|
08 May 10 - 04:56 AM (#2902561) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: GUEST,The Smiler Silas That doesn't make sense. If people wanted to stop the Cons, winning, all they had to do was vote Labour. Sadly, voting for LibDem was like voting for a quarter of a seat and consequently allowed the Cons to get more seats. |
|
08 May 10 - 04:58 AM (#2902563) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: GUEST,Silas Hi Smiler - where have you been for the past few weeks? |
|
08 May 10 - 05:09 AM (#2902565) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: s&r How many people voted Tory because Murdoch told them to? Stu |
|
08 May 10 - 06:15 AM (#2902577) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Les in Chorlton This result is far better than we, Labour people, ever hoped for and may turn out to be the best thing in the long run for Lib Dems and the general left and centre left. Celibrate .......... erm probably L in C# |
|
08 May 10 - 06:33 AM (#2902588) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: MikeL2 hi I am reading ( Daily Extress ) that Clegg is reported to have been offer the post of Deputy Prime Minister by the Tories. If this is true ( doubtful) will Clegg be able to turn it down?? In the same article Huhne has been earmarked for the Home Secretary job. Looks like some Tory noses will be pushed out of joint if it were to happen. IMHO the only Libdem to put into the Cabinet should be Vince Cable ( if only to get rid of Osborne ) but he will not be chosen - you can guarantee that. Hey ho.....happy days are here agian.... Cheers MikeL2 |
|
08 May 10 - 07:04 AM (#2902600) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Richard Bridge If they gave Cable the chancellorship - an interesting possibility. I don't see how the conservatives can buy into a mansion tax to finance tax relief for the poor without upsetting their core vote - nor indeed how they could buy into closing tax loopholes when they too are core to the conservative belief (as that odious American woman said - "only little people pay taxes"). And I don't see how the LDs could in conscience accept the conservative position on such things. I don't see how the LDs could in conscience accept such an obvious stall as an X-party commission on voting reform. I don't see how in conscience the LDs could in conscience accept the conservative mantra of "cuts now" when they have said that excessive cuts too soon could jeopardise the recovery - but we know that the immediate axe on the poor is a conservative axiom. I don't see how in conscience the LDs could accept conservative militarism - but the conservatives will never scrap trident. In short, the only explanation I can see for any conservative/LD discussions is that Clegg is simply trying to climb the greasy pole. It's a power grab for power's sake and if Clegg does do it surely it will blow the LDs apart. |
|
08 May 10 - 07:33 AM (#2902606) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Emma B "I don't see how in conscience the LDs could accept...." Unfortunately these inducements (or bribes) are aimed at the leadership and not the rank and file party members or, indeed, the people who voted for them believing they were a viable alternative to the tories The argument goes that because of the number of seats the Lib-Dems would not have to enter into a full coilition with the Tories as they would have to with the Labour Party. As such they would only need to abstain to allow legislation to pass and could claim subsequently, but maybe not in all sincerity, that they didn't vote for it. I'm inclined to agree with Richard that the effect on the parlimentary and national party of such an alliance would ultimately be more harmful than any short term gain of a place in government. |
|
08 May 10 - 07:59 AM (#2902615) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Paco O'Barmy I do some gardening for an old lass in the next village now and then, I always take my trusty lock knife with me (5inch blade) Our neighbours daughter (7yr old) often stays overnight with us on a weekend as she has three brothers and gets sick to death of them. Both of the above activities are'crimes' under New Labour laws. Ta Ta Gordon and Harriet Harperson, hello common sense. |
|
08 May 10 - 08:19 AM (#2902626) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: GUEST,Silas Oh yes. Every idiot should be allowed to carry a 5" blade around with them at all times - you know it makes sense. And why shouldn't peidophiles be alloed to babysit 7 year old girls? Sounds good to me. (Idiot) |
|
08 May 10 - 08:36 AM (#2902629) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Emma B Jusr because someone posts something in red doesn't make it true and I would suggest a simple look at current child protection legislation. There certainly are some sensible limitations on children away from home on sport trips etc sharing a room with a coach for example and some local authorities have been accused of being too tigid om allowing children in residential care or foster care to stay with friends overnight unless their friends' parents or carers had been police checked through the Criminal Records Bureau Official Ofsted policy states " It has never been government policy that friends' parents have to be police checked." "Unless a court order or the child's care plan requires otherwise, children's home staff and foster carers can decide whether to allow or refuse each request to sleep over, according to the circumstances (for example, whether they know the family and what exactly is being proposed), just as any parent does, without any requirement for police checks. They should, as any reasonable parent would, have the contact details of where the child is staying, confirm arrangements with the parents/carers beforehand, and make sure the young person has the means of calling home if they need to." |
|
08 May 10 - 08:47 AM (#2902632) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Dave the Gnome Ta Ta Gordon and Harriet Harperson, hello common sense. So it was common sense to wreck British industry as the Thatcher administration did? It was common sense to go to war with Argentina when we didn't need to? It was common sense to de-nationalise transport? Come off it. All governments make unpopular decisions. It is the nature of the beast. Maybe if some people stopped reading the Daily Mail and Sun, or at least stopped believing the crap they print, we could get a bit of common sense. Barmy by name... Cheers DeG |
|
08 May 10 - 08:54 AM (#2902636) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox Yes - Thank you Emma for correcting another Lie. As for carrying a 5" blade ... ...Why? I need to use a knife and fork to eat ... but why would i carry them around? I need to use a saw from time to time ... But why would I habitually conceal one on my person? Garden trowels are invaluable things. But why would i complain if i wasn't allowed to go out in public with one in my pocket? It would make no difference to my life. So whats the big deal about a ban on carrying a concealed lock knife? Why is it needed? It isn't. Why is it banned? Well now lets think about that shall we ... DUH! |
|
08 May 10 - 09:01 AM (#2902638) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Emma B "I do some gardening for an old lass in the next village now and then, I always take my trusty lock knife with me (5inch blade)" That's very public spirited of you and I'm sure you will be reieved to know that you are not breaking any laws The Criminal Justice Act (1988) says that you may carry a knife with a blade length of 3.0" or less so long as it is capable of folding. That means no fixed blade knives However, you may carry a larger knife if you have 'reasonable cause'. That means that you must be able to prove that you had a genuine reason for carrying the knife. You may carry a larger cutting tool if it is associated with your work (for instance a chef may carry a 9.0" butchers knife roll to and from work), or if it is associated with your sport, (for instance a fisherman may carry a 6.0" fillet knife, or a hunter may carry a 4.0" fixed blade hunting knife). I would recommend however that you don't continue to carry a knife used as gardening tool to your local football match or even dropping in on the pub on your way home Knives Act 1997 |
|
08 May 10 - 09:01 AM (#2902640) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox BACK ON TOPIC ... Looks like Clegg's demands to labour go further than PR. He's holding out because he wants Brown to stand down. So if it is to be a Lib Lab pact, we will probably see Brown abdicate and Milliband come through. Brown got very upset about this and gave Clegg an earful. So Clegg is threatening him with a Tory Lib pact as Cameron is allegedly taking a respectful and constructive approach. So it may all be down to whether Brown is prepared to give way or not. This could be Cleggs Bridge too far and might backfire on him, but if this gamble succeeds, it would be quite a coup. So prepare for the possibility of a Lib/Lab pact with Milliband as PM |
|
08 May 10 - 09:04 AM (#2902641) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Paco O'Barmy Emma doesn't like red, how about blue? Just listen to yourselves!!! My point is that what used to be everyday common activities are now 'illegal'. The shocking thing for me is that you ALL AGREE with these new petty laws. |
|
08 May 10 - 09:08 AM (#2902644) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Emma B "My point is that what used to be everyday common activities are now 'illegal'" MY point is that you are talking bollox! |
|
08 May 10 - 09:12 AM (#2902646) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox If you had read Emmas post Paco you would ave noticed that whether its in red pink blue or green, the restrictions you have talked about only exist in your imagination. So if you keepblithering on about them you're going to make yourself look like an idiot. On the subject of Clegg/Brown ... Heres a quick link . How are the labour party going to react? will they allow brown to keep them out of power? ... |
|
08 May 10 - 09:19 AM (#2902648) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Paco O'Barmy Ta Ta hippies, you lost. |
|
08 May 10 - 09:33 AM (#2902651) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox Very Good Paco. Back to reality ... "Scotland's First Minister, SNP leader Alex Salmond, called on the Lib Dems to join a "progressive alliance" involving Labour, the SNP and Plaid Cymru" This would give the progressive left the majority they need to rule. As I've said before, SNP and Plaid Cymru would both support PR, and of course the libs would support further devolution of power to wales and scotland. Labour have always claimed to support these things. The next 6 months will be about redefining the British political landscape. All Brown has to do to make it happen is resign. Now we'll get to see just what kind of a man he really is. |
|
08 May 10 - 09:41 AM (#2902655) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Paco O'Barmy Scotland should be its own sovereign state, ditto Wales and Ireland. Let them stew in their own juice without English taxpayers support. Ta ta hippies. You lost! |
|
08 May 10 - 09:59 AM (#2902662) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: GUEST,Silas Bye bye barmy. At least you can thank the Tories for your care in the community. |
|
08 May 10 - 10:02 AM (#2902663) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Paco O'Barmy Tee hee hee... who's next then trying to turn a defeat into a victory? Definition: Socialism = I want you have got, but I don't want to work for it! Ta Ta. |
|
08 May 10 - 10:02 AM (#2902664) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox "Ta ta hippies. You lost!" You really are an idiot aren't you. The tories haven't won. They aren't in Government yet. And Unless the tories give PR to the libs, they won't get into government. In which case the Libs and Labour will form the next government. If by "hippies" you mean the liberals, they are currently choosing who gets in - and they will be a part of the next government. So in conclusion ....... er ....... DUHHH!!! Idiot. |
|
08 May 10 - 10:16 AM (#2902669) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Paco O'Barmy Lox, No, I am not an idiot! I am a country boy and we have a 'can do' philosophy. In April 2009 I paid £9000 income tax.( That is just for that month) Where did it go? Why is my country swamped with illegal immigrants? Nu-labour has gagged anyone who doesn't follow them. Read Geaorge Orwells 1984. |
|
08 May 10 - 10:20 AM (#2902670) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: GUEST,Allan "Scotland should be its own sovereign state, ditto Wales and Ireland. Let them stew in their own juice without English taxpayers support." You're a bit confused as you seem to celebrating the improved election results of the most pro-union of the 3 main unionist parties! Not only were they originally opposed to any kind of devolution in Scotland and they are vehemently opposed to the SNP's aim to break with the union - but they were also willing to openlt get into bed with Ulster Unionists |
|
08 May 10 - 10:23 AM (#2902674) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox Oh hello - The BNP manifesto ... ... hey - did you hear about how well the BNP did in the genearal election AND in the council elections? Well guess what ... ... They lost ALL their seats. Should it be "ta ta" or "ha ha" ... |
|
08 May 10 - 10:28 AM (#2902678) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Paco O'Barmy I personally can see no reason why Wales, Scotland and the dreaded Nortern Ireland aren't separate countries! '['Britain is a 17th century construct. F@@k off. Then maybe I will be allowed to a white blue eyed Anglo-saxon again!! |
|
08 May 10 - 10:29 AM (#2902680) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: GUEST,Silas Actually, Barmy, I've just been googling and it appears that you are not an idiot. You need an IQ of 20 or less to be an idiot. I think you are probably higher than this, 20 - 49 ish. So, you will be pleased to learn that you are actually an imbecile. Isn't that a relief? |
|
08 May 10 - 10:34 AM (#2902681) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox Not prepared to wait ... ... Give us PR Now!! |
|
08 May 10 - 10:35 AM (#2902683) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: mousethief Why is my country swamped with illegal immigrants? Things are becoming clearer about Mr Paco. |
|
08 May 10 - 10:39 AM (#2902685) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Paco O'Barmy Cheers Silas, My business turns over £20million a year. How about yours? |
|
08 May 10 - 10:44 AM (#2902689) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: GUEST,Silas Well done. Oh very well done. £20 million a year? I am suitably impressed. The mind boggles! |
|
08 May 10 - 10:47 AM (#2902691) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox Paco - its time to go back on the meds mate. |
|
08 May 10 - 10:50 AM (#2902694) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox "Then maybe I will be allowed to a white blue eyed Anglo-saxon again!!" What are you now? And how did they stop you from being a white blue eyed anglo saxon this time? Big Brother has been colouring people in again ... |
|
08 May 10 - 11:51 AM (#2902713) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Dave the Gnome Why is my country swamped with illegal immigrants? Prove it. Nu-labour has gagged anyone who doesn't follow them. So, I guess you do follow them seeing as you are not gagged? My business turns over £20million a year... In April 2009 I paid £9000 income tax.( That is just for that month) Your business turns over £20m and yet you employ an accountant that lets you pay £9000 income tax in one month? Like I said before. Barmy by name... DeG |
|
08 May 10 - 01:17 PM (#2902740) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Bonzo3legs This means 52% of the voting electorate believe in socially democratic politics - Rubbish, I'd wager a good % vote as instructed by control freak spouses and parents for a start. A good proportion haven't the first idea what "socially democratic politics" is or have any desire to know, they vote however they have always voted. The dozen or so raving socialists posting here can't assume that millions of others are like minded. |
|
08 May 10 - 04:50 PM (#2902762) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox I see ... ... so lets get this straight ... of those who voted labour and liberal, a significant proportion were bullied into it or only did it out of party loyalty. Whereas all those who voted tory did so intelligently, of their own free will and from a well informed perspective. Ironic how Bonzo seems to be the exception to this rule. |
|
09 May 10 - 08:05 AM (#2903013) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: SPB-Cooperator Hmm proves a point of view that I have held a long time.... There is little or know correlation between income and intelligence. |
|
09 May 10 - 08:13 AM (#2903014) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: SPB-Cooperator it is interesting that my local authority has gone from Tory to Labour, while my constituency Labour to Tory. The latter no doubt due to a boundary change that has led to a demographic shift to much higher average income (i.e. more million pound plus houses.) It means that Acton which is comparatively more deprived has an MP that that was voted for by the relatively more affluent Ealing area. Maybe I'll adopt an MP from one of the surrounding constituencies. |
|
09 May 10 - 09:01 AM (#2903026) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Les in Chorlton Labour did well in the locals. Partly because of high turnout, although this could be a myth, and partly because we were even more unpopular in the last local elections L in C# |
|
09 May 10 - 09:08 AM (#2903030) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Jim McLean We are told there are 650 seats making the winning cut off at 326. If we take the 5 Sinn Fein seats away (they always abstain) and a further 4 which include the Speaker and his three deputies who are traditionally neutral, we have a new overall majority figure of 322. Lib, labour and the 9 Nationalist MPs add up to 324 whereas the Tory 306 plus 7/8 Northern Irish MPs only make 314 max. |
|
09 May 10 - 09:55 AM (#2903046) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Dave the Gnome In the local vs national results I believe the big swing to Labour is three-fold. Firstly - The locals always swing the opposite way to the latest general election. Some sort of cussedness on our part maybe? Secondly, amd more importantly, people saw that the minority extemist parties did well in the last locals - one in particular which I will not name because the scan for it! People have realised that unless they did something the loonies would get in again. We have shown what we can do as not a single seat was retained by those in question:-) Finaly. I think that the local labour parties are closer to grass roots, certainly by definition they are 'local., They understand local moods and ideas and have not, as yet, become 'New' Labour (or alternative tories). I think the local offices retain a lot of the old values which central office seems to have lost. Cheers DeG |
|
09 May 10 - 01:21 PM (#2903135) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox DDavid - The BNP lost out, but the Greens did extremely well. |
|
09 May 10 - 01:46 PM (#2903153) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Dave the Gnome Lox - I did say councils were grass roots politics so it makes sense thatthe greens did well... Not bad of the cuff:-) DEg |
|
09 May 10 - 01:57 PM (#2903164) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Bonzo3legs You clearly all have many issyoos do you not - and all the while Brown clings to number 10 like shit to a blanket!! |
|
09 May 10 - 02:27 PM (#2903185) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Les in Chorlton Mr (Ms?)legs or maybe Bonzo, you bring something to this thread that few others ever achieve. Why? Best wishes L in C# |
|
09 May 10 - 03:12 PM (#2903221) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Richard Bridge Bonzo, for fuck's sake go and buy and read a book on constitutional law rather than the Sun or Mail. |
|
09 May 10 - 03:52 PM (#2903245) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox Les - beautiful! Dave - I meant that the electorate did indeed vote to ensure people like the BNP were kept out, but that they also used their votes quite shrewdly to ensure that more constructive minority parties were not excluded. I would also quickly and slightly pedantically point out that the Greens also did well in the national election, winning their first ever seat in parliament as representatives of Brighton Pavillion. |
|
09 May 10 - 04:42 PM (#2903275) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Bonzo3legs Bonzo, for fuck's sake go and buy and read a book on constitutional law rather than the Sun or Mail. Sounds like the thought of a Cameron/Clegg government is really getting to you socialists!!! |
|
09 May 10 - 05:09 PM (#2903286) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Tootler No Bonzo, they were just pointing out the facts. There needs to be continuity, so the current PM remains so until his successor has been appointed. That being the case, Gordon Brown remains PM until such time as the various discussions that are going on have finally come to a conclusion. At which point his successor will be named and will take over. Clearly there is little Gordon Brown can do at this stage except "hold the fort". |
|
09 May 10 - 05:56 PM (#2903314) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Gervase Most people, when shown up to be as ignorant as Bonzo, would slink off into a corner and do their best to become better informed. But not our Bonzo, who seems to revel in his stupidity. And if he's paying five grand a month in tax with a company that turns over £20 million, he really is stupid! Is he, perhaps, George Osborne's advisor? |
|
09 May 10 - 07:17 PM (#2903370) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Don(Wyziwyg)T ""And if he's paying five grand a month in tax with a company that turns over £20 million, he really is stupid! Is he, perhaps, George Osborne's advisor?"" Nice try, but no coconut. The twenty million fantasist was Paco, not Bonzo. Never mind, eh? Don T. |
|
09 May 10 - 08:08 PM (#2903400) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox I thought I'd copy and paste a point I made on the other gen. election thread as this appears to be the official one now. ---- snip ---- On the subject of analyisis and predictions ... I'm starting to wonder whether the libs might jump in with the tories after all. The language that the libs and tories are using suggests that they are moving into a new phase of negotiation and that they may be comng near to making a deal. I can handle this as long as there is a referendum on PR. If Clegg jumps in with Cameron and this commitment is not made then he can kiss his career goodbye and the libs can kiss their chances goodbye for years to come and they will be known as the party who betrayed their faithful. It will be interesting to see what happens. --- snip --- |
|
10 May 10 - 02:29 AM (#2903512) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: SPB-Cooperator Seems that Bonzo is "One Tory Shirt of a Majority" :) - that has to be the expression of the year. |
|
10 May 10 - 03:42 AM (#2903539) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: theleveller Perhaps it's a good thing that one party does not have absolute power because, as the saying goes, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Look at bloody Thatcher. Look at Blair. Those sorts of politics we can do without. |
|
10 May 10 - 04:59 AM (#2903566) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox Exactly leveller. Thats why we need PR. And the libs need to make this opportunity count. If they don't we will continue to have elected dictatorships, and the party whips will ensure that democracy is flattened. Under PR there would have been considerably less haste in the invasion of Iraq. |
|
10 May 10 - 05:42 AM (#2903573) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: theleveller With you all the way on that, Lox. |
|
10 May 10 - 05:47 AM (#2903575) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie Cometh the hour, cometh the man; My country needs me! After all, elected or not, I would stand out in a well hung Parliament..... Yee! Haaahh!!! |
|
10 May 10 - 06:22 AM (#2903579) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: MikeL2 hi Britain waits with baited breath.........!!! It looks as if the Tories and the Libdems will come to some arrangement. " All in the national interest of course" - my arse as Jim Royle would say. How can two parties with almost opposite political stances get into bed together???? There are huge background recriminations in both parties going on, but the " In the National Interest " spin is being woven by both. Has anyone noticed that Vince Cable, Libdems normal spokesman is almost invisible in this?? Personal power and glory are being spun as being in mine and your interests. Never mind we will all be voting again in a matter of weeks. cheers MikeL2 |
|
10 May 10 - 06:44 AM (#2903589) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Stu "The dozen or so raving socialists posting here can't assume that millions of others are like minded." Ah, a true blue attitude. One thing about the Tories (and I used to be a party member) is that they have no idea that people on the whole are intelligent and compassionate enough to understand their votes actually have an effect and exercise their franchise with this in mind. Now is the time to jettison the old paradigm of self and take a step on the road of progressive politics to benefit all strata of society, not just the rich and scared. If Clegg doesn't recognise that most of the electorate desire this sea-change in parliamentary politics and gets in bed with the Tories then that will be potentially disastrous unless electoral reform is on the cards. Even then, Wales and Scotland will have no voice in parliament under a Con-Lib pact and we all know how the Tories feel about the parties in the devolved countries; it could set politics back for years. |
|
10 May 10 - 06:44 AM (#2903590) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Stu "The dozen or so raving socialists posting here can't assume that millions of others are like minded." Ah, a true blue attitude. One thing about the Tories (and I used to be a party member) is that they have no idea that people on the whole are intelligent and compassionate enough to understand their votes actually have an effect and exercise their franchise with this in mind. Now is the time to jettison the old paradigm of self and take a step on the road of progressive politics to benefit all strata of society, not just the rich and scared. If Clegg doesn't recognise that most of the electorate desire this sea-change in parliamentary politics and gets in bed with the Tories then that will be potentially disastrous unless electoral reform is on the cards. Even then, Wales and Scotland will have no voice in parliament under a Con-Lib pact and we all know how the Tories feel about the parties in the devolved countries; it could set politics back for years. |
|
10 May 10 - 06:49 AM (#2903593) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Bonzo3legs Socialists are so easily wound up - I laugh!! |
|
10 May 10 - 07:08 AM (#2903600) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie What's a socialist? We have three mainstream parties of the size and capacity (in numbers and money backing them) capable of forming a Westminster Parliament. We don't have a socialist one amongst them, just two versions of "middle of the road (my arse)" parties claiming to dismiss their heritage and a liberal offering of policies that are half baked on the understanding they will never become law. When I was young, and indeed when you were young, whoever you are, the Tories were seen as the establishment, the old men in grey suits, the reactionary Luddites. Labour were the nearest we had to the Socialist Utopia that sounds good on paper. Well, there is no Labour party. Worse, many younger voters have never experienced a Labour party and are in the position to judge on merit rather than tradition. Young people from working class (whatever that means) families are not conditioned into hating Tories and see no class war in weighing up the options, as the election showed. Used to be, you voted and you got the Government. Seems we can't even get that right now....... |
|
10 May 10 - 07:14 AM (#2903603) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox UPDATE! 1. This morning it turned out that the Libs said they would consider talking to Labour if Brown stood down. Then ... 2. Its just emerged that The Libs and Labour have been having face to face negotiations over the weekend. If I were a gambling man I'd have a heart attack! |
|
10 May 10 - 07:21 AM (#2903609) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox Did anyone ever see the TV adaptation of "First among Equals" in the 80's So is it to be Simon Kerslake or Raymond Gould? Lib Lab Negotiations |
|
10 May 10 - 07:24 AM (#2903612) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: GUEST "Lox - I thought I'd copy and paste a point I made on the other gen. election thread as this appears to be the official one now" Says who? |
|
10 May 10 - 07:25 AM (#2903613) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: GUEST,Jim Martin sorry, that was me! |
|
10 May 10 - 07:34 AM (#2903618) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox Me. I say that this "appears" to be the official one now. Appearances may of course be deceptive. It doesn't matter to me one way or the other. (and I wish people would read first and and questions later) |
|
10 May 10 - 07:59 AM (#2903634) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Richard Bridge Just for the record Fuck the rich, they've been fucking us for centuries. |
|
10 May 10 - 08:34 AM (#2903657) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: theleveller "The Libs and Labour have been having face to face negotiations over the weekend" As opposed to the face to arse Lib/Tory negotiations :) |
|
10 May 10 - 09:15 AM (#2903673) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Stu "Socialists are so easily wound up - I laugh!!" Yeah - you're such a card. |
|
10 May 10 - 11:04 AM (#2903724) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Bonzo3legs Fuck the rich, they've been fucking us for centuries No doubt you include in your definition of rich, the nice working class lads in Premier League football teams who must have voted labour!... |
|
10 May 10 - 11:50 AM (#2903752) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Richard Bridge How many of them can write enough to make a cross? |
|
10 May 10 - 11:59 AM (#2903756) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Acorn4 results of the General Election of November 1885:- Conservatives:Earl of Salisbury:249 Liberals: Gladstone: 335 -Lib majority over Cons:- 86 Irish Nationalists(Parnell) 86 Now that was a really interesting one! |
|
10 May 10 - 12:21 PM (#2903767) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: McGrath of Harlow the nice working class lads in Premier League football teams But most of them wouldn't have votes in the UK anyway. |
|
10 May 10 - 12:39 PM (#2903777) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: GUEST,The Smiler Brown to resign. That will probably bollocks up a Con/Lib Dem arse licking coalition. |
|
10 May 10 - 01:55 PM (#2903839) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Bonzo3legs and good ridance to him! |
|
10 May 10 - 02:51 PM (#2903888) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox Its true. Brown will step down. Brown out! Which means the tories will not Govern. What were you saying Bonzo? Something Labour losing? Something you need to know. PR is coming in. Under PR, the tories will NEVER have a majority in parliament EVER AGAIN! Have fun with Browns Wellies. |
|
10 May 10 - 02:58 PM (#2903893) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: GUEST,The Smiler Just Clegg lickarsing Labour. |
|
10 May 10 - 03:00 PM (#2903895) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: MikeL2 hi So it looks as if we are going to get a rainbow government of Labour/Libdems/greens etc etc. Obvious Brown will have to go....you will never see brown in a rainbow..... cheers MikeL2 |
|
10 May 10 - 03:10 PM (#2903908) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: theleveller What's the betting Brown will turn up as Chancellor in the coalition government? Better than anything the Tories have got. |
|
10 May 10 - 03:12 PM (#2903913) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: GUEST,The Smiler What a load of bollocks Leveller. Brown has bankrupted this country. |
|
10 May 10 - 03:32 PM (#2903932) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: theleveller And what would a Tory Chencellor have done under the circumstances, I wonder! |
|
10 May 10 - 03:34 PM (#2903934) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: GUEST,The Smiler The tories haven't been in charge for so long, I don't see how you can say that. Gordon has held the purse strings for so long and made an absolute bolloxs up of things. |
|
10 May 10 - 03:39 PM (#2903943) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Bonzo3legs I'm sure that some of these raving socialists only come out of this site when they go to collect their benefits! |
|
10 May 10 - 03:50 PM (#2903960) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Les from Hull Oh yes? Well the next benefit I claim will be my first (State Pension in three years time). |
|
10 May 10 - 03:58 PM (#2903968) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox Brown will not come back. I know this may be hard for some to believe, but Brown never had enough power to cause the global financial crisis. Bonzo - go and look up "projection" in the dictionary - then look up "denial" ... ... then have a go with the rest of the dictionary and learn to read, speak and write coherent english. Then, use your new found skills to learn about politics and economics. Till then you are only ever going to be able to write meaningless ignorant rubbish that marks you out as an imbecile. |
|
10 May 10 - 04:06 PM (#2903981) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: theleveller "I'm sure that some of these raving socialists only come out of this site when they go to collect their benefits!" Ha ha! Come on Boko, we all know that you you sit around in your bedsit in Croydon all day constructing you delusional Walter Mitty world (polo club - as if?). I don't think people 'collect' their benefit these days - dole queues are a think of the past that, thankfully, went out with Bloody Thatcher who, let's face it, put enough people on them. |
|
10 May 10 - 05:51 PM (#2904069) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Don(Wyziwyg)T ""Even then, Wales and Scotland will have no voice in parliament under a Con-Lib pact and we all know how the Tories feel about the parties in the devolved countries; it could set politics back for years."" And a Lib/Lab pact, which cannot raise a majority, will have to offer all sorts of advantages to the Scots and the Welsh, at the expense of the English. Once again we will pay through the nose for prescriptions and University fees, while they get them free, and no doubt the English, who have no parliament to protect them, will pay the lion's share of the current monstrous debt, while at the same time pouring money into the Welsh and Scottish budgets. Talk about Turkeys voting for Christmas. Don T. |
|
10 May 10 - 06:18 PM (#2904082) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox Don, The party most likely to push for tuition fees to be scrapped is the Liberals. You said in another thread that you are left of centre in your heart, but that the alternatives in the current system compel you to vote tory. Surely PR has to be the solution to your dilemna? In future you will be able to vote, not based on the relative probabilities of which lame duck you find less unpalatable, but according to your conscience - and your vote will matter and you might feel like you have a voice in government at last. We have 1 Green MP in Parliament - who would have believed that last week! In 5 years we could have several! |
|
10 May 10 - 06:47 PM (#2904097) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Richard Bridge No parliament to protect them? Funny, I thought there was this thing at Westminster. |
|
10 May 10 - 06:57 PM (#2904108) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: GUEST,AllanC "Once again we will pay through the nose for prescriptions and University fees, while they get them free," The original statement that Scots etc would have no representation in a Tory/Lib coalition is of course wrong as a good proportion of the Lib Dem MPs are from Scottish seats. However your point above is pretty pointless as the devolved Scottish govt decides how it allocates its funds so what it gives out on free prescriptions wasn't from extra funding but came from money saved elsewhere in their budget. If English people wanted the same then they should have canvassed their MPs moer for it to be introduced in England. The vast majority of MPs in the house are after all English. There are of course differing opinions as to who subsidises who but I must point out that the SNP wish for independence where of course only money raised in Scotland would be spent in Scotland - and much of the other opinion within Scotland is for for further devolution with full fiscal autonomy within the union where again as much as possible only money raised in Scotland would be spent in Scotland. The people who are rigidly opposed to this are the arch-unionists among the Labour Party but more especially among the Tory Party. |
|
11 May 10 - 01:33 AM (#2904271) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: SPB-Cooperator While PR means that parties are 'more fairly' represented in parliament, it does remove the choice that constituents make on the individual that they want to represent them, and one thing that the election showed was that incumbent MPs that constituencies likes were relected, even bucking the trend in terms of national swing. Another flaw is that PR could result in the more insidious parties gaining seats, while it would be virtually impossible for a local independent candidate to be elected. I personally do like that we seem to be heading for a preferential voting system, as used by constituency political parties to put forward candidate for approval for election and the Mayoral election. |
|
11 May 10 - 02:33 AM (#2904283) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Bonzo3legs I still laugh. |
|
11 May 10 - 03:32 AM (#2904300) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: GUEST,keith A o Hertford Alan C. "The vast majority of MPs in the house are after all English" Labour's majority was only maintained by Scottish MPs. Scottish MSPs voted for free social care, tuition fees, prescriptions and school dinners for their people, and Scottish MPs decided it could not be afforded for the English, but the English have to subsidise the Scottish largesse. NI, Wales and Scotland have their own assemblies and parliament where the English have no jurisdiction, while their MPs decide on matters that only affect England. Such injustice threatens the whole Union. |
|
11 May 10 - 04:30 AM (#2904314) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Richard Bridge Maybe you should send a gunboat, Keith |
|
11 May 10 - 04:34 AM (#2904315) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: GUEST,keith You are happy with it Richard? |
|
11 May 10 - 05:36 AM (#2904341) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox "Another flaw is that PR could result in the more insidious parties gaining seats, while it would be virtually impossible for a local independent candidate to be elected." This is interesting. Yes, the BNP will have a better chance of winning a seat or 5 under PR. However, one of the reasons people cite for voting BNP is that they don't trust the main parties in what they see as the current political stitch up. People feel disenfranchised and ignored, and they turn to the only party that claims to speak for them. Under PR, people will be more enfranchised, and as a consequence they are more likely to use their vote constructtively. Take note of the fact that in Barking and Dagenham, where a sustained camaign was waged by Hope not Hate to ensure that people were fully informed about the realities of voting for the BNP, the BNP lost all their seats. This proves that involving the electorate in the political process and giving them proper meaningful information and trusting them to participate constructively DOES contribute to a more sensible and constructive political environment. Informed and enfranchised voters are bad for the BNP. |
|
11 May 10 - 05:49 AM (#2904346) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: theleveller Well said, Lox. As a member of the Green Party, I think that PR, or something akin to it, is essential for smaller parties with an informed and popular agenda to be represented. It takes away the argument that there's no point in voting for the Greens because they don't stand a chance and, for this, I'm prepared to confront the far right, in the form of the BNP and their buddies UKIP, on an issue-based agenda. As you say, we need engagement rather than apathy. |
|
11 May 10 - 06:03 AM (#2904350) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Bonzo3legs As a member of the Green Party Well, that says it all! |
|
11 May 10 - 06:09 AM (#2904353) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox Leveller, The other point of course is that running away from debate with the BNP, or being afraid of them is not the way to approach the issue of the far right. It just allows them to grow unchecked and allows then to play with peoples paranoia. The way to deal with the far right is to include them in the National debate where they can be shown up for who they really are. As this thread shows, when shallow partisan politics is juxtaposed next to intelligent interesting conversation, it just ends up looking thick and very soon people satop paying attention. |
|
11 May 10 - 07:23 AM (#2904378) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: theleveller "Well, that says it all!" Perhaps not all, but a lot - at least I hope so. |
|
11 May 10 - 07:25 AM (#2904379) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: theleveller Lox, I'd agree with all that. Bring a slug out into the bright light of the sun and it'll soon shrivel up and die. |
|
11 May 10 - 07:29 AM (#2904381) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Bonzo3legs Ok we'll all leave lox and leveller to slug it out between themselves as it seems they want to be kings of the school playground! |
|
11 May 10 - 07:36 AM (#2904386) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Jim Carroll Margaret Thatcher's party back in power - doesn't bear thinking about really. If the Lib Dems throw in their lot with them, I hope they take a long spoon. Jim Carroll |
|
11 May 10 - 08:14 AM (#2904403) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Richard Bridge Precisely so, Jim - and one might think of the lion and the owl dining together too. |
|
11 May 10 - 08:40 AM (#2904416) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Backwoodsman And I hope the working-class tory supporters have got plenty of vaseline. They'll have very sore arses otherwise. |
|
11 May 10 - 09:06 AM (#2904423) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Bonzo3legs All going a bit sour now is it????? |
|
11 May 10 - 10:14 AM (#2904452) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: SPB-Cooperator There would still be the two unresolved debating issues, that of who the MP is representing and that of individuals outside of party politics being able to stand as an MP and sometimes being elected. |
|
11 May 10 - 10:46 AM (#2904467) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Bonzo3legs Therefore Proportional Representation really is a non starter in the UK. |
|
11 May 10 - 10:52 AM (#2904473) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Dave the Gnome Instead of PR why don't we just do away with party politics? Abolish the power struggle? Free the proletariat from oppression by power hungry leaders? Let's have people standing on issues that the electorate feel are important and let us know how they are better equiped to deal with these issues than the their opponents. They could demonstrate their talents to the general public. Have votes, with the worse one having to drop out each week. We could have Simon Cowell, Alan Sugar and Arlene Philips telling us who they favour and every week important issues could be resolved. As a series finale a small war could be staged with some country that is a threat to our democracy! How about "Britain's got Government", "Parliamentary Idol" or "The put an X in the box Factor" for a title? Sorted :D (eG) |
|
11 May 10 - 11:05 AM (#2904477) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: McGrath of Harlow "PR" can mean a whole range of different ways of doing it. Here's the Electoral Reform Society page about a whole range of a dozen possible electoral systems. Weird and wonderful range - about the only thing that 11 of them have in common - they are all better than the first-past-the-post one we have. |
|
11 May 10 - 11:10 AM (#2904480) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: theleveller Not convinced that AV is a big step forward - but it seems to be what's on offer from both parties. |
|
11 May 10 - 11:30 AM (#2904498) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox Cons offering a referendum on AV. Lab offering legislation on AV and a referendum on PR However, it is starting to look like it could be a ConDem coalition after all ... ... this whole affair is brilliant - the electorate will be better inforemd about politics as a result of these events than ever before. (with some notable exceptions who couldn't learn a song if it was programmed into them with a keyboard) If the Cons can give us genuine reassurance on PR then I could live with a ConDem coalition. The addition of SNP to a lib/lab pact could make things shaky for the country. I fully understand Cleggs Dilemma. |
|
11 May 10 - 11:43 AM (#2904506) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Bonzo3legs Labour recognise their efforts to do a deal with the Lib Dems to stay in power are over, the BBC understands - nearer!!! |
|
11 May 10 - 11:48 AM (#2904509) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox Well it looks like Bonzo's taken the time to read something for once. BBC Report. |
|
11 May 10 - 12:15 PM (#2904529) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Richard Bridge It will mean instant and savage cuts - the ultimate sellout of the electorate for posts of private influence. If young Peston is right. |
|
11 May 10 - 12:17 PM (#2904530) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: theleveller I think it's the nay-sayers in the Labour Party that have been the stumbling block. They'd rather be in opposition for a short time, watch the coalition fall apart (which, of course, it will) and then clean up at the next election. Hopefully, by then there'll have been some electoral reform which will give parties like the Greens more of a say. Hmmmmm.....like you, Lox, I can live with that. |
|
11 May 10 - 12:17 PM (#2904531) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Acorn4 I'm particularly anxious about that file marked "The Big Society" - is that another way of saying "Care in the Community"? |
|
11 May 10 - 02:56 PM (#2904650) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox I suppose it was unrealistic to expect Labour to form a new government whilst simultaneously electing a new party leader. In addition, Labour had probably had enough of being told what to do by the libs. Nonetheless, the Tories have shown that they are willing to work in a cooperative coalition. If we have PR then thats the way we want parties to behave. So Labour claimed to be in favour of PR, but in practice it may be the tories who will show that they are able to share power. Unexpectedly progressive! Whatever happens, Brown is officially recommending the Queen to invite Cameron to form a government. odds on that we'll have a ConDem Government before tomorrow night. It will be very surprising if we don't. Labour supporters can't complain, as Labour appear to have chosen these circumstances for themselves. |
|
11 May 10 - 03:33 PM (#2904671) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: GUEST,Jim Martin Looks like Lab have well & truly f****d things up! There's gonna be one helluva price to pay for this, I remember feeling just the same way when that b****y woman got in in 1979 (b****y depressed) and boy, did I have good reason to be! |
|
11 May 10 - 03:50 PM (#2904677) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: GUEST,Melodeon Bring on the election! We can genuinely say "Vote Liberal,get a Tory". My daughter is feeling betrayed at the moment, she has been a Labour voter in her short political life but last week, because she lives in a constituency where Labour have no hope of winning' voted Lib Dem "to keep the Tories out". What I wonder will Nick Clegg have to say to her and the many thousands like her who will probably vote Labour next time. Viv |
|
11 May 10 - 04:05 PM (#2904684) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox Its all over now ... Clegg may rue the day. But Labour rejected him - not the other way round. |
|
11 May 10 - 04:47 PM (#2904710) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: GUEST,SPB Co-operator I wouldn't rule out the Tories calling a snap general election before electoral reform even starts to get off the starting block and try for a single party majority. |
|
11 May 10 - 04:56 PM (#2904718) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Bonzo3legs I hope they do. |
|
11 May 10 - 05:22 PM (#2904737) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox Well they'll face a legion of voters who have deserted the liberals in the belief that voting Liberal elects Tories. I have just been reading that labours membership is increasing at an unprecedented rate as we speak ... a new mamber every 15 seconds ... Labour will never offer PR again - they are too stuck in their ways. Clegg has set the liberals back 50 years. If there is a snap election tomorrow, expect a landslide for labour. |
|
11 May 10 - 05:34 PM (#2904745) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: McGrath of Harlow So Labour claimed to be in favour of PR, No they didn't. They promised a referendum on AV, "Alternative Vote" - but though that has significant advantages over what we've got, and would eliminate the need to go in for Tactical Voting, it is not PR. In fact, as with the existing system, it would be quite possible for a party to get millions of votes - even more than other parties, and not get a single seat. Look at that link I gave to the Electoral Reform Society, which explains things like that in detail. |
|
11 May 10 - 05:36 PM (#2904748) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox So as a result of the above, the tories will need to back PR against the labour traditionalists to prevent a labour landslide next time ... ... who would have predicted that?!?!?!?!?!?!?! ... and did Clegg see it coming? If so then he is a political and diplomatic genius!! This has been the most fascinating game of chess I have ever seen and it is far from over!! |
|
11 May 10 - 05:41 PM (#2904751) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox McGrath, You have made a mistake. Labour Promised AV would be immediately legislated and that more extensive PR would go to a referendum. The tories promised a referendum on AV. They are now going to have to campaign like **** to get it, or the progressive majority in Britian will ditch the libs and unanimously back labour at the next FPTP election for the most resounding landslide in history, while the libs will be off the radar for good! |
|
11 May 10 - 05:44 PM (#2904753) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: mousethief Lox: Nonetheless, the Tories have shown that they are willing to work in a cooperative coalition. No, they haven't. They've shown that they are willing to enter into a coalition. Whether they will be cooperative or not remains to be seen. keithA: NI, Wales and Scotland have their own assemblies and parliament where the English have no jurisdiction, while their MPs decide on matters that only affect England. Such injustice threatens the whole Union. Texas has its own assembly where the rest of the nation has no say. But Texas gets to vote on matters that affect the rest of the nation. Ditto every state in the 50. There are many issues that just don't affect a state because of geography, geology, or what have you. For instance border security doesn't really affect Montana. But Montana gets a vote in it. Seems pretty normal for a quasi-federal system. |
|
11 May 10 - 05:51 PM (#2904759) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox Mousethief, Read through the rest of my posts. It looks to me like the tories will have to work cooperatively within this coalition as it is now they who are likely to depend on PR - Clegg appears to have them by the balls. |
|
11 May 10 - 06:23 PM (#2904788) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: GUEST,Allan "Labour's majority was only maintained by Scottish MPs." This is simply not true! If you're going to argue points you have to get the basic facts somewhere near the truth. After the last election Labour had 356 MPs whereas the total on the opposition benches (not counting the 5 Sinn Fein members) was 285. The had a majority of about 71. The total number of Scottish MPs was only 59 but of course Labour didn't hold all these seats. Scottish Labour only took a majority of 23 seats to Westminster. The fact is that Labour held a clear and comfortable majority of English seats at Westminster and whether Scottish MPs were present or not made little difference apart from a couple of votes. So for the most part it was only a hypothetical democratic imbalance. At the same time Labour used the so called Sewel Motion over 60 times where devolved matters were taken from the Holyrood Parliament and passed instead at Westminster. How many moans do we hear about that? Likewise we constantly hear about the West Lothian Question but the truth is for most of the last 80 years or so the UK has had a devolved parliament in Ulster. Yet we never heard about the West Belfast Question. |
|
11 May 10 - 06:57 PM (#2904810) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Teribus There's gonna be one helluva price to pay for this, I remember feeling just the same way when that b****y woman got in in 1979 (b****y depressed) and boy, did I have good reason to be! Yep must admit there is a certain feeling of deja vu about this: In 1979 the country was in a complete and utter mess after various Labour Governments/Lib-Lab Pacts/& irresponsible Trade Unions dictating to the elected Government how the country should be run (the latter could not even collectively agree on how to go about that) Come 2010 guess what the country is in a complete and utter mess after 13 years of ZANULiebour mismanagement. Damn right there is going to be one hell of a price to pay, now lay the blame for having to pay it at the feet of those leaving office, they and they alone are responsible for the mess as they and they alone created it. Just for the record that b****y woman got us out of the shit in 1979 and attracted a massive amount of foreign investment to Britain, unfortunately I do not think that Cameron is as capable. Nick Clegg was doomed from the start on the pronouncements he made immediately after the final results were in. Had he opted for a re-run of the Lib-Lab Pact it would have collapsed within months and there would have been another General Election which the Conservatives would have won outright. A new mamba joining Labour every 15 seconds?? Opened the asylums have they? After ZANULiebour's term in office you would have to be a complete and utter bloody idiot to give them a fourth bite at the cherry considering the complete and utter bollocks they have made of the last 13 years (Pension Funds raided; Gold reserves sold off at bargain basement prices; just exactly what was the man thinking about - Oh yes, he was attempting to buy votes for the good of the Labour Party, what was that? The good of the country? - That never entered the bloody equation). As for PR? You want this stupid unnecessary and damaging circus every election do you? Works very well in Italy doesn't it. Please do not quote Germany as an example, they actually have responsible Trade Unions who sit on the boards of the companies their members work for and actually have an interest in the good of those companies and the industry they are involved in. |
|
11 May 10 - 06:58 PM (#2904811) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: McGrath of Harlow There have been indeed suggestions that the Labour negotiators offered a deal with immediate legislation to provide AV, and a referendum on PR. These may or may not be correct - they have been denied by some people - but in any case the problem was that there was every reason to think that it would not have been possible to deliver any such deal. All it would have taken would have been to have a couple of Labour backbenchers vote against both offers in parliament - and several Labour backbenchers, and a couple of ministers, had indicated that they would do precisely that. The numbers just didn't add up to make a coalition of LibDems with Labour possible. Moreover, even a promise of a referendum would not mean that it would be accurate to say "Labour claimed to be in favour of PR" - after all the Tories have agreed to a referendum on AV, but that doesn't mean they won't campaign for a No vote when it comes. The same would undoubtedly have been the case with Labour and a PR referendum - and for that matter when the AV referendum does come it is certain that there will be Labour people campaigning for a No vote. All very messy. The LibDems would have been much better advised to avoid going into coalition, but try for a minority Tory government, with some lesser degree of cooperation, in exchange for the referendum on AV. Perhaps they did, and the Tories wouldn't play. |
|
11 May 10 - 07:12 PM (#2904821) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox McGrath, I think Labour backed out because they believed they would attract disenchanted liberal voters into their ranks. This appears to be true and I have heard it alleged that liberal voters are deserting in vast numbers to join labour. Labour would therefore benefit under a future FPTP election if the Lib/Con coalition were to collapse. They would also be likely to stay in power for a long time, by exploiting the slogan "a liberal vote is a tory seat" for years to come. I believe that the liberals may have anticipated this and that they may hope that it will compel the tories to campaign for PR to prevent the inevitable labour landslide whenever this adminiistration falters. Teribus. "they and they alone are responsible for the mess as they and they alone created it." Exactly how did the Labour party in Britain cause a global banking crisis, and how did they engineer it to begin in America? |
|
11 May 10 - 07:16 PM (#2904824) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox "Yep must admit there is a certain feeling of deja vu about this:" Except that Thatcher had a majority and Cameron has been reduced to working with the liberal democrats. |
|
11 May 10 - 07:22 PM (#2904832) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox Oh yes - Teribus, So I'm not allowed to mention the very inconvenient fact that PR works very well in Europe. (of course you've given a good excuse why Germany can't be mantioned) Well how about these countries? Algeria Party list Angola Party list Australia For Senate only, Single Transferable Vote Austria Party list Argentina Party list Aruba Party list Belgium Party list Bolivia Mixed Member Majoritarian Brazil Party list Bulgaria Party list Burkina Faso Party list Burundi Party list Cambodia Party list Cape Verde Party list Colombia Party list Costa Rica Party list Croatia Party list Cyprus Party list Czech Republic Party list Democratic Republic of the Congo Mixed member proportional Denmark Party list Dominican Republic Party list Equatorial Guinea Party list Estonia Party list Finland Party list Germany Mixed member proportional Greece Party list (with plurality bonus) Guinea-Bissau Party list Guyana Party list Hungary Mixed Member Majoritarian Iceland Party list India For Upper House (Rajya Sabha) only, Single Transferable Vote by State Legislatures Indonesia Party list Iraq Party list Ireland Single Transferable Vote Israel Party list Italy Party list (with plurality bonus for coalitions) Japan Mixed Member Majoritarian Latvia Party list Lesotho Mixed Member Majoritarian Liberia Party list Liechtenstein Party list Luxembourg Party list Malta Single Transferable Vote Mexico Mixed Member Majoritarian Moldova Party list New Zealand Mixed Member Proportional Namibia Party list Netherlands Party list Netherlands Antilles Party list New Caledonia Party list Nicaragua Party list Northern Ireland Single Transferable Vote (for regional assembly only) Norway Party list Paraguay Party list Peru Party list Poland Party list Portugal Party list Romania Party list Russia Party list San Marino Party list Sao Tome and Principe Party list Scotland Additional Member System (for national assembly only) Slovakia Party list Slovenia Party list South Africa Party list South Korea Party list Spain Party list Sri Lanka Party list Suriname Party list Sweden Party list Switzerland Party list Taiwan Party list Thailand Mixed Member Majoritarian Turkey Party list Ukraine Party list Uruguay Party list Venezuela Party list Wales Additional Member System (for national assembly only) Wallis and Futuna |
|
11 May 10 - 07:26 PM (#2904834) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox Oh yes - and Teribus, You will note that Iraq, whose Political reformation you champion so proudly on here, is on the list. Or did the "coalition of the willing" make a mistake there? I mean surely the Iraqi's ore than anyone need a stable government ... all that political wrangling couldn't possibly be healthy in such a volatile country could it? Here is the news. First Past the post exists because Labour and the Tories have stitched up the system to serve their own selfish interests. It keeps them in and everyone else out. |
|
11 May 10 - 11:58 PM (#2904940) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Teribus Here is the news. First Past the post exists because Labour and the Tories have stitched up the system to serve their own selfish interests. Here are the Facts: The "First Past the Post" system existed long before the Labour Party came into existence. Works perfectly well in a two Party System and does deliver strong Governments. What has happened since the creation of ZANULiebour is that there is in effect no Labour Party, there is no Party that represents the left, what you do have is a group of "professional politicians" who will do anything, no matter how destructive to the country, merely in order to cling onto power. |
|
12 May 10 - 12:11 AM (#2904947) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Teribus Good list that Lox, some absolute crackers there - Greece eh?? Iceland?? - the Scandinavian countries, socialist nannie states in which you would be complaining about "Big Brother" all the time, plus the fact of course they do pay rather a lot in tax (Norway amongst the richest in the world basic rate is 38%), which you cannot really avoid if you want to live there (small populations mean you cannot hide and to do anything you have to use what they call your "Birth-Number"). No Brown did not engineer the crisis in the global banking system Bill Clinton, Freddie Mac and Fanny May did that. All Brown did was errode our ability to withstand the worst of its ravages. Pensions - raided to pay for non-jobs Gold reserve - sold off to pay for non-jobs "Education, education, education" - complete and utter disaster NHS - more money thrown at it than you can imagine and it only gets worse and worse "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime" - complete and utter joke. The ASBO has become a badge of distinction. Glad to see the back of the lot of them. |
|
12 May 10 - 12:11 AM (#2904948) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Teribus 200 Up |
|
12 May 10 - 02:16 AM (#2904978) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Les in Chorlton So, after that terrible list of Labour failures - I wont bother boring you by contesting anything you have written Mr/Ms Teribus, you know you are correct, as I do myself, the voters, minds poisoned by the Marxist Press, couldn't bring themselves to elect a tory majority and a party closer in policy and history is getting into bed with the posh children of Thatcher and the rank and file of the Fib Dems? Who knows Best wishes L in C# |
|
12 May 10 - 02:50 AM (#2904985) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Bonzo3legs Please explain posh. |
|
12 May 10 - 03:05 AM (#2904995) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Les in Chorlton I feel sure I don't need to explain posh to anybody much. L in C# |
|
12 May 10 - 03:18 AM (#2904999) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: theleveller Fascinating to be around while history is being made - but how will this unholy alliance be judged by future generations? I suspect that, because of the animosity that this deal has caused, coupled with the unpopular eonomic measures which are going to be made and the in-fighting that is bound to ensue, The Condems will have condemned both their parties to the political wilderness for very many years. This is good news for parties like the Greens who can step in to fill the political vacuum - especially if there really is a change in the voting system. We've had a major breakthrough in winning our first seat this time and that could open the floodgates to the Green Party being a major political influence in this country. |
|
12 May 10 - 03:26 AM (#2905001) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Les in Chorlton Interesting. "This is good news for parties like the Greens who can step in to fill the political vacuum - especially if there really is a change in the voting system" Don't hold your breath Mr/Ms Green leveler. The last thing the Tories want is any form of PR. The Labour Party didn't until last week L in C# |
|
12 May 10 - 03:33 AM (#2905006) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: theleveller "Don't hold your breath Mr/Ms Green leveler." No but modestly optimistic. My glass is half full. |
|
12 May 10 - 04:20 AM (#2905022) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Dave the Gnome The results using an AV system would not have been wildly different. Con:281 Lab:262 LibDem:79 Other:28 - OK LDs would have got more votes and they still would have held the balance of power but I am not sure if the same would have been true had the vote had given anyone a majority. Does anyone know? DeG |
|
12 May 10 - 05:01 AM (#2905044) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox "who will do anything, no matter how destructive to the country, merely in order to cling onto power." So why did Labour pull out of negotiations - effectively giving the election to the tories. Try and make your response consistent with the assertion that Labour " will do anything, no matter how destructive to the country, merely in order to cling onto power." |
|
12 May 10 - 05:14 AM (#2905051) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox Teribus, "Here are the Facts:" Labour has been talking about electoral reform for 13 years but has done nothing about it. It Still Exists because it hasn't been changed. It Exists because the Tories and Labour want to keep it so that they have a duopoly on power. Your "facts" do not even begin to respond to the reality of my point. "Pensions - raided to pay for non-jobs Gold reserve - sold off to pay for non-jobs "Education, education, education" - complete and utter disaster NHS - more money thrown at it than you can imagine and it only gets worse and worse "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime" - complete and utter joke. The ASBO has become a badge of distinction." This list is taken straight out of the tory handbook for politically ignorant fools. Try saying something meaningful. "Good list that Lox, some absolute crackers there" Here we go - Teribus gets his big chance to sneer at foreigners. Come on - out of the closet ... "the Scandinavian countries, socialist nannie states in which you would be complaining about "Big Brother" all the time," I have met many scandanavians in my life and not one of them has ever made the complaint you are talking about. They are in fact very proud of their green record and their record on social responsibility, not to mention that the quality of life for the average citizen of scandanavian countries is significantly higher than it is here, as is the quality of their education. |
|
12 May 10 - 05:25 AM (#2905053) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies) "I have met many scandanavians in my life and not one of them has ever made the complaint you are talking about." Likewise. Though something from his statement makes me imagine that T hasn't. |
|
12 May 10 - 06:36 AM (#2905088) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: SPB-Cooperator Some interesting comments re: council elections http://www.sel.org.uk/uploads/Results-FINAL-10-05-10-kf.pdf |
|
12 May 10 - 11:38 AM (#2905307) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Teribus Oh let me see now: Lox and Crow Sister have met Scandinavians but never lived in a Scandanavian country, people very rarely complain when they are on holiday or working abroad. And what was Crow Sister's assumption again, oh yes, the assumption that I have never lived in a Scandinavian country. Well Crow Sister you would be dead wrong, I have lived and worked for some considerable time in Norway & Denmark + I have spent periods of up to 6 - 9 months at a time working in Finland and in Sweden. So that would cover it quite nicely don't you think. |
|
12 May 10 - 03:56 PM (#2905516) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Bonzo3legs lox is obsessed with this site |
|
12 May 10 - 04:29 PM (#2905538) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox "people very rarely complain when they are on holiday or working abroad" Nonsense. Have you ever heard the Brits moan about their political system to people of other country's? They don't half go on! Bonzo is obsessed with me. |
|
12 May 10 - 06:48 PM (#2905624) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Richard Bridge I have worked in Sweden (and had Swedish and Norwegian clients) and agree that those I met there were generally very proud of their record on progressive policies, equality, quality of life (and Ingemar Johannson)) |
|
21 May 10 - 04:23 PM (#2911523) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Paco O'Barmy Greetings Socialist. A lot of you are obviously unemployed or work for Local Government ( same thing really) otherwise you would realise that APRIL in England is the Inland Revenue 'catch up' month where your accountant advise you to come semi-clean and contribute a bit! Tee hee hee, you lost! ps: Goodbye HIPS,thank you Mr Cameron. |
|
21 May 10 - 04:49 PM (#2911540) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Bonzo3legs Have you ever heard the Brits moan about their political system to people of other country's? Presumably you mean countries?? |
|
21 May 10 - 05:39 PM (#2911576) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox Its taken you 9 days to come up with that little Gem Bozo. Well done. If you were a heckler at a gig, the audience and performers would all have gone home by the time you thought of something to shout out. There's nothing like a quick wit ... ... and you have nothing like a quick wit! Now stop following me you wierdo. |
|
21 May 10 - 06:26 PM (#2911614) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Dave the Gnome Ditto for he April comment, Paco. April 6 is tax year end so the busiest month is March. Business taxes are always due 7 months after formation anniversary and personal taxes in January. Words like hole, digging and stop would usualy spring to mind but as ignorance of anything remotely business-centric is apparant I think I am probably too late. Or would you care to share your company registration number with us to prove me wrong? DeG |
|
21 May 10 - 06:31 PM (#2911616) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: McGrath of Harlow The results using an AV system would not have been wildly different. Or maybe they would have been - nobody knows, because in an AV system any number of people wouldn't have voted the same way, and they'd have had a wider range of choices. I'd probably have ranked the one I actually voted for in fourth or fifth position under AV. |
|
22 May 10 - 08:37 AM (#2911910) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Paco O'Barmy Gnome, I would no more put my company details up on this board than I would put you out if you were on fire! |
|
22 May 10 - 01:01 PM (#2912017) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Gervase If that bullshitting troll ever managed to start a company I'd be amazed. From his posts he seems the sort of bloke that spends his days raising and lowering a barrier while wearing a hi-viz jacket. Not the sort of person to whom you'd turn for any political wit or wisdom, at any rate. |
|
22 May 10 - 05:04 PM (#2912140) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Bonzo3legs Lox, I care nothing for your hang ups and problems and certainly do not follow your posts specifically. I suggest that you are careful with your insults in the real world - it's rather different than from behind a computer screen. |
|
22 May 10 - 06:42 PM (#2912212) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Richard Bridge You know who I am. See you soon. Tosspot. |
|
23 May 10 - 05:00 AM (#2912399) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Dave the Gnome I thought as much, Paco. Anyone who would pay £9000 in income tax in one month and not know anything about HMRC close off periods is not like to know anything about running a company either. I guess you have never heard of marketing and image either? :D (eG) Co reg: 6333129 |
|
23 May 10 - 05:08 AM (#2912404) Subject: RE: BS: Tories just short of a majority From: Lox Now now Bozo - don't get upset ... (rofl) |