News1 min ago
Perish The Thought?
21 Answers
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Hardly implausible
Labour are much more natual bedfellows for the LibDems than the Tories
There were 4 LibLab pacts before now
http://
However from current figures it doesn't look as if the LibDems would get enough seats to hold sway unless there was a fluke narrow margin
Right now predictions are for Labour to win an outright majority of about 58
http://
and while the Tories picked up a bit in the second half of 2013 unless the liberals start to rob Labour of votes it won't be enough.
David Cameron needs to get people to vote for Clegg if he wants to stay in No 10 because unless that happens he's pretty much sunk
Labour are much more natual bedfellows for the LibDems than the Tories
There were 4 LibLab pacts before now
http://
However from current figures it doesn't look as if the LibDems would get enough seats to hold sway unless there was a fluke narrow margin
Right now predictions are for Labour to win an outright majority of about 58
http://
and while the Tories picked up a bit in the second half of 2013 unless the liberals start to rob Labour of votes it won't be enough.
David Cameron needs to get people to vote for Clegg if he wants to stay in No 10 because unless that happens he's pretty much sunk
I suppose you'll not accept this as it's from the left-leaning Daily Telegraph.
http://
http://
Are you all missing something? Scotland votes for Independence in 2014??
Labour loses xx MP's the Lib-Dems, [who'd sell their soul to any-one] lose xx MP's. Cameron and the Cons lose virtually no MP's - they are almost assured of a free run at the next General Election 2015, with MP's from England, Wales and NI. Oh dear it's all a game at present. The fate of the UK is in the hands of eligible voting people on the Scottish electoral register. btw: reading a futuristic novel at present, where the new Country of "North Britain" starts at/and North of Manchester - now that's a thought!!. Also; would Wales call for an "Independence" referendum; so do we actually have a United Kingdom?
Labour loses xx MP's the Lib-Dems, [who'd sell their soul to any-one] lose xx MP's. Cameron and the Cons lose virtually no MP's - they are almost assured of a free run at the next General Election 2015, with MP's from England, Wales and NI. Oh dear it's all a game at present. The fate of the UK is in the hands of eligible voting people on the Scottish electoral register. btw: reading a futuristic novel at present, where the new Country of "North Britain" starts at/and North of Manchester - now that's a thought!!. Also; would Wales call for an "Independence" referendum; so do we actually have a United Kingdom?
// but with the Lib Dems in tow stand more of a chance of being elected. //
No. There is no pre election pact. Labour and the LiDems will fight each other at the election. A coalition after the election may happen if the electorate vote for one.
Cameron has not ruled out another coalition with the LibDems either. If the votes follow last time, the Conservatives will grasp the lifeline of the LibDems if it means they remain in power.
No. There is no pre election pact. Labour and the LiDems will fight each other at the election. A coalition after the election may happen if the electorate vote for one.
Cameron has not ruled out another coalition with the LibDems either. If the votes follow last time, the Conservatives will grasp the lifeline of the LibDems if it means they remain in power.
sandyRoe
/// I suppose you'll not accept this as it's from the left-leaning Daily Telegraph.///
No Sandy apart from your sarcasm, I would accept this, not only are we having to pay for the mess the books got into during 13 years of Labour we have also had to endure a world wide recession.
So perhaps this statement:
/// Another £25bn must be cut in order to balance the books, ///
Is only to prepare us for the obvious, which surely is much more useful than pretending everything in the garden is lovely, just to win an election?
/// I suppose you'll not accept this as it's from the left-leaning Daily Telegraph.///
No Sandy apart from your sarcasm, I would accept this, not only are we having to pay for the mess the books got into during 13 years of Labour we have also had to endure a world wide recession.
So perhaps this statement:
/// Another £25bn must be cut in order to balance the books, ///
Is only to prepare us for the obvious, which surely is much more useful than pretending everything in the garden is lovely, just to win an election?
Yes they are a bad thing, Sandy, because they make for weak government (as has been adequately demonstrated by this latest shambolic arrangement) and everybody gets what nobody wants. Since 2010 we have seen the party that came a distant third in the General Election calling the shots on a number of major issues.
If you want to see how permanent coalition governments really work just take a look at Italy. There, because of their ridiculous voting system, Coalition is the only outcome. There have been in excess of 60 governments since 1945 with only one lasting its full term. The average duration is just a few months. The country is rife with political corruption (mainly because of the shady deals that have to be accomplished to secure power); its economy has stagnated; its attitude towards women leaves a lot to be desired and its justice system is highly politicised.
Yes, the most successful nation in Europe at present is indeed run by a Coalition. But so is one of the least successful (see above). It is arguable that the UK may have been even more successful had Mr Cameron not had to pander to the whims of Clegg, Cable and Co.
Nations need strong government and that usually involves upsetting up to half of the people at any one time because most nations (UK included) seem to be divided politically roughly in half. Coalitions do not provide this. Personally I would outlaw all political parties and make individual MPs form their own Coalitions on individual issues. However, I appreciate there are problems achieving this in the short term so whilst parties exist I cannot laud Coalitions. All they do is allow also-rans to get their hands on the spare keys to No.10.
If you want to see how permanent coalition governments really work just take a look at Italy. There, because of their ridiculous voting system, Coalition is the only outcome. There have been in excess of 60 governments since 1945 with only one lasting its full term. The average duration is just a few months. The country is rife with political corruption (mainly because of the shady deals that have to be accomplished to secure power); its economy has stagnated; its attitude towards women leaves a lot to be desired and its justice system is highly politicised.
Yes, the most successful nation in Europe at present is indeed run by a Coalition. But so is one of the least successful (see above). It is arguable that the UK may have been even more successful had Mr Cameron not had to pander to the whims of Clegg, Cable and Co.
Nations need strong government and that usually involves upsetting up to half of the people at any one time because most nations (UK included) seem to be divided politically roughly in half. Coalitions do not provide this. Personally I would outlaw all political parties and make individual MPs form their own Coalitions on individual issues. However, I appreciate there are problems achieving this in the short term so whilst parties exist I cannot laud Coalitions. All they do is allow also-rans to get their hands on the spare keys to No.10.
No, nobody wanted it, emmie. It was not an option of the ballot form. The danger is that politicians (especially outside the two main parties) will get a sniff of power and that efforts will be made to ensure that no single party is likely to gain power in the future. Witness Mr Clegg's failed AV proposal, thankfully kicked into touch by a sensible electorate.
Coalitions suit some politicians. They do nothing for the electorate.
Coalitions suit some politicians. They do nothing for the electorate.
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles2 mins ago
Starmer Continues With "Grossly...
News2 mins ago
News2 mins ago
News3 mins ago
