pslewis

Get your diaries out and fill in 14th October 2010.

That's the date we will all be voting again ....

You heard it here first!

Mark my words!

Leslie

As long as that!

Les

pslewis

Yep....

I think the Tories will 'attempt' to govern with a minority .... that will last 6 months.

The Zohan

Still gotta be better than NL + three other parties they will need to get together with to get enough seats to govern...

AlzayUK300

iTrader: (2)

How can the Tories be allowed to rule when a whole country, part of the so called UK, didn't vote for them. They have no mandate to rule in Scotland or Wales or NI?

richie001

iTrader: (3)

True but do Labour have a mandate to rule in England .

Leslie

Why should Scottish MP's be allowed to vote in the UK parliament when the other MP's have no say in the Scottish parliament?

What benefits do the Scots only get which other UK citizens don't but are still paid out of UK taxes?

Les

Bram

The Tories are well within their rights to form a government. Only two problems they must first face to form a government.

1. How do they get a Queens speech passed without others support
2. How do they get a economic policy passed without others support

If they do manage this a big IF, they must then face a lot of their legislation/manifesto not getting passed in practice without going to other parties for assistance or compromise.

Lets take one, stopping NI rise. Both Libs and Labour will vote against this as they both agree with it.

Lets see another issue that could come to the fore. Lib/Nationals/Labour put a bill in to change electoral reform they all agree with it only how far it goes is the sticky bit. End of Tories as we know it, maybe. I would think with such a bill threat DC will go to the country or go to country cause he cannot get anything done due to restraints placed on him by his own right wingers. They might even split the party, the divisions are starting as I write, DC is not that popular with the Tory old guard, he promised government and failed to deliver and cost £18 million into the bargain.

I would also not rule out GB stepping down for the good of the party. Which is another option for Li Dem/Labour/ Nationalist/SDLP/Green alliance to succeed.

Bram

The same can be said for the disparity between what is spent in the South of England (London) than anything the Scots/Welsh/North of England/NI get per tax spent. The Scots and Welsh have chose to spend their cash wiser than the English, do not object join in the opportunity for splitting government from London, Federalism is the key.

I must also point out if you refuse the Scots/Welsh/NI the vote in parliement it is the end of the Union. It is written in the law. But I for one would not object to ratifying a new Union deal, it would take more than what you bought the Scots for the last time, a great deal more, England could be on parity with the likes of Belgium as an independent wee soul in EC and lose you UN seat on council, etc, etc. Scots never had it so it makes no difference how small a country we are, could English ego deal the same, you may even be entitled to third world benefits.

CrisPDuk

I disagree there, Brown is the sort of person who will try to hang on to everything he can, for as long as he can, no matter the cost

douglasb

Because many of the decisions made in the UK parliament affect the whole UK and not just England. As long as Scotland, England, Wales and Northern Ireland are a Union there should be a Union parliament.

The question, "Why should Scottish MPs be allowed to vote on purely English matters in the UK parliament?" is a rather different one and is the famous West Lothian Question.

The (sole) Scottish Conservative MP doesn't vote on purely English matters and neither do the SNP members. I don't know about the Scottish Lib Dems but I suspect they don't vote either. It's really only a problem because of Scottish Labour MPs who vote on English matters. If they just "sat on their hands" when Westminster was deliberating on English matters the problem would be solved without the need for an English parliament and another layer of government.

Bram

Brown is a socialist by birth I feel he would not stand in the way of a Labour government if his head was the price.

He will go for the next election if there is one anyway, I for my part feel if Labour had another leader if one could have been found Labour would have won this election. My reasoning is the fickle short term memories of the voters and how all the old mp's were infected with money spent via legitimate expenses or not. Did some who were tarnished get elected yes they did, true some of the worse got out first but they were all claiming money which is hard to justify on the grounds they were making them on, second houses etc. I see Murphy the Labour Scottish Secretary has flipped his house back to Glasgow as main accomadation. The merry-go-round is still with us I am afraid and it needs more than one party to stop it, three or four parties forming a government may be the answer.

Tory policies are not as they have no overall mandate to govern the UK as three of the four countries did not want them. The other group whichever join it to make a government having a far superior vote count and it is what the voters wanted as it forms a majority, it is new and unique answer to politics the UK find itself. It is a UK election after all not a English or have I missed something.

douglasb

Bram - I think you contradict yourself in your last paragraph. You say that "three of the four countries did not want them" but then say "it is a UK election".

If it's a UK election then it's what the majority of the UK vote for that the whole UK gets (even if some areas strongly vote against that).

alcazar

iTrader: (2)

I didn't know that, and it's very interesting.

Why can we not just introduce a law that disallows them voting on PURELY English matters?

Or would that just be too simple?

Bram

I do not think I contradict myself at all, the other deal brokers Lab/Dem/Nat/etc bring with them their votes and it far out ways the third or so the Tories can bring. Spain do it for example and so do New Zealand to a lesser degree. So enables more voters getting what they voted for in the way of reform, tax and spending enabling a government to be formed.

A very original idea for UK not since the war have we had such a chance to bring so many views in to one government, is it a bad thing maybe necessity is the mother of invention after all.

This is what proportional also supplies future electorate.

Would have the Iraq War for example happened and UK troops been sent. It may have but I feel it would have unraveled the threads that formed the government so would not have happened under such a formed government. All you need do is stop thinking the old political way how government is formed, it did not hold up to modern diverse voting and does not hold with democracy in its best form. Or do you wish for one party to rule over with their thinking, have a look at how many voted for any government in the last 40 years and watch the decline. The less rule the most, not democratic at all. I do not know why no political parties tried doing this before, joining forces so to speak.

r32

Is this from the same person who told you about putting the clocks back?

J4CKO

iTrader: (1)

He was right about the Snow !

Anyway, have you noticed how Cameron and Clegg look quite similar ?

SwissTony

iTrader: (19)

Look at the map of the voting and I see the Lib Dem are the majority in Scotland

You made your stance quite clear when in the other thread you said that GB was the clear and obvious leader for the UK. Well it seems your faith is somewhat misguided and bourne out by the election results

Clarebabes

I'd be more than happy to let Scotland, Wales and NI drift off on their own with no funding from London at all for any of them. Let's see how long they can offer no university fees and free hospital parking then....

alcazar

iTrader: (2)

Abso-fekkin-lutely!

Leslie

The break up of the Union would be a big mistake.

Les

ALi-B

iTrader: (1)

Scots and Welsh seem to be under the impression its only them that get a rough deal from UK parliament, when its infact awywhere in the UK outside of London; especially Northern England and the Midlands. As the English (outside of London) don't have their own parliament to represent and restore some balance in their own interests; They have to make do with a blinkered London based parliament. Not helped when in past thirteen years its been by a bunch of Scotsmen!

A little musing anecdote I have; I visited the Welsh assembly earlier this years with some freinds. Whilst looking round, my one friend said with a wry grin "we paid for this". He's English, so that may explain the hint of sarcasm

alcazar

iTrader: (2)

Explain, please?

Leslie

The strength of this country depends on the Union.

Les

alcazar

iTrader: (2)

How so? You are just making statements. Back them up with argument, please?

Xx-IAN-xX

Knock knock ......

Who's there ? ......

David ......

David Who ? ......

Gordon open the ****ing door and get out of my house.

Bram

How long would London be able to finance anything they get which is far more than any Welsh/Scots/Irish get by capita. Would the rest of England in a devolved union just let you by chance carry on get the lion share and financial bias the South of England (London) benefit greatly from at present.

What happens when you chip away at London's funded government expenditure. Would England need such a foreign or defence spend in London or any other dept as it is at present, this would affect a great deeper than you are giving account off. Or do you think London has jobs they can move into without white collar government jobs due to loss of union or need of their services.

A break up of the union would mean drastic drops in Navy/Army and RAF manpower as an example. You must also find jobs from them returning to civie and last of all the demise of Union would also stop UK being a world player. Who would want to listen to England voice or what clout would you have. You would never be up with France and Germany in Europe and would rather be akin to Poland/Belguim in this respect. Maybe it would mean a mass exodus to European countries by English economic migrants. Which is a bit ironic as the London based governments have done the same to Scots/Irish/Irish/Northern England over the last centuries.

All interesting stuff, not akin to turkeys voting for xmas

Clarebabes

I was sort of joking, these threads always get full of moaning from the Scots and Welsh etc.... that they are so hard done by.

The Zohan

Have you not seen Braveheart or Ivor the Engine - they are repressed and stereotyped by the scummy Brits who own thier a$$es