Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Not very Inspiring: local Labour Twitterers stick the tweetboot in to David Schmitz & Gorrie
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by E. F. Salzman on
-
All the signs are that PR will be shunted aside with promises of meetings about meetings and commissions which can be again ignored as they were in the past. Procedural obstructions will provide all the needed delays, while people mouth the right things. For Clegg to accept this would be sell-out, if he knows or heeds the history of this issue and coalition negotiations.
For Lib Dems to get into bed with Con without this commitment is self-out, or their own power-grabbing under guise of best thing for country, or pursing mug's game in which the issue will be "discussed" to death, either going down in flames or dying away, with everyone trumpeting how there are far more important issues.
In fact, the one clear thing arising from this election is that this issue is widely viewed countrwide as an important one. Therefore, anyone claiming that rnow precedence needs to be given to other "more importan" issues - with this argument for "good of country" used to cow others into submission - would be ignoring or diminishing in importance the one loud and clear and shared opinion of this electorate.
-
Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on
-
ONE of the factors in the calculations is that David Cameron does not have to do a deal.
If he can't agree terms with Nick Clegg, then he could carry on with a minority government. If and when governance is made impossible by the two other main parties, Mr Cameron could go to the country again in say six months and ask the electorate who is being responsible here? And the two Oppo parties could well be trounced in such circumstances.
Mr Clegg must take care not to overplay his hand.
-
-
If there is another election now, I for one would happily withdraw my first vote ever for Lib Dems and return to Labour (the lesser of two evils). I wonder how many more would do same.
-
Permalink Reply by matt on
-
You can't blame Clegg for the situation he faces which was given to him by the voters and the current electoral system. The country needs stable governance. The voters didn't give their country that. So Clegg finds himself the possible kingmaker looking to join a form of coalition that may give that stability.
Difficult with the Tories for obvious policy differences but it gives the numbers for majority government. Difficult with Labour because it would have to involve so many other smaller parties as well; SNP, Plaid Cymru, DUP etc. These regional parties will always be attaching support for difficult national decisions to their regional demands.
Both these possible coalitions would be under immense pressure as the country enters it's period of austerity in order to pay off it's debt.
-
-
Actually, I misspoke. What I meant was that if he reneges on his promise about referendum I'd withdraw vote. I do recognise Clegg's dilemma and that an alliance with Labour would require other support, and surely Brown stepping aside to give a fresh breath of air to this option for many against him, right or wrong.
The only reason for Conservatives to object to referendum on electoral reform is a principled stance against discovering the electorate's view on this issue. And what does THAT tell us about that party?! What we already know in fact.
-
-
Yes Brown would have to go if Clegg looks to Labour for a deal and Clegg has publicly said that. Trouble is all these things take time and the electorate may not like Labour in power with another leader they didn't vote in. All getting rather complicated isn't it!
-
-
Clive,
For Cameron to attempt minority government means exposing his party to another cliffhanger election and a worse blow.
Furthermore, in doing this, he'd be exposing the underside of his party many find so distasteful: the right-wing, empire-clinging, elitist, monetary-driven and selfishly wealthy, not even the more pragmatic kind that Cameron himself may or may not be.
By that time too, the party would have shown they don't trust their own electorate to give their views on electoral reform, the one issue it does seem there is a lot of agreement on. They may instead use the delaying tactics of meetings and commissions. AS WAS USED BEFORE, and came to nothing, procedural stuff snarling up progress. If the only progress in this issue is Cons arguing for some watered down reform intended to keep them in power (or for any party to do so) would reveal much about their principles, since everyone is suddenly getting so high-minded! (That'd be nice.)
By acting in a way that's likely to entail a second election, Cameron would indicate that despite what he says he's notm putting country first, apart from the fact by then Brown could probably be gone, So what I'm saying is it's by no means certain what the outcome would be in an election six months hence.
-
Permalink Reply by John McMullan on
-
the right-wing, empire-clinging, elitist, monetary-driven and selfishly wealthy
Don't hold back there. You missed out homophobic and racist too BTW.
-
-
I hold no brief for the Conservative Party, but to suggest that winning both the most seats and the most popular votes is somehow a bad "blow" seems wide of the mark and less than objective.
Yes, for Mr Cameron to attempt a minority government would expose his party to another election in say six months time, which he would be likely to win outright. Up until that time, the other parties would make governance impossible and the electorate would not forgive what would be seen, generally but not universialy, as irresponsible behaviour.
Such a period of uncertainty would be damaging to the economy (including exchange rates, interest rates, investment, the stock market, borrowing ability). Holding a second election (to get a unambiguous mandate) would be the only reasonable thing any party could do in the circumstances and the parties seen as responsible would be hammered in the ballot box.
Any second election in the near term would see the Conservatives returned decisively (other things being equal). I'm sure these things will weigh on Mr Clegg's mind. I think some kind of a deal is still more likely than not; I merely say that Mr Cameron is not bound to do a deal.
Mr Clegg may have to settle for something modest, such as a reform of the local government electoral process. In many ways that would be a good compromise - try out PR locally and if it is not a success, then dump it. If the experiment works, adopt it nationally.
-
-
A far greater portion of population voted in favour of centre-left (or left) opinion, putting together Lib Dem and Labour votes than voted Con, never mind other parties. THAT is the truth of this country's majority opinion.
-
-
You bracket the Labour Party in centre-left (or left) opinion, but in my mind, New Labour stopped being a left wing party years ago. Many of their polices would have shamed the Conservative Party and made them blush!
I'm thinking of the pursuance of more privatisations, the PFIs (that mortgaged all our futures well before the financial crisis hit), the cosiness with The City, the tax-loopholes left unclosed, the de-regulation of a range of activities, pro-gambling legislation. I could go on. Unusual closeness to a Republican Administration in the USA.
These traditionally would be thought of as "right" wing policies.
The Labour Government even wanted to privatise air traffic control and RAF fighter pilot training! I think the upshot is that old notions about what is "right" and "left" wing are less clear.
What I listed are mainly policies. But what has been the net effect of 13 years of 'socialist' government? income inequality has increased. If ever there was an indictment of New Labour, on its own terms, that is it.
The old party shibboleths seem less relevant, if not tired out: the country's majority opinion, which you rightly hold as important, should be reflected at least in part by proportional representation. That's what I hope comes out of the present impasse, for long term benefit for the country as a whole.
-
-
I completely agree with you about Labour. As I said while being door-stepped pre-election, it is not me who has left Labour. The party has left me. Hence my vote for Lib-Dems.
But I seriously doubt Cameron will be in any position than to agree to anything substantive. As I said: more commissions and meetings to have meetings. This has all happened before and promise reneged on to buy coalition. Will get bogged down in procedural morass. That's one way to claim you're pursuing and then let this sort of thing finish it off slowly. But I'd like to be proven wrong.
You mean be right about shibboleths, but I profoundly distrust and dislike the hidden and not--so-hidden face of Conservativism and all it stands for. If anything, there is more bigotry lurking there, and special interests nothing whatsoever to do with those held by majority electorate I suspect.
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
