[Closed] Is Brown still in power?

the PM remains in power until they resign or loose a vote of no confidence. Brown is technically running the ountry, as PM, so we dont have a scenario where we have no PM for obvious reasons.

Phew!! And relax...

define "power"

define "power"

Tells people what to do. Specially people like the police or army.

What do you think he's telling them then ernie (that they didn't know already)?

scaredypants - Member
define "power"

finger on the button baby wwwwhhhoooooo

What do you think he's telling them then ernie

All sorts of things............."I'm the big boss-man", "do this do that", "yes I authorise an attack on a Afghan wedding party which is threatening coalition forces", "get me a cup of tea"........

I was thinking more like "man the barricades", "repel boarders", "kiill theem".

GB is now Caretaker PM.

Dave got more seats but not enough to govern with the magic number as pushing laws will not be easy and parliment will run badly.

Lib dems can back one of the parties as it has enough seats to make the conservative the leading party and PM Dave or back Gordo.

Once we know what Lib dems want and then they can go from there.

Lots of possible outcomes and influence on policy, economy and speed of parliment reflecting on the country.

Lib dems likely to back Dave and Tory party for stability of country and what the tories will agree on the table...could be a good change or hell.

We will have to wait and see.

Brown is doing well as he has never won an election but still manages to be PM. Squaters rights!!

Ijust about remember the last hung p'ment....it was not good.

Im 18 so was able to vote for the first time this year. I will be pissed if lib dems created a colition government with the tories. I voted for them as to not get tories government but at the same time perhaps have some change. Bit of a wasted vote espcialy as tories won round here with a huge margin

Im 18 so was able to vote for the first time this year. I will be pissed if lib dems created a colition government with the tories. I voted for them as to not get tories government but at the same time perhaps have some change. Bit of a wasted vote espcialy as tories won round here with a huge margin

Mate, it would be equally as bad if LD create a coalition with labour.
My advice is don't let this put you off, keep voting for who you believe in. My constituency did and we got change in the end.

Gordon was only in power a couple of months until it all went tits up and he sold his soul to the Dark Lord. Mandelson is the one who has been in power for the last year anyway.

Mate, it would be equally as bad if LD create a coalition with labour.

Better chance of electoral reform though.

Plus you're going to get another chance to vote in the next 12 months when the coalition collapses.

Better chance of electoral reform though.

I will be pissed if lib dems created a colition government with the tories. I voted for them as to not get tories government but at the same time perhaps have some change.

The trouble is not that many people agreed with you.

I don't agree with you aracer. I reckon many people who voted LibDen, will like Dan67, be pissed off if that translates into Nick Clegg allowing the Tories to form a government.

Specially as the only real chance of proportional representation being introduced, is from a Labour/LibDen alliance - the Tories will never introduce it. And the reason the Guardian threw it weight behind the LibDems, is because according to them, "proportional representation" was the most pressing issue - even more so than the economy ffs.

No, I reckon they will be [i]many[/i] very disappointed people - if that happens.

Bit of a wasted vote espcialy as tories won round here with a huge margin

Not a wasted vote. Only a vote not cast is a wasted vote. You've exercised your legal and democratic right to vote, and therefore have taken part in the Democratic process. You've not wasted your vote at all. Feel proud that you've performed your civic duty, and done something many people on Earth don't have to opportunity to do.

I reckon many people who voted LibDen, will like Dan67, be pissed off if that translates into Nick Clegg allowing the Tories to form a government.

Come to that, how many people aren't disappointed with last night's result? I'd hazard a guess that it might suit about 1.7% of those who voted.

Lib dems likely to back Dave and Tory party for stability of country and what the tories will agree on the table...could be a good change or hell.

As said before PR will be a main issue. This is an almost once in a lifetime chance for the Libdems to change the voting system in their favour, the tories don't want PR period. I doubt Clegg will throw that out the window and incur the wrath of his party.

The trouble is that the situation isn't good for anyone, Clegg could throw his support behind Cameron, but who's to say the Libdems won't pull the plug on their support down the line? Same goes for a lib/lab coalition.

so you could quite reasonably argue that Clegg is simply going with the more popular viewpoint.

😕 Erm no, the most "popular viewpoint" yesterday was, "we don't want a Tory government".

It would be a very strange thing indeed, if a LibDem leader justified supporting the Tories on the grounds that they won first past the post.

This is an almost once in a lifetime chance for the Libdems to change the voting system in their favour

Singlespeed shep, Gordon Brown has won quite a few elections. We vote for our local MP in this country, and GB was elected leader of the Parlimentary Labour party (or not unelected) and is, or was, prime minister.
EDIT as the Tories have been trotting this one out as regular as clockwork- 'he's unelected', what about John MAjor?

Erm no, the most "popular viewpoint" yesterday was, "we don't want a Tory government".

Gordon Brown has won quite a few elections

as the Tories have been trotting this one out as regular as clockwork- 'he's unelected', what about John MAjor?

Neil Kinnock was elected leader of the Labour party!?
Whats yor point
Its not America, you dont vote for the presedent
John Major wasn't 'elected' Prime Minister, Its not how this country works, but the Tories seem to have forgotten that. He won his seat and was made leader of the the Tory party when they couldnt hack the old witch any more, just like Gordo, when they'd had enough of Blair
Sorry if you dont like it but thats how it is

The first most popular viewpoint was "we don't want a LD govt"

I think you'll find that more popular than that, was "we want a Labour/ LibDem government"

When there isn't a clear majority of seats belonging to parties who'd definitely support such a change?

I think there probably is actually. I think it's fair to say that Labour would now support change, which gives "a clear majority of seats belonging to parties who'd definitely support such a change"

Although for decades many within the Labour Party have supported PR, it is now supported at the highest level. And not only as a result of yesterday's election - Alan Johnson a year ago :

[url= http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article6355254.ece ]Britain must have root-and-branch reform of its constitution — and a referendum on proportional representation[/url]

I think you'll find that more popular than that, was "we want a Labour/ LibDem government"

I think you'll find that more popular than that, was "we want a Labour/ LibDem government"

Oh, and whilst I'm here, a <whoosh> for colnagokid.

I think there probably is actually.

All sat there saying "we don't want FPTP system" but thinking "thank F*** for FPTP, we may be able to weasel some power out of this despite what the voters think".

Lib Dem came well down the table for number of votes, yet they seem to hold all the cards?!?
It's a funny old system. The voters have clearly shown that they dont want a Lib Dem government, yet they seem very close to having a sniff of power, albeit shared.

Mind you, "not a Green government" did even better

The last thing I would ever ever claim on here, was that my political views were in line with that of the general population........it's going to be a while before that happens.

So what's your point caller ?

The last thing I would ever ever claim on here, was that my political views were in line with that of the general population........it's going to be a while before that happens.

I'm sure they'll get round to reprogramming you soon.

There is no need to be rude fella 😐

colnagokid - Member

Singlespeed shep, Gordon Brown has won quite a few elections. We vote for our local MP in this country, and GB was elected leader of the Parlimentary Labour party (or not unelected) and is, or was, prime minister.

Was a tongue in cheek comment.

Confused result with no winners. If LibDems had done a bit better and Cons a bit worse it would be a LibLab coalition and PR in a year. All those folk who queued up to vote Con at the last minute prevented this.
The politicians have to make some sense of it while working in the national interest. The most responsible thing for Nick to do is forget PR and make a stable alliance with Dave (gnashes teeth) IMO.

Confused result with no winners.

Seems to me that the real winners in all of this - are the party which came third in the election.

Because everybody seems to agree that whilst it is uncertain whether the Tories or Labour will be involved in the next government, it's a certainty that the LibDems will be involved.

It's a no lose situation for the LibDems .........haven't they done well out of our unfair electoral system ?

Better get ready for all the farce to be replayed about October time!

There's no way this is going to be pretty for us!

There is no need to be rude fella

"BREAKING NEWS

Liberal Democrat sources have told the BBC's Jon Sopel that Gordon Brown delivered a diatribe laced with threats when he spoke to Nick Clegg last night by phone. It was in sharp contrast to the respectful and constructive talk between David Cameron and Mr Clegg, they added."

Bye-bye Gordon, you useless git 😀

I was just coming back on to post the same thing myself! So he can't even get power sharing talks right?

Jon Sopel that Gordon Brown delivered a diatribe laced with threats when he spoke to Nick Clegg last night by phone.

Probably by far and away the best strategy. Now Clegg will be forced into a weak alliance with a weak Tory government.

The soon to be staged Queen's Speech, will for the first time, reveal to the British people the full horrors of what the Tories plan to do - they won't be able to hide their policies from the British people any longer.

Support for the Tories will plummet, civil unrest will occur with strikes and massive demonstrations. War will break out within the Liberal Democrats as it's left-wing speaks out, and the public turns away in disgust at the sight of them propping up a Tory government and, the realisation that the LibDems are no alternative to Labour.

Eventually the government will be forced into an early general election, and Labour win on a massive vote.

Has the wily old ****er [i]really[/i] told Clegg to go and get stuffed ? 😀

[url= http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8669508.stm ]

But there are conflicting reports about the conversation, with one senior Lib Dem source saying Mr Brown had ranted at Mr Clegg and another telling the BBC it had been a perfectly amicable conversation.

[img] [/img]

Support for the Tories will plummet, civil unrest will occur with strikes and massive demonstrations..............................................

Eventually the government will be forced into an early general election, and Labour win on a massive vote

IME there's nothing more likely to send the UK electorate further to the right than the oiks displaying their displeasure. Certainly seemed to be a feature of the last Tory govt.

But I like your scenario.

Whenever I think of Cameron and Clegg forming an 'alliance', I'm reminded of these two:

[img] [/img]

[b][i]".... and another telling the BBC it had been a perfectly amicable conversation."[/i][/b]

Well it would make sense for them to say that.

It hardly looks good if they admit that Brown told them to get stuffed - it would be far better for them if they convinced the public that they were doing everything on [i]their[/i] terms.

If Nick Clegg goes with Tories he will not be Lib leader by end of year unless PR is on the table which no sensible Tory would agree too. I cannot understand why he would not be speaking to Labour as they both believe in PR which is the Libs No1 policy. The Libs so need Paddy Ashdown this guy is not the man to lead them.

IME there's nothing more likely to send the UK electorate further to the right than the oiks displaying their displeasure.

Actually it brought about the end of Thatcher's political career - the only thing that saved the Tories from losing a general election was the fact that they sacked her.

Don't underestimate how unpopular a Tory government under Cameron is likely to be - or any government for that matter. This is a good election to lose.

I think the Libs will agree to abstain on the Queens Speech and Budget votes, thus allowing the Tories to form a government without sullying themselves through a coalition with either party.

Brown will be ousted/quit as Labour leader and Milliband will take his place.

Then another election in a year or so.

Actually it brought about the end of Thatcher's political career - the only thing that saved the Tories from losing a general election was the fact that they sacked her

Poll Tax riot 💡 Fair point.

Brilliant: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/may/07/malcolm-tucker-may-7-outbox

I think the Libs will agree to abstain on the Queens Speech and Budget votes, thus allowing the Tories to form a government without sullying themselves through a coalition with either party.

A very possible scenario imo. And which will lead to a situation of "vote LibDem and get nothing". And also one which would back up my previous suspicion that Clegg isn't interested in power and all the difficult hard work it entails.

Politics for Clegg, I suspect, represents an interesting and rather well-paid hobby, which involves little more than "protesting". Because if he was [i]really[/i] interested in power, and making a difference on behalf of the British people, he wouldn't hesitate to grab the first opportunity in 80 years to do so.

He should publicly demand that Labour commences talks to establish a Labour-LibDem coalition in the interests of the British people. If he did that, [i]he would[/i] have PR before the next election, and real influence in government. Otherwise is alternative is to do nothing, and achieve nothing.

Well we don't know what will happen other than chit chat on possible consequences.

Just wait and see what happens and enjoy the show lol

I'm not going to dismiss Cleggs intetnt on power just yet. Surely his only real means of securing any in the long term is by getting a deal on PR with Lab, I'm not so sure that a deal on PR is going to be on the table from the Tories.
If Clegg goes into discussions with Brown having been made some kind of offer by Cameron, then he's in a much better position to demand what he wants from Brown.
I think entering into a pact with Cameron would signal the end for the Liberals with a substantial element of their support whereas a deal with Brown surely gives tham a glimpse of what they've always hoped for.

Maybe that's just naievity on my part.

PR which is the Libs No1 policy.

I think entering into a pact with Cameron would signal the end for the Liberals with a substantial element of their support whereas a deal with Brown surely gives them a glimpse of what they've always hoped for.

I agree. And I think that helps to explain the LibDem's abysmal 0.9% increase on their 2005 election result.

When you consider all that has happened since 2005 - the state of the economy, rising unemployment, the expenses 'scandal', the failure of the Tories to provide realistic alternatives, Gordon Brown's poor presentation skills, Clegg unlike Kennedy, being given equal billing in the limelight, etc, etc, it really is almost unbelievable that the LibDems for all intent and purpose, got the same level of support they got 5 years ago.

At least part of the reason for that I reckon, was the fact that many possible LibDem voters were scared off by Clegg's suggestion that he was prepared to do a deal with the Tories. Clegg should have categorically stated that he would never work with the Tories.

Instead, he categorically stated that he would never work with Gordon Brown. If you accept that LibDem voters are typically Guardian readers or disaffected Labour voting Mirror readers, then that hardly would have endeared very many of them to him.

[b][i]"If Clegg goes into discussions with Brown having been made some kind of offer by Cameron, then he's in a much better position to demand what he wants from Brown."[/i][/b]

I'm not convinced by that - Brown is no fool, he can see a bluff, and he knows full well that the LibDems getting cosy with the Tories it will spell disaster from them - as disaffected Labour voters return to Labour like prodigal sons - along with middle-class liberals.

IMO, it is much easier for Labour to regain their lost voters, than for the Libdems to find new ones. Plus much of LibDem support is very soft and unreliable whilst what's left of the Labour vote is very solid and much more reliable. The LibDems are in no where as strong a position as many would like to think.........although the way it's been reported you could be forgiven for forgetting that Labour actually got almost 2 million votes more than the LibDems.

I'm not convinced even the people who voted for them see that as the most important thing right now

I wouldn't have thought so either. But apparently that was the justification the Guardian gave for urging their readers to vote LibDem, ie, changing the electoral system was the most issue - more important, presumably, than the economy ffs. Of course the irony of all that is that the best way to guarantee electoral reform and PR, would have been to give Labour a majority.

the best way to guarantee electoral reform would have been to give Labour a majority.

Hahahahahaha. Hahahahaha. Ernie, you should be on the stage with material like that!

Of course the irony of all that is that the best way to guarantee electoral reform and PR, would have been to give Labour a majority.

Junkyard, here, have a virtual pint... 😉

Personally I hope that the Con-Lib alliance makes a success of it. It includes both my 1st and 2nd choice parties.
Given the electoral rejection of labour (Gordon?), it would be political suicide for libdems to prop up labour against the clear electoral will of the people.

Looking at the latest updates from Cameraon and Clegg, things seem to be getting cosy, and I sincerely hope they can agree a programme of action that can seen them be a progressive government between them.

If not the other alternative as I see it is for Clegg to say "sorry folks,mwe tried with the Tories, it couldn't work, so for the sake of the country we are going to pair up with labour and their new leader".

I really hope its the former, and I hope that something like AV+ is introduced so that a quarter of the vote for libdem gets more than 1/8th of the seats.
Bring back Lembet!

There is only one way to achieve PR, and that's through a Labour government. If are suggesting that the Tories would introduce PR, [i]that[/i] would be funny Flashheart. I have never ever heard a Tory politician speak in favour of PR, I have however, heard many Labour politicians speak in favour of it. And yes Junkyard, Labour has indeed introduced PR in the last 13 years - not something the Tories have ever done.

Been thinking all weekend about this. The arithmetic does not work for a Lib/Lab/Other pact, too weak numerically, propping up an outgoing party and unpopular leader.

A strong Gvt will have to be an alliance. A couple of lib dems in the cabinet sends a strong signal that they being taken seriously. But the Cons will not tolerate PR IMO.

Ernie. If labour wanted PR they had 13 years to do it. They, commisioned a report (no doubt at huge expense to the tax payer) and then Tony ignored it and shelved it. So come on, admit it Labour are only offering PR now as they are panicking.

And yes Junkyard, Labour has indeed introduced PR in the last 13 years - not something the Tories have ever done

CPT :is the pint meths or among the finer choices from your cellar?

CHB - Member
Ernie. If labour wanted PR they had 13 years to do it. They, commisioned a report (no doubt at huge expense to the tax payer) and then Tony ignored it and shelved it. So come on, admit it Labour are only offering PR now as they are panicking.

Amen.

Junkyard, I'm not opening any of the Mouton Rothschild, if that's what you're asking, but how about a nice bottle of Summer Lightning? 😉

The prospect of a Lab/Lib/SNP/Plaid/Green/SDLP alliance clearly would never work!

Even if it was put in place only long enough to implement electoral reform, the likely effect on the money markets of such a tenuous, convoluted coalition would be horrific, every vote would have to be fully whipped and a ridiculous level of bargaining to keep every single member onboard.

The biggest fear for both Labour and the Libs is another snap election - they cannot afford it, and need at least two years to get their funding back together.

Camerons comment that at the moment we need strong government in the interest of the nation is spot on!

Interestingly - A deal with Clegg solves a lot of problems for Cameron...

The main schism within the Conservative party has, for many years now, been Europe - with the leader of the party spending a huge amount of their time trying to placate either side of the argument to retain power.

Clegg solves this problem, Dave is able to say to the more radical side of the party "sorry, but we cannot countenance withdrawing from the HRA/bringing forth a referendum on Europe, as the coalition LD's wouldn't wear it" - this suits Cameron's long lasting agenda of moderating the more "right wing" - with a large majority, he wouldn't be able to do this, he would face constant sniping from the wings.

In addition, it allows Cameron to moderate the more right wing economic policies, as the main interest remains keeping the coalition together. It allows Cameron to push a more modern, less Thatcherite and more One Nation Tory agenda.

I'm afraid political memories are short - the Origins of the Tory and Liberal party are amazingly close to each other, the works of Edmund Burke for example, interesting days!

It's a no lose situation for the LibDems .........haven't they done well out of our unfair electoral system ?

Really? So getting 57 seats, i.e. 8% having polled 23% of the votes cast is a no lose situation. The reality is that the unafir voting system is a self fulfilling nightmare, because the electorate realise its virtually impossible for the liberals to win, so they simply move their votes so that they are "not wasted".

We have a political system in this country which was profound and world leading some 400 years ago, but is completely archaic now. It is steeped in the concepts of rank and privilige, and creates this utterly devisive society. If you think in terms of Labour = Roundheads, and Tory = Cavalier you won't be far off understanding the gist of it. The thing was set up to bring about a move from a robber Baron/Aristocratic style government to a "democracy" without the total overthrow of the aristocracy French stylee. In its day that was far-sighted and perhaps even sensible. The world has moved on though, and the concept of Parliamentry privilige, intended to stop democratically elected representatives being offed to the Tower and so forth is way past its sell by date, (not to mention abused), as are the concepts of a Royal Family, class, and inherited status.

Please God let them agree to change the system, so that we can move on and maybe catch up with the best of the rest of the world.

Junkyard, I'm not opening any of the Mouton Rothschild, if that's what you're asking, but how about a nice bottle of Summer Lightning?

😆

Glad to offer a (virtual) pint of Salisbury's golden nectar!

zulu eleven is spot on.
I think Cameron is to the left of his party and Clegg to the right of his.
Done carefully I really could see these two working well together and moderating the extremes withing each of their respective parties.

CFH, I shall rise a glass of G&T to your wisdom 🙂

So come on, admit it Labour are only offering PR now as they are panicking.

Well I will certainly admit that Labour will only agree to introducing PR either, because they think it will benefit them, or, because they are under pressure to do so.......and ? so ? where's the big surprise ?

Next you'll be dropping a real bombshell and you'll be telling me that the LibDems only support PR because it benefits them. But please, spare me the "stating the bleeding obvious"

The reality is, that [i]eventually[/i] PR [i]will be[/i] introduced into the British electoral process, the only uncertainty is [i]when[/i] will it be introduced. But I don't think there's any uncertainty about [i]who[/i] will be introducing it............it won't be the Tories - that's for sure. Even if Cameron agreed with it, there's no way his party ever would.

Ever since I first got involved in the Labour Movement many years ago, I have heard members of the Labour Party argue in favour of PR. And now even very senior Party members are arguing the case for PR.

And it isn't just as a result of what happened on thursday either - I've already posted this on here recently but I'll do it again, Alan Johnson in the Times over a year ago :

[url= http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article6355254.ece ]Britain must have root-and-branch reform of its constitution — and a referendum on proportional representation[/url]

As I've already said, I have never heard a Tory politician argue the case for PR.

But then again, I don't spend too much time listening to Tory politicians - so I could be wrong.

💡 Perhaps if Flashheart has managed to stop laughing now, he could post a link showing a Tory politician arguing the case for PR ?

ernie, can i join in the political debate.......please. 🙂

post a link showing a Tory politician arguing the case for PR ?

Why should I?

Why should I?

Well I'm stumped there...........I'll be damned if I can think of one good reason why you should 😐

Truly Flashheart, you have completely floored me with brilliant political acumen.

And on that note, I shall leave you 'til we lock horns once again - whilst engaging in passionate political debate.

I just hope that next time I'll be more ready for you......