[Closed] Nick Clegg, you are the weakest link, goodbye!

But the problem with labour is that they're so frightened of causing offence, they're not actually for anything. You can't nail your colours to the mast, if the mast is made of jelly.

They're going to lose

They're going to lose

Of course. There is an alternative political position to tory dogma, and they're miserably failing to articulate it in a doomed attempt to be all things to all men.

They're going to lose

So are the Tories. Remember; they didn't win last time. Despite acting like they got a landslide. The lib dems will be wiped out at the next election. I think we'd better get used to the idea of hung parliaments. I can't see it going any other way. Despite Labour gifting Dave the most laughable leader in the parties history

So are the Tories. Remember; they didn't win last time

The Prime Minister of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is The Right Honourable David Cameron MP. I dont think it really matters that he doesnt meet your definition of winning.

Interesting idea, that the Lib Dems are en-route to electoral annhilation at the next General Election...

Then followed up with quite a few comments about the LDs being the only effective opposition to the more rightist Tory plans, and acting as some sort of modifier / balance to the more outlandish Tory ideas.

Sounds clear to me, the intelligent, articulate and well informed British electorate will see the value in the role played in the coalition Govt...

Oh, bugger, I new their was a flaw in this democracy idea 🙁

ETA

The Prime Minister of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is The Right Honourable David Cameron MP. I dont think it really matters that he doesnt meet your definition of winning.

In practice, sadly, you are right - this country has had too many elected dictatorships - Thatcher esp, and Blair's warmongerring.

However, as an eternal idealist, it would be nice consider a little bit of "representation" at the heart of Government...

A coalition does more to this end than the other recent majority administrations, IMO

The lib dems will be wiped out at the next election. I think we'd better get used to the idea of hung parliaments.

bit of a non-sequitur that.

If the LibDems are wiped out then there's [i]less[/i] likelihood of a hung parliament as the alternative parties are unlikely to amount to a sufficiently sized total to get in the way of two-party "hegemony" again.

A coalition does more to this end than the other recent majority administrations, IMO

I agree. My preference, depending on the leadership would be

1. Tory-Lib coalition
2. Tory
3. Labour-Lib
4. Labour

Though if you put the Blairites in sole charge of the Labour Party and told the unions to get lost I'd move Labour up to #3 or even #2.

I think it was a programme I was listening to about the German political system. Their coalition governments are made up of several parties some of which have been in power 20+ years. This has held to much better long-term policies and planning, and not the short-term policies our 2 party system creates. Do we need more strong parties in the UK?

However, as an eternal idealist, it would be nice consider a little bit of "representation" at the heart of Government...

More John Prescott's?? Please save us!!

The good news is that the Tories are revealing their true colours as swivel-eyed self-interested loons who have a pathological need to dismantle/privatise - i.e. "the nasty party" of old.

...as opposed to those swivel-eyed self-interested loons who have a pathological need to intervene/nationalise - i.e. "the nasty party" of old

Sounds like a coalition really is a good idea then - hadn't thought about it that way 😉

i think they will legitimately be able to say "our road tax pays a company to charge us to use the roads"

THERE.IS.NO.SUCH.THING.AS.ROAD.TAX

How many more times before this sinks in, eh?

The Prime Minister of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is The Right Honourable David Cameron MP. I dont think it really matters that he doesnt meet your definition of winning.

The conservatives polled (IIRC) about 23% of the electorate's vote, so he's hardly representing the people.

As an aside, the conservatives think that unions should achieve greater than 50% of their membership vote before striking.

The good news is that the Tories are revealing their true colours as swivel-eyed self-interested loons who have a pathological need to dismantle/privatise - i.e. "the nasty party" of old.

More than one in four Conservative peers - 62 out of the total of 216 - and many other members of the House of Lords have a direct financial interest in the radical re-shaping of the NHS in England

When you vote in a sovereign government, there seems to be little you can do when they break election promises and start to dismantle the way we live (which incidentally, may not have been the best way to do things anyhow) 1 in 4 workers in the civil service in some form or other, manufacturing moving abroad leaving us with a service sector, successive governments selling off the crown jewels, food and fuel going up, wages not so much and I wouldn't consider rising unemployment figures a bonus.

And what's with trying to get 50% of the youth through university? Used to be only 12% and now they've achieved 41%. Be alright if the majority were actually getting an education instead of a government mutilated curriculum, but when they show no interest, don't "read" their degree and then whinge their reference states, "X student attended x university and studied x course between x dates." When that reference can't get them a job, jobs which needed A levels 15 years ago and now needing degrees, they don't know what to do with themselves after wasting 3 years of their life getting pissed and ending up dressing the same as everyone else, listening to the same music and with little interest in reading for leisure or any hard work that won't immediately benefit them (teach to test system to blame.)

Coalitions are the way forward if we look to the EU. This is our first voyage into the unknown and they better not mess it up, although it looks like they are going to. The population of this country is deeply apathetic and are going to let the government (whoever they are) do whatever they feel they want to, and with the lobbyists and their money, you can bet it's not going to help the man on the street, even though you'd think that if there is more money going round there is more chance of it getting in their pockets.

The conservatives polled (IIRC) about 23% of the electorate's vote

What did the party you voted for poll?

The conservatives polled (IIRC) about 23% of the electorate's vote, so he's hardly representing the people.

Just like Tony and Gordon after 2005 (actually they got an even lower proportion than that - oh and none of the public ever voted for Gordon as PM).

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/voting-intention/yougov

Currently the Tories would lose.

Yay! Now we just need Alex Salmond to permanently...go away.

ohnohesback - Member

The much-heralded 'falling out' stories are but window dressing.

Absolutely. It tends to remind me how the US government periodically raps Israel of the back of the knuckles after Israel has committed a particularly outrageous act which shocks global opinion. It is of course a completely meaningless exercise and Israel is fully aware that they have nothing to worry about.

.

Mr Woppit - Member

It used to be the case that government Capital Projects were a useful tool to help regenerate moribund economies. This of course, was predicated on governments being able to afford them. This is not the case today.

Immediately after the end of WW2 Britain was absolutely skint and extremely in debt. And yet it was precisely during this period that the British government committed itself to one of the greatest spending projects of all time - the creation of the National Health Service. And of course the welfare state.

[img] [/img]

It is precisely when the economy is up Shit Creek without a paddle that "government Capital Projects" are so useful.

.

BTW mcboo, I'm deeply touched that you've alleviated me to such a position, that you are now suggesting the only alternative to the Tories, LibDems, and Labour, is the SNP, Greens, and Ernie.

But truly, despite being deeply touched and honoured, I'm not worthy - I'm just a simple building worker who likes to occasionally ride a bike. But thanks anyway 8)

Just for the record, in case you weren't aware, I supported the Greens in 2010 (previously I supported the LibDems until Clegg became leader) And certainly up until yesterday my probable intention was to support the Greens on 2015 (certainly with respect to my constituency - elsewhere might have resulted in a different conclusion) Although since yesterday I have become particularly interested in the coalition healthcare professionals who intend to field candidates in targeted seats. IMO they have the potential to represent the most positive development in British politics for decades. I will certainly follow how they develop closely, and hopefully if things take off I'll make a commitment to help them in their election work, But very early days yet.

**** me. Is that a voter who considers the candidates rather then voting the bloody same each and every time based on some political dogma?

oh and none of the public ever voted for Gordon as PM).

and hopefully if things take off I'll make a commitment to help them in their election work, But very early days yet.

Democracy in action that is. Not sure how a doctor running in a Labour/Tory marginal helps the left but who knows.

BTW my brother in law is a doctor, he'd go way further than the government in restructuring the NHS. Would have charges for seeing your GP for example, much like Germany and France. Doesnt think he is at all unusual in the profession in wanting to see that introduced. Doctors will do what they think benefits them, that was true when they opposed the very formation of the NHS, and it is true today.

E-L be careful reading ukpublicspending.co.uk and other graphs on the UK. They all have a sneaky habit of showing artifical figures (eh excluding bank bailout, unfunded pension liabilities).

Even if current plans are implemented we will be over 100% in 2-3 years time at around £1.5 trillion, then add the bank bailouts and we are £2.2trillion (so getting around 150% GDP in the graph), then £1.1 trillion of unfunded pensions.....and it doesn't look quite so rosy.

And of course Gov projections assume Europe sorts itself out (where is are those nice marines that we can tell that to?)

Not sure how a doctor running in a Labour/Tory marginal helps the left but who knows.

And I'm not sure how having Labour win an election helps the Left.

That's two us confused then.

E-L be careful reading ukpublicspending.co.uk and other graphs on the UK.

I deliberately post graphs to wind you, and others, up teamhurtmore. I'm wicked like that.

I deliberately post graphs to wind you, and others, up teamhurtmore. I'm wicked like that.

Everyone knows it's not the spankiest graph, but the longest sentence with the most clauses in it that wins, non? 😀

He wants his 5 minute,s of fame so he will put up and shut up and do as his tory masters tell him what he can say ie just enought that some people believe he has some say in this government.
This government hasn't even started with the real cut backs yet , how long before depending where you live will determine how much dole money you get ? Because the amount of people that they are going to put out of work and the tax cuts for the rich is going to cost a lot of money that the low and middle class tax payers will have to find as it won't be the rich .
Hopefully Clegg will find his backbone and force another election and if this happens and the Torys get back in then the people in this country deserve all that will happen to them .

Teamhurtmore - unfunded (sic) pension liabilities are not debts and are mainly imaginary, bank bailouts are purchases of assets and have value in large part so are not debts either

THERE.IS.NO.SUCH.THING.AS.ROAD.TAX

How many more times before this sinks in, eh?

Sorry, I thought it was obvious that I was predicting what the average driver is likely to say (but obviously not). I know it and you know it but they don't.

And if it is used directly to pay for roads then the percieved strength of their arguement will grow.

ernie_lynch - Member. E-L be careful reading ukpublicspending.co.uk and other graphs on the UK. I deliberately post graphs to wind you, and others, up teamhurtmore. I'm wicked like that.

Surely not! 😉 No-one winds each up on here!! But you gave the game away with Argie, I'm afraid!! It doesn't vaguely wind me up anymore. But hat's off to you, you still seem to ruffle Z11's feathers though, especially yesterday with national pay awards. I was amazed at his stamina/the fact he missed the wind up.

Sorry TJ they are both liabilities (or did you take a sabbatical and work for RBS for a while?)

Not debts tho. 🙂 Liabilities - do you include the next 50 years public sector pay? You are including the pensions. Do you include Trident? Do you include the cost of decommissioning the nuclear power stations? Do you include the cost of crossrail?

TJ - may I suggest the ONS and a read of their definitions (and why they hide, sorry exclude, financial interventions) as I know you wont believe me?

Teej doesn't think bank bailouts are debts which is a problem because an independent Scotland is going to be saddled with the rotting carcas that is the Royal Bank of Scotland. You guys enjoy yourselves with that.

Vote lib deam and get Tory

I've lived here for >20yrs and got to choose between Tessa Munt (LD) and David Heathcote Amory (Con); and picked Munt who won the seat.

I've met Tessa, liked her. She's got an answer to a question from a minister on my behalf. Responded to emails etc.

David never once showed his face in all those years, and bought manure for his constituency home's garden claimed back as expenses intended to support his London abode. Berk.

LDs were never going to be able to keep promises as the minor partner in the Con-LD coalition - the parties only have some liberalism in common, while they are completely at odds on the social progressive v.s conservative axis. But we do at least have a functioning government at this time of economic crisis.

But we do at least have a functioning government at this time of economic crisis.

Britain's got a well established problem with having "functioning governments" during times of economic crisis ?

When was the last time that happened then ?

Talking of greater transaparency, looking forward to introduction of tax forms that explain exactly where the fruits of our labour and taken to and invested in. If reports are correct this will also be announced/introduced this week. Should create some lively debate.

MPs should be allowed a free vote on all votes, regardless

It'd wouldn't stop covert whipping but it'd go a long way to allowing them to vote the way their constituents want or their conscience tells them.
Currently the threat to withdrawn the whip is sufficient to make most of them toe the party line

jota180, have a look at the effects of the 'whip' [url= http://www.publicwhip.org.uk/mps.php?sort=rebellions ]in this link here.[/url]
Absolutely no point in badgering my MP on voting against anything as he [i]is[/i] a party whip. 🙁 (yes I have tried)

The only thing he has come out against (his party) lately is [s]gerrymandering[/s] constituency boundary reform. I am sure it is a complete coinicidence that the proposed reform to his own constituency boundaries mean he will need to work much harder to get re-elected next time. 😕

That's my point TBH - do away with the whips, legislate to ensure all votes are free votes
As I said, there'd still be some 'lobbying' going on but I reckon it'd be a great step forward

[i]"Minority party in coalition having to compromise" SHOCKER! [/i]

This. Comedy knee-jerking scapegoat-hunting the lot of it.

jota180, agreed.

Our MP is a whip but also a genuinely local person (lived here for 10+ years before he ever got into politics). Once you get beyond the 'cut-n-paste' email responses from his PA, he does enter into dialogues with his constituents and writes letters/intervenes for specific individual issues (at a non-parliamentary level where the boat will not be rocked.)

I think he is elected in very comfortably each time because he is well known, quite the opposite of a 'Tim Nice But Dim' choppered into a safe seat and a hundred times more interested in his constituents than our other local Blue Flavour MP. People like [b]him[/b] as well as the party he stands for.

Not everything he votes for is always in the long-term interest of his constituents however (over-representation of old folk in rural locations compared to the 'average' constituency for example). He is also a well-serious Christian and chairs the cross-party Christians in Parliament committee. I wonder how he would vote if he voted with his heart, with the prevailing mood of the constituents who badger him about things, or with 'whatwouldJesusvote'?

legislate to ensure all votes are free votes

I'd be interested to know how you plan to enforce that.

I'd be interested to know how you plan to enforce that.

see above

There'd still be threats and lobbying but it'd be much harder to do meaning at least some of the benefit would be realised.
Or ensure completely secret ballots, this would have a few accountability issues though 🙂

I'd be interested to know how you plan to enforce that.

[s]Vindictive fagging for the toffs, chinese burns and wedgies for the working class ones.[/s]

Oh no, that would only work to make them toe the party line, (not free them from it). Whatever they do already works it would seem.

I think I would rather live with the status quo than have no idea what my MP is and isn't voting for. It's nice to wonder 'what if' once in a while though....