bluemooner,

i hear what you're saying, but am i right in saying Clegg could have gone in with labour to form a lib lab government.
if thats the case then Cameron obviously would'nt have been PM,and could'nt have included Clegg in his government.

I guess we'll have to wait for the Clegg / Brown diaries to have the definitive answer on this, but it seems that Labour realised that even with the Lib Dems on board they wouldn't have had sufficient numbers to hold the Govt together in the rough times ahead – so talks never got past the exploratory phase.

As the Tories have a few more MPs than Labour then together with the Lib Dems they actually have a buffer in numbers that will let them pass legislation even if some of their own MPs were to rebel. This is also why some of us quite like the outcome, because the voice of the more looney right wing Tories won't count for so much as their votes are neutralized by the nice left(ish) Lib Dems

No, he's there because Cameron needed him in order to form a government.

I disagree. He could have formed a minority Govt. There was some talk of this over the last few days. Did you see any of the coverage?

eg the forthcoming 55% no confidence proposal

It's not. It's a 55% for dissolution proposal.

A vote of confidence would still be 50% +1 BUT at that point, others (Current PM with different partners) would have the opportunity to put together a new Govt without an election.

The idea behind this (I think) is to stop small parties being able to join a Govt, then torpedo it themselves without the Govt being able to try to put together a different coalition.

bluemooner, I wasn't criticising you really – just banter, but there definitely is a large group of people that are whinging about voting Lib Dem because they didn't want Tory.

But what where they expecting? Not a Lib Dem Govt eh?

What they actually wanted was a Labour Govt, in which case even more people would have voted for something else.

Clegg isn't there because you voted for him, he's there because Cameron wanted him in his Govt

Are you goijng to complain as soon as Cameron promotes someone to the Lords so he can have them in Govt? Like Adonis, or Mandleson were. It's exactly the equivalent scenario and it's Cameron's choice to have them in.

BUT clearly the LIb Dems think they can do more good in someone else's Govt than outside in opposition.

how is it that more than 75% of voters didnt vote lib dem,
more than 90% of mp's ar'nt lib dem,and yet good ole Nicky boy can end up deputy head.
im neither here nor there about the situation,its probably a good thing,
i just find it ironic that a Democrat holds a very promonent position,when nobody really wants him.

The other 60 million of us got together and decided to fix it this way just to annoy you.

When you say "nobody really wants him"… well I do. Personally I think the current solution is the best we could have hoped for given the outcome.

I have to say that I also find the "I didn't vote Lib Dem to get Tory" bleating a bit pathetic.

Look at it the other way. If you hadn't voted Lib Dem, you'd probably still have got Tory, but Tory in with the right wing of their party wielding a lot more power.

Grown ups get by by making compromises.

Skedge

Hey, I was right – I'll go and make a note in my diary.

Best of luck Mike.

I have no direct knowledge or experience of your situation, BUT I can imagine circumstances where your ex might have a point.

If you go round there EVERY night then maybe she does feel that you are invading her space / interrupting their evening routine. Maybe your visits cause some discussions / ructions that she has to deal with after you leave. How old is your daughter BTW? Old enough to have a say in things?

Maybe your ex didn't put the suggestion to you very tactfully, but maybe she felt bad herself about bringing it up. How amicable have your discussions re' such things been in the past?

First of all you need to find out why she came up with the suggestion. Then you need to think about whether it was reasonable or not. Maybe there is a compromise somewhere, like sometimes you go round and sometimes you use skype with web-cam, or you see your daughter less frequently during the week, but for a longer period when you do see her.

Don't get mad, just keep thinking about the options.

Great set of pics from GBs last hours in No 10 –
click

Raising the tax threshold is fantastic.

Apart from the obvious, that some people on the lowest wages will drop out of tax and have more money it will go a long way towards simplifying our tax system. When you think about all the shenanigans with tax credits etc that make the poor jump through hoops and create expensive bureaucracy/administration in the tax system it has got to make sense to simply drop some of the poorest people out of tax.

AND, of course, if the overall tax take is to remain the same, or rise, it might mean that the rich have to pay more, which I'm also in favour of.

Who'd have thought it – Tories back redistributive tax policy.

But I raise you, Rupert Murdoch!

Ah, the exception that proves the rule!

The cartwheel bits are the "cogs that slice your head off – NB one of them has treasure (X) underneath"

Also the line of small circles on the right hand side are "things that roll down and kill you" when you try to get the treasure just N of them.

He's a bloodthirsty little sod.

phonetics gets them started, then they begin to learn the words and memorise the spelling.

Dead right. That's why it is important to listen to your child read. Then you spot the words they sound out wrong and correct them.

I'm usually the one that reads the kids their bedtime story, but often my 6 year old reads a bit of it and the 5 year old reads a sentence or two as well.

I'm not talking about politicians BTW.

Here's something to think about.

Think of anyone in public life that you consider a really loathsome person.

Are they basically right wing or left wing?

I'm not saying all right wing people are loathsome BTW, but I just can't think of anyone who I consider to be really horrible who isn't right wing.

For example – Jeremy Clarkson.

The trees blow in the wind.
Rays of sun flood into my room.
Over the road a cat walks by.
Life is sweet.
Laughter can be heard from afar.

And why do they resurrect dead threads apropos of nothing? Idiots.

The pic BTW is a map of an island covered with "cogs that slice your head off" with the treasure hidden under them. 😀

Treasure Map it was – made me laugh.

My wife's a primary teacher and she's not bothered about it – it's called "emergent writing" apparently.

I'm just chuffed that my 5 year old boy wants to write anything off his own bat. His sister (6) is always writing stories but up to now Arthur hasn't wanted to write as much, and when he does it's usually a list – V male behaviour! Mind you the other day he did write quite a long piece:

Iloocatthemoon.themoonhazcraitzorloovit

The wealth inequality does not exist in many other countries to the same extent – even rabidly capitalist countries such as the USA and Japan.

TJ, I think you've got it wrong about inequality in the US. There's far more polarisation there BUT the difference is that the poor actually think that they have a chance of joining the rich and are more prepared to accept their lot. (not that that is a good thing of course)

Labour admit defeat…

And the Tories pick up the ticking bomb…

Actually here's a brilliant idea. Lifted from that Grauniad blog linked a few posts back:

3.01pm: At Left Foot Forward, Will Straw is now arguing that the best outcome for progressives would be a Conservative minority government. He explains his reasoning here, but to understand his argument in full you also need to read this post he wrote this morning. Straw proposes a five-point way ahead for progressives which concludes with this:

Labour announces that it will stand aside in 60 Tory-Lib Dem marginal seats. In return, the Liberal Democrats announce that they will give Labour a free run in 30 seats where they are in third place or below.

I think that is a brilliant loaded gun to hold to the head of the Tories if they piss about re' PR – threaten them with Lib/Lab cooperation at the next election!

rightplacerighttime, I can find very little to disagree with there.

That's the nicest thing anyone here has ever said to me 😳

I voted Lib Dem and I think that we have got the best possible outcome.

If Lib/Lab had been on the cards (a few seats more for either) we'd still have GB. Actually I like GB, but he is now too divisive a figure so for the sake of the country, better he goes.

I prefer the idea of a relatively weak Lb/Con Govt as it will expose the problems with the Tories prior to the next election whilst giving some Lib Dems experience in Govt.

The Labour party needs a rest.

We will get some sort of movement on PR.

I don't mind another election in a year or two.

The "Strong Govt" scare story is a myth. London is one of the financial capitals of the world and it will stay that way. Investors have to put their money somewhere and many of them will still want to put it into UK Govt debt – there aren't loads of other places for them to put it.

I can believe the bit about the Guardian, not so sure about the degrees

But some people here have more than one, which will lift the average 😀

But I'm not sure that Boulton is advocating a Con-Lib Govt is he?

He clearly wants is a different result to the one we got and is apoplectic that the Tories haven't got in with a majority.

Actually, just found another clip of Adam Boulton going off on one.

Boulton + Ben Bradshaw

I thought he was supposed to be an independent news reporter? It's not terribly difficult to see where his sympathies lie.

Personally I hope the negotiations go on a bit longer as eventually Boulton will explode, which could be quite a spectacle.

What about the poor bl00dy country?!

What about it?

What, in your day to day life, has suffered over the last few days? What do you think will really happen over the next few days if they take time to come to a decision?

I think everyone needs to get a bit of perspective.

5 Live is very entertaining at the moment as everyone tries to out-analyse each other about every nuance (mostly stories generated by the media) of the negotiations.

Great quote just now "this is the wisdom of crowds, everything seems to be working out quite well for the good of the people"

Personally I think it's great to see a few of our politicians in a different light for a change.

For example, Michael Gove, who up to now I've found quite repulsive, offering to give up his cabinet seat to a Lib Dem, but on the other hand Malcolm Rifkind, who I've never been that keen on, but who at least I thought sincere coming out with a quote about Mugabe style politics. Clearly the latest batch of Tories are a bit more reasonable than the old guard, but how much power do the old guard still have, and will they shut up and go away, or carry on doing their best to wreck their own party.

I suspect that whatever happens the Tories are going to go through another period of internal strife – they aren't united in any way.

ocrider,

Thanks for that link. I think if nothing else it shows what a brilliant performer Alastair Campbell is and how desperate some of the tories backers, like Sky/Murdoch are.

I especially loved the bit where Campbell reminded Boulton that they were on television – what a pro!

I completely disagree.

People have been piling into gold for a couple of years. But there's more to it than our piffling little election.

Have a look at the Crash Course[/url]

A current favourite but they only produce this for a limited time in the spring.

Local to me too. Very hoppy and refreshing.

Golden Champion (a bit fruity), Golden Glory (very fruity) and Tanglefoot (thick, rich and malty) are all great Badger beers though.

Clearly the driver was at fault, but I pretty much ride around expecting drivers to do stupid things on roads like that and ride cautiously. Touch wood, no similar acccidents yet.

Better alive and wronged than dead and in the right.

Ernie – you are an idiot.

There, I've made my point. Now I'm going to move on.

But just in case anyone else here is interested in what happened V your warped view of things ernie, here's what Charles Kennedy said in the debate before the vote on March 18th 2003 – lifted from Hansard.

1.51 pm

Mr. Charles Kennedy (Ross, Skye and Inverness, West): Following the hon. Member for Liverpool, Walton (Mr. Kilfoyle), I acknowledge with thanks, through him, to the right hon. Member for Islington, South and Finsbury (Mr. Smith) and to all those concerned in all parties in this House, that an honest option has been discussed and agreed in a cross-party way. In the previous debate, the right hon. Gentleman made a powerful contribution to that cross-party basis, which needs to be heard and discussed rationally today.

Although it is sad that we have lost a very good Leader of the House, there is no doubt, having listened to his brilliant resignation statement in the House yesterday evening, that those of us who are supporting the cross-party amendment in the Lobby tonight, as I and my right hon. and hon. Friends will do, have gained

18 Mar 2003 : Column 782

a powerful additional advocate for the case that we are sincerely making. Given the events of the past few days and the last few hours, there has been much understandable comment about the drama of the situation. In the next few hours and days, however, we are liable to see even more drama and trauma when what appears to be the inevitable military conflict against Iraq begins. Let us hope, as we all agree, that the conflict can be conducted as swiftly as possible, with the minimum of casualties: first and foremost, clearly, among our forces, but equally among innocent Iraqi civilians, with whom none of us has ever had any quarrel and who have suffered terribly under the despicable regime of Saddam Hussein.
As for those of us who remain unpersuaded as to the case at this time for war, and who have questioned whether British forces should be sent into a war without a further UN mandate having been achieved, there stands no contradiction—as the former Leader of the House and former Foreign Secretary put succinctly last night—between giving voice to that legitimate anxiety and, at the same time, as and when exchange of fire commences, looking to the rest of the country, and to all of us in the House, to give full moral support to our forces. They do not take the civilian political decision in relation to what they are being asked to do, but they must carry out that task in all our names. The shadow Leader of the House expressed that well last night, but, equally, Church leaders, who earlier expressed profound opposition to war in this way at this time, are making the same point. If, later tonight, at the conclusion of this debate, under the democratic procedures that we enjoy in this House, that is to be the decision, it is important that the whole House unites in that genuine support.

Sir Patrick Cormack (South Staffordshire): Can I therefore take it that if the amendment is lost the right hon. Gentleman will vote for the substantive motion?

Mr. Kennedy: I thank the hon. Gentleman for his question, but the answer is no. I will not do so because our consistent line is that we do not believe that a case for war has been established under these procedures in the absence of a second UN Security Council resolution. That is our position—[Interruption.]

It goes on a bit after that as other MPs ask questions, but you can read the rest here if you want; click

You know how you keep going on about courts and stuff?

Well, in a court case, it's normally the person who makes the allegation (that's you BTW) that provides the evidence.

I'll try and make another helpful analogy.

It's like you are the prosecution, and the LIb Dems are the accused, and I am the defence.

And you stand up and say:

"It was them wot done it – a bloke from the Green Party said so. The prosecution rests m'lud"

Now, in a court of Law, the defense could probably go and have their sandwiches at this point. I don't really think anyone would be asking them to "prove" their innocence.

That's an article by someone from the Green party giving his interpretation of what the Lib Dems position is.

It's worth about as much as your interpretation.

Give me something that directly quotes the Lib Dems supporting the war.

Must be loads of stuff – sounds like a big story!

Sorry double post

Don't be so ridiculous, no one's suggesting "that the Lib Dems could be taken to court"

Well you seemed to be. You're the one who brought the courts up for no good reason. I was trying to get you to explain what you meant (which you still haven't done BTW).

And I am also trying to get you to show me a quote or a news item or something to show that the Lib Dems supported the war in Iraq, because I don't think you can.

The Lib Dems never supported the war, but they did support the forces who were sent out there to pursue it – there is a difference.

It's a bit like supporting the legal system that gives murderers the right to a defence doesn't mean you support murder.

Not sending speakers to the Stop the War Coalition isn't the same as supporting the war.

You seem to think you've got a monopoly on outrage – get off your high horse.