Miliband rules out being prime minister ever

[Batcher]

You talk of Democracy while pointing out that the SNP who are unashamedly totally anti Britain and only want to split the Union will hold Parliament to ransom?

So the elected members who represent an entire 15% of the UK electorate (if they ALL showed up to vote) will control the UK, how exactly is that a democracy?

It's democratic because those people who voted should be represented. Is what you are saying is that all those people should vote but if it turns out to be for a party you don't like, then they should not be allowed to be represented?

[Batcher]

Like I said, policies for the hard of thinking.

Dunno about you but I'm not too impressed at my taxes paying for free prescriptions and university fees for someone else. Put SNP anywhere near being able to dictate terms and that will get worse.

And you call others the hard of thinking?

People in Scotland all pay the same taxes as people in the rUK. We also supply lots of cash by way of whisky and oil taxes amongst others. We get pocket money via the Barnett block grant and it's from this that we budget accordingly. We decide to have free care for the elderly and prescriptions, Uni fees, etc. That was the SNP manifesto and that's why they were voted in.

Maybe if the SNP had a say in Westminster you would find England getting some of those benefits instead of spending £100bn on Trident.

[centurian]

For once I feel a tinge of sympathy with Miliband (the feeling will soon pass) - he's caught between a rock and a hard place.

By ruling out a coalition, he puts the Scottish vote at further risk - SNP will no doubt claim that Miliband will be "ignoring the will of the Scottish people".

But if he had not ruled it out, he risks the wrath of North of England labour heartlands (already taking some dents from UKIP), who fear he will sell out to Salmond just to be PM.

[Batcher]

One other thing. What Milipede ruled out today wasn't even on the table.

If he goes further and says he won't even consider C&S with the SNP then that's different. He will effectively be ruling himself out as PM to let Cameron back in. So Labour would rather have a Tory government than let the Scots have their democratic say in Westminster.

The union is finished whatever happens.

[jamesbrown]

No, I'm talking the pragmatic view that the man in the street is being presented with a selection of potential leaders, none of whom have any credibility, but at least one of whom has done the job: badly, I agree, but nobody in their right mind wants Millipede in charge of anything. Scots will vote SNP, traditionalists will vote Labour, every one else will mostly go Tory when faced with a choice of them, UKIP and Lib Dem (we can ignore the minority parties since they only get votes from the same people anyway).

Therefore, since we are stuck with constituency boundaries that don't align to the population (another, serious Lib Dem act of sabotage for petty political purposes, remember), we inevitably get to a Tory party with the most seats but not with enough to form a majority

However you cut it, a Tory minority Gov't is unlikely. It was the failure of the Tories to agree Lords reform, rather than petty politics, that was responsible for the Lib Dums reneging on their promise; the Tories only have themselves to blame on that and it was, in my opinion, their fatal error in this parliament. Otherwise, I agree with you. Perhaps the only good thing to come from the next parliament is that Dim Prawn won't be part of it.

[jamesbrown]

One other thing. What Milipede ruled out today wasn't even on the table.

Precisely. Nothing Milibland said today made any difference, as a formal coalition was extremely unlikely (IIRC, the SNP had all but ruled it out, favouring an informal arrangement, i.e. confidence and supply or vote-by-vote).

[centurian]

Maybe if the SNP had a say in Westminster you would find England getting some of those benefits instead of spending £100bn on Trident.

I'm not for Trident renewal, so part of me hopes the SNP do push this argument.

However, the savings are quite small - or rather nothing like the £100bn figure quoted, which is literally made up - and it's the spend based over decades, not over the next 5 year.

The most independent survey placed the savings at £83bn over 50 years - less than £2bn per year - most of that is operating costs - paying the wages of sailors, maintenance engineers, fitters etc. rather than the cost of the submarines, missiles or warheads.

Sure that will help - and like I said, I am all for cancellation - but putting a few pence on fuel duty will help the deficit more than cancelling Trident.

[malvolio]

One other thing. What Milipede ruled out today wasn't even on the table.

If he goes further and says he won't even consider C&S with the SNP then that's different. He will effectively be ruling himself out as PM to let Cameron back in. So Labour would rather have a Tory government than let the Scots have their democratic say in Westminster.

The union is finished whatever happens.

And you claim I'm hard of thinking...

Ignore the SNP bulltulip, go and look at the figures. Compare your mighty O&G and Whisky revenues to those generated by the City, for example. Look up how much non-Scots taxpayers are passing over to you through the Barnett formula.

And you don't seriously believe anything Millipede says, or that he has any power or ability to deliver anything his unions don't want. If Unison say join with SNP, which is quite feasible, that's what will happen: why else is Blair trying to arrange alternative funding to put the unions off the critical path? Stuff democracy, that went away long ago.

[tomtomagain]

The union is finished whatever happens.

Whatever happens? I think you are getting a bit carried away.

It's going to be an exciting few months.

[Zero Liability]

However you cut it, a Tory minority Gov't is unlikely. It was the failure of the Tories to agree Lords reform

What does this refer to, out of curiosity? I'm not familiar with it.