What would it take for another general election to be held?

[expat]

That's true of virtually every election, if not all. Has the winning party ever got 50% or more of the votes? And yet they get a big majority in the commons and can effectively do whatever they want.

That is a common criticism of the first-past-the-post system: that it tends to give large majorities, which the government of the day interprets as a whopping mandate.

The converse in a system of proportional representation is that, as you note, the electorate rarely if ever give even a majority, never mind a large one; so a government elected by such a system is effectively always paralysed.

[maximus]

What do you reckon we get the Queen to dismiss the current Government?

Wouldnt that be funny!

Mailman

Better still... what would it take for the armed forces to stage a coup?

An unpopular war?

Plummeting morale levels due to budget cuts & regiments being disbanded?

Being stretched by fighting too many wars?

Being subject to prosecution by the very people who send you off to fight the wars?

If it happened would it be such a bad thing?

[Commscnut]

Calm down, he's brought us a Captain Pugwash avatar.

We've never had one of those before...

Cheers Zeity

[zathras]

Whats it take to get an early election held in this country?

I reckon if one was called now Labour would be out on its arse...BUT...if they are allowed to go to full term I'm afraid you English just aren't intelligent enough to vote the feckers out!

Last election I could understand how Labour got in...after all they had no real opposition did they...but now? Not so sure Labour could pull it off.

Mailman

Err... excuse me but us English folks did vote New Labour out. It was the Welsh and Scots that got him in.

[expat]

Better still... what would it take for the armed forces to stage a coup?
...
If it happened would it be such a bad thing?

Yes. The Mother of Parliaments deposed by a banana-republic style coup?

There's something bizarre about wanting to replace a government that you didn't vote for, by a government that nobody voted for.

Remind me if you would of the last few good military coups, anywhere.

[expat]

Err... excuse me but us English folks did vote New Labour out. It was the Welsh and Scots that got him in.

Darn yes. My answer to the West Lothian Question: Scottish politicians should not vote on anything at Westminster. They shouldn't be there at all.

[VectraMan]

That is a common criticism of the first-past-the-post system: that it tends to give large majorities, which the government of the day interprets as a whopping mandate.

The converse in a system of proportional representation is that, as you note, the electorate rarely if ever give even a majority, never mind a large one; so a government elected by such a system is effectively always paralysed.

Pros and cons to both really. But as a matter of principle the commons should represent the people, which is never how it is in practice. And now we have a slightly back to front situation where the lords are often the ones that listen to public opinion, and the commons listen to just one man. Most of the time anyway.

So we have a couple of LibDem ministers under a Labour leader, and Labour don't get all votes their own way unless they can convince the other parties to join them. Difficult yes, but then perhaps we should just bang all their heads together and tell them they need to bloody well work together for the good of the country.

[expat]

So we have a couple of LibDem ministers under a Labour leader, and Labour don't get all votes their own way unless they can convince the other parties to join them. Difficult yes, but then perhaps we should just bang all their heads together and tell them they need to bloody well work together for the good of the country.

Could be. But it could be like Germany:
1. the tiny party in the middle can normally choose either main party to make a coalition with. So they, not the voters, decide on the government.
2. because of this power, the tiny party can demand major ministerial posts out of all proportion to their representation.

[zathras]

Darn yes. My answer to the West Lothian Question: Scottish politicians should not vote on anything at Westminster. They shouldn't be there at all.

It is unfortunate but not only are they there but laws have been passed which would have failed had they not voted. (Having previously voted against the proposals North of the border) - tuition fees springs to mind.

[expat]

It is unfortunate but not only are they there but laws have been passed which would have failed had they not voted. (Having previously voted against the proposals North of the border) - tuition fees springs to mind.

I have little sympathy with the English there. The last of it evaporated when the first devolution referendum had a totally new threshold of 40% of the voters roll attached to it, by a gang of MPs who were:
a. all English
b. all elected with less than 40% of the registered vote themselves.

Well, maybe it was a good thing in the long run. I've always said that when the Scots finally go for their freedom, it will be the English who goad them into it.