Reply to: Hung parliament question

[DiscoStu]

I think you may find that 70s were great - manufacturing wasn't fully destroyed back then and bankers did not get their hands on computers to enable complex derivative of a pure bulltulip.

You do make me chuckle AtW. I love the way you frequently undermine your own arguments by writing utter bollocks.

[Gonzo]

I think you may find that 70s were great

[Pickle2]

If the Conservatives win the popular vote, how much support would a Lib-Lab coallation have?
.

Well, if the national vote breaks down as per today's poll of polls

34% Con
28% Lab
28% Lib

Such a Lab/Lib coalition would probably have the support of those 56% that voted Lab/Lib - ie the majority of the country.

[BolshieBastard]

Is it always the party with the most seats who gets to pick a coalition partner? Or can two other parties announce coalition and gain power even if neither got the most seats?

e.g say Labour get 280, Tory 255, LibDem 80. Does it rest on Labour to find a partner to get the extra 50-odd seats? Or would Tory/LibDem be allowed to combine and take power (if they wanted to)?

No not necessarily.

In such circumstances, the Queen can ask anyone she likes to try and form a Government. By convention, this would be the leader of the party with the most seats but does not have to be that way.

She could ask any leader or indeed, another figure of one of the parties to try and form a Government. In other words, she could by pass Brown and ask another member of the cabinet to form a government although this would be unusual but not without precedent (I think!).

If the single largest party couldnt secure agreement, the Queen could ask this party leader to form a minority Government but the reality is this government wouldnt be able to force through any major or indeed much legislation. So, she could invite the leaders of two or more other parties together and ask them to form a coalition if they can agree to work together.

I think the likely outcome in a hung parliament, would be brown attempt to form a coalition first or failing that, a minority government.

Time will tell though.

[AtW]

I was there the 70's were a f**ing Labour/Liberal disaster.

Yes it was, but there was way out - how can you see this country cutting down massive debts, what would it export to the rest of the world?

[Green Mango]

I think you may find that 70s were great - manufacturing wasn't fully destroyed back then and bankers did not get their hands on computers to enable complex derivative of a pure bulltulip.

I was there the 70's were a f**ing Labour/Liberal disaster.

[Green Mango]

If the Conservatives win the popular vote, how much support would a Lib-Lab coallation have? After all, the LibDems make a big issue on reforming the voting system to a more honest and fair one. Forming a goverment not including the winning party is hardly that.

I think they'd lose all credibility and support of the public if that happened.

The conservatives don't necessarily need a majority. If they're a few seats short, I imagine they'll just go ahead and run a minority goverment without worrying too much about a coallition.

Thats another option a minority government and we've had that experience before.

Well it wouldn't be practical as the Tories are likely to be easily outnumbered by the Labour and Liberal mps.

Labour are only around 5% behind the Conservatives, so LAbour will probably have the have the most MPs anyway
especially as may LAbour/Liberal voters are intending to tactical vote for each other.

[AtW]

Welcome back to the 70's.

I think you may find that 70s were great - manufacturing wasn't fully destroyed back then and bankers did not get their hands on computers to enable complex derivative of a pure bulltulip.

[VectraMan]

If the Conservatives win the popular vote, how much support would a Lib-Lab coallation have? After all, the LibDems make a big issue on reforming the voting system to a more honest and fair one. Forming a goverment not including the winning party is hardly that.

I think they'd lose all credibility and support of the public if that happened.

The conservatives don't necessarily need a majority. If they're a few seats short, I imagine they'll just go ahead and run a minority goverment without worrying too much about a coallition.

[Green Mango]

I'm not sure one of us understands the other.

My question is how the government is decided if hung. If Labour get most seats, is it up to them to find a partner, or could they win most seats and still not get into power if Dave & Nick combined forces? In other words, does the government have to include the part winning the most seats?

Also, what if we get a tie? One of the recent polls makes the BBC thing predict this and it's obviously possible, albeit unlikely.

In the 70's the Conservatives under Ted Heath won the the most seats. They tried to cut a deal with
the Liberals under Jeremy Thorpe, but they couldn't.

Labour and the Liberals then got together and formed a coalition government. It didn't get on very well and split up after a couple of years of
acrimonious infighting. Welcome back to the 70's.

[AtW]

My question is how the government is decided if hung.

It's decided by negotiation with parties involved - horse trading, future favours etc etc etc: there is no written law to cover this eventuality because it so rarely happens in this country.

[AtW]

Conservatives have the opposite policey with the largest cuts in the public sector,
but the lowest TAXes on businesses.

Yeah Cons promised to abolish 1% NI - that's effing massive!

The reason I won't vote Cons is exactly that - they've failed to give proper plan to cut MASSIVELY public waste as it should be and consequently reduce business and personal taxes. Second reason is that I have no confidence they'll deal with banks in the City properly - frankly I am certain if Cons were in power instead of Labour then we'd have the same result (without 50% income tax maybe).

Vince Cable on the other hand was warning about debt problem for a long time - I'd certainly have far more confidence for him to be chancellor than anyone else, which is why I'll vote for Lib Dems - even if they don't get MPs every extra vote they get will help them negotiate for coalition Govt, as long as it's not with Liebor it's fine by me.

[d000hg]

Of course any parties can band together to form a coalition. It doesn't matter who get the most seats.

I'm not sure one of us understands the other.

My question is how the government is decided if hung. If Labour get most seats, is it up to them to find a partner, or could they win most seats and still not get into power if Dave & Nick combined forces? In other words, does the government have to include the part winning the most seats?

Also, what if we get a tie? One of the recent polls makes the BBC thing predict this and it's obviously possible, albeit unlikely.

[Green Mango]

None of them have real policies worth talking about - they need to agree on one massive public sector cuts policy: Cons know it, and Lib Dems know it - Labour would never allow serous public cutting to happen because it would be cutting off their votes.

Liberals policey is to raise TAXes on business and the rich and to have the smallest
public sector cuts. This is quite close to Labour's position.

Conservatives have the opposite policey with the largest cuts in the public sector,
but the lowest TAXes on businesses.

[AtW]

If Conservatives - Liberals try a coalition the difference in policey is liable to provide
a coalition that finds it difficult to agree policey.

None of them have real policies worth talking about - they need to agree on one massive public sector cuts policy: Cons know it, and Lib Dems know it - Labour would never allow serous public cutting to happen because it would be cutting off their votes.