General Election 2015

[Westdene Seagull]

Why is it pointless? Are you suggesting energy prices will never rise again?

No, of course prices will eventually rise but I've read that many experts don't see the oil price going back up for some considerable time so there's a good opportunity for energy prices to continue to fall. Given Labour has promised to freeze prices only for two years it seems rather pointless to set the old price as the ceiling when prices are unlikely to reach that level over the next two years. If on the other hand ( and Labour haven't said which way they plan to do this freeze ) the idea is to freeze the price at the level when Labour take power then it will encourage the energy companies just to stay at the fixed level even their costs continue to fall.

The policy is much the same as the promise of increasing the minimum wage to a level it will get to anyway ..... regardless of who is in power.

 

[Kuipers Supporters Club]

It really is appalling that a party can't take their seat if they don't want to swear allegiance to the queen. Not very democratic is it?

That is the literal reason they give, overall its that they don't recognise the Parliament as being legitimate, even if it was a republic. Not very democratic either?

It works both ways, that wasn't my point though, but that you can win overall. with around 319.

 

[mwrpoole]

I can see it happening - a case of "better the devil you know" for the politicians. Why wouldn't the Lib Dems do it? They get to be in the government for a second time in a row, safe in the knowledge that they have a 5-year proven record of working with the Tories. They also be keen to protect their legacy and build on their achievements of this parliament.

Similarly, the Tories will not want to risk coalition with UKIP because if the voters vote to stay in the EU Referendum UKIP are shot, the government will probably be brought down and the Tories will lose credibility. If they're in coalition with the Lib Dems and we vote to stay in the EU then the Tories will be able to mop up the defunct UKIP support over the life of the parliament and win a majority in 2020.

I can see the Lib Dems losing many of their MPs this time round, they may not have much left to form a coalition. Even Nick Clegg's constituency in Sheffield is alleged to be very close.

 

[Kuipers Supporters Club]

The largest party would be under considerable pressure to form a minority government... and run the country based on achieving sufficient consensus among the elected representatives - by bring forward a widely acceptable program of measures. I suspect failure to reach this consensus would result in the uncooperative party/parties being judged very harshly by the electorate if a further election was necessary.

Whoever was the 2nd largest party would just block everything, ' a supply and demand' system would really struggle to work, especially in the long term. I agree that it would be best for the Country to have a Government of National Unity with all parties (elected proportionality) but the Country is becoming more polarised now. I think more people just wouldn't bother voting in a second election, hence a Tory win.

 

[Simster]

That is the literal reason they give, overall its that they don't recognise the Parliament as being legitimate, even if it was a republic. Not very democratic either?

It works both ways, that wasn't my point though, but that you can win overall. with around 319.

It doesn't work both ways at all. The fact is, you can't enter parliament without declaring an oath to the queen, which is everything that republicans stand against. If they were able to enter parliament simply because they won the vote, you'd have a point. But they can't, so you don't.

And yes, I was well aware of what your point was - you spelt it out very clearly. I'm merely highlighting the side issue that it is undemocratic that a party like Sinn Fein (or any republican MP for that matter) cannot enter parliament without being a total hypocrite.

 

[Kuipers Supporters Club]

It doesn't work both ways at all. The fact is, you can't enter parliament without declaring an oath to the queen, which is everything that republicans stand against. If they were able to enter parliament simply because they won the vote, you'd have a point. But they can't, so you don't.

And yes, I was well aware of what your point was - you spelt it out very clearly. I'm merely highlighting the side issue that it is undemocratic that a party like Sinn Fein (or any republican MP for that matter) cannot enter parliament without being a total hypocrite.

Some (not lots) of MP's want to abolish the Monarchy, would it not be better to work from the inside? Now that we have had great moves forward in NI, wouldn't it be time for SF to enter Parliament and do that?

Also there was my other point from before, even if we had a republic, SF wouldn't sit in Parliament, they don't recognise the state they are standing in. So the Monarchy is of course one obstacle but it's not the zero sum game you make it out to be.

 

[DTES]

Obviously gambling is far down the list of important things this election, but it's interesting how the betting markets have absolutely no clue what is even likely to happen in May:



When the shortest odds are on "Any Other", you know it's all up in the air...

 

[GT49er]

Somebody seems to have modified the thread title. How bloody clever.

I've just wasted time looking at it only to find it was a thread I've ignored for ages because I wasn't interested in it. Nice one, clever clogs.

 

[Buzzer]

It doesn't work both ways at all. The fact is, you can't enter parliament without declaring an oath to the queen, which is everything that republicans stand against. If they were able to enter parliament simply because they won the vote, you'd have a point. But they can't, so you don't.

And yes, I was well aware of what your point was - you spelt it out very clearly. I'm merely highlighting the side issue that it is undemocratic that a party like Sinn Fein (or any republican MP for that matter) cannot enter parliament without being a total hypocrite.

I disagree. The government is Her Majesty's Government and the prospective candidates are contesting to become either part of that or Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition. It's implicit in the title that the Queen controls the Government (even if it's in name only) and by accepting to become an MP you pledge an allegiance to the person who controls it, those are the rules and everyone else who has held that office has agreed to it. You can certainly try to change the rules from within but if you do then you have to agree to the current rules first. If you don't want to agree to the same rules as everyone else from the outset then you're going to need a different strategy that doesn't involve becoming an MP under the current system. But all the while it's Her Majesty's Government then it seems fair to pledge allegiance to the controlling interest.

 

[Titanic]

Whoever was the 2nd largest party would just block everything, ' a supply and demand' system would really struggle to work, especially in the long term. I agree that it would be best for the Country to have a Government of National Unity with all parties (elected proportionality) but the Country is becoming more polarised now. I think more people just wouldn't bother voting in a second election, hence a Tory win.

It would be down the the largest party to put forward policies that, if blocked for purely political ends, would gain general support in the country. It would not be in any parties interest to be seen to be playing political games in what would be a time of some potential crisis. Basically, we would be asking our politicians to behave like grown-ups. That isn't too much to ask, is it?

 

[Kuipers Supporters Club]

It would be down the the largest party to put forward policies that, if blocked for purely political ends, would gain general support in the country. It would not be in any parties interest to be seen to be playing political games in what would be a time of some potential crisis. Basically, we would be asking our politicians to behave like grown-ups. That isn't too much to ask, is it?

Erm, I think it might be. Both sides would find reasons not to support each other. It's not in their interest it is? I really couldn't see an opposition side being punished for wanting the best for their party, whoever is incumbent in the 2nd election of 2015 (I reckon it will be the Tories) will win.

 

[Titanic]

Erm, I think it might be. Both sides would find reasons not to support each other. It's not in their interest it is? I really couldn't see an opposition side being punished for wanting the best for their party, whoever is incumbent in the 2nd election of 2015 (I reckon it will be the Tories) will win.

Their interest does not matter in the circumstances. They have a duty and responsibility to form a working government. The public are not stupid. They would see through who was not acting in the national interest and punish them next time round.

 

[Stato]

Of course the previous administration built a lot more schools and created many academies, but, they didn't pay for them, they used PFI which we, our children, our grandchidren will be paying for until we have to give them back and refinance them all again. Pay twice, three times, four times, five times.

PFI is a means of raising capital for investment. It's use by previous governments is unpopular now, but was supported by all three parties at the time. Had Major, Hague or Howard won their respective elections, they would have used PFI.

My point is that Labour, the Lib Dems, the SNP & UKIP have no ideological axe to grind over the future structure of education and would not have made the radical and unnecessary massive changes which Gove drove through. (Although the Lib Dems supine support of radical legislation that they did not agree with and that the majority of the electorate voted against was an utter disgrace).

Voting in Milliband is necessary because his government would cause only accidental damage to the country, not the wrong headed deliberate damage intended by the radical ideologues currently in charge of the Conservative Party.

 

[Kuipers Supporters Club]

Their interest does not matter in the circumstances. They have a duty and responsibility to form a working government. The public are not stupid. They would see through who was not acting in the national interest and punish them next time round.

Both parties wouldn't find a middle groud though, they wouldn't come up with things they could support, they are ideologically different from each other! On small things, maybe yes, but on the big issues - NHS, Europe, the Economy the parties wouldn't find a solution, especially when it comes to a budget!

 

[Ernest]

A lot of yahooing going on from the Tory boys but it is a NATIONAL election and there is not a hope in hell that the Conservatives will get enough seats to form a MAJORITY at the election, Labour may get a majority or as likely be the LEADING party in a coalition.

 

[Titanic]

Both parties wouldn't find a middle groud though, they wouldn't come up with things they could support, they are ideologically different from each other! On small things, maybe yes, but on the big issues - NHS, Europe, the Economy the parties wouldn't find a solution, especially when it comes to a budget!

So they wouldn't change very much. Only things they could all agree on. Which might not be a bad thing. Eh?

 

[Kuipers Supporters Club]

So they wouldn't change very much. Only things they could all agree on. Which might not be a bad thing. Eh?

Or they wouldn't be able to make and real change that the Country needs? They don't agree on the things that matter.

Having a minority / weak Government will cripple us Economically, throwing us into a state of flux.

 

[Titanic]

Or they wouldn't be able to make and real change that the Country needs? They don't agree on the things that matter.

Having a minority / weak Government will cripple us Economically, throwing us into a state of flux.

So, again, they have to behave like grown-ups and act in the national interest. Failure to do so will be treated harshly at the earliest opportunity by the electorate.

 

[Kuipers Supporters Club]

So, again, they have to behave like grown-ups and act in the national interest. Failure to do so will be treated harshly at the earliest opportunity by the electorate.

Or they would act in the interests of those who support them? I'm sure Labour voters wouldn't want to prop up David Cameron in office and vice-versa. The country is only able to get real change by a proper Government.

Who defines what 'national interest' is?

 

[Gwylan]

apparently there's money backing two elections this year, sounding more and more likely.

Governments are now for a fixed term of five years unless there's a two-thirds majority. Both major parties would have to want a second election for that to happen