Tomorrow

[Deleted account DD]

dave, have you ever thought about standing as an MP, you seem to be knowledgeable about politics and have some valid and strong points,but not everyone would agree with you, and i don't really see what what this thread is doing on here to be honest, it will probably lead to arguments.
it doesn't matter who gets in, they will only line their own pockets, especially the Tories. amen.

:thumbs ta, I just might and as I said earlier each persons politics are their right.

I studied politics and got good (not marvellous :augie too pissed too often) grades and was going to go onto uni but I did my political bit by joining the armed forces and utilising superior fire power as foreign policy

Tbh I dont consider this more than healthy debate and I enjoy it, if anyones getting upset I'll happily stop. You can go round in circles with politics :naughty

 

[Deleted account DD]

ps Tezzer, I agree completely. Whoever gets in we're fcuked for the next few years at least :nenau

 

[andrewk]

Harold Wilson formed and led in the first instance a minority government from 1974. He did not have a ruling majority. Maybe a lot of work for the party whip though?

As no doubt you are aware, there was a general election on 28 Feb 1974. The sitting Prime Minister, Ted Heath did not secure a majority and spent several days negotiating with Jeremy Thorpe, the then leader of the Liberal Party. He did not resign until 4 March 1974.

It was only after Ted Heath resigned that Harold Wilson was invited by the Queen to form a government. The minority government lasted little more than 6 months and there was another election on 10 October 1974.

I cannot help but wonder how any new government would fare, if another election was forced within a year. If Mervyn King is to be believed - probably very very badly.

Andrew

 

[andrewk]

B.O.H.I.C.A

No, this time it will be much MUCH worse.


Andrew

 

[andrewk]

That is why I asked you for the link to the statutory requirement for him to remain in post. Have you found it yet?

Did I forget to say it? My apologies. I'll say it now - DYOR!!

Andrew

 

[andrewk]

Tbh I dont consider this more than healthy debate and I enjoy it, if anyones getting upset I'll happily stop.

Ditto.

Andrew

 

[andrewk]

ps Tezzer, I agree completely. Whoever gets in we're fcuked for the next few years at least :nenau

I agree completely also.

The extent to which any individual (or family) is f****d depends on how financially secure/robust you are and on the party or parties that come to form the government.

Andrew

 

[Deleted account DD]

Did I forget to say it? My apologies. I'll say it now - DYOR!!

Andrew

:jesterbg:jesterbg:jesterbg


Absolutely not, I dont need to. You do though to support your argument and constitutional comments which seem to form the basis for your points sadly being based on shifting sands.

What with that. partial or out of context quotes and trying to put words in my mouth youre either a very weak debater or a closet labour politician :lol

Watching and endlessly the BBC probably satisfies the above but not a lot else.

See the quote (or certainly accurate paraphrase) in my sig,it was a singular rather arrogant uninvited comment I observed how profound and accurate that person was without realising it. Does it sound familiar ?

:thumb2:augie:naughty

 

[Deleted account DD]

As no doubt you are aware, there was a general election on 28 Feb 1974. The sitting Prime Minister, Ted Heath did not secure a majority and spent several days negotiating with Jeremy Thorpe, the then leader of the Liberal Party. He did not resign until 4 March 1974.

It was only after Ted Heath resigned that > Harold Wilson <was invited by the Queen to form a government. The minority government lasted little more than 6 months and there was another election on 10 October 1974.

yes so who formed the minority government you clearly and incorrectly said was a situation that could not occur ?

Government can continue only if you have a majority in the house.

hint.........the answers above and in my post

Its entirely doable :clap

 

[andrewk]

a closet labour politician.

Good heavens, no

For the next year or so, labour politicians would do well to keep their heads below the parapet.

If I were a labour politician, my immediate priorities would, I think, be to:

1) Encourage Gordon Brown not to overdo any overtures to Nick Clegg, else Cleggy might actually start to believe that Gordon is serious about some sort of agreement between Labour and the Lib Dems. I suppose he could always put him off with another phone call lecturing him about constitutional propriety. :sly

2) Campaign within the party to reject any agreement with the Lib Dems in the very unlikely event that one surfaces. The very last thing the Labour party needs is to be in power for at least the next year or so.

Andrew

 

[andrewk]

yes so who formed the minority government you clearly and incorrectly said was a situation that could not occur ?

You seem to have misunderstood what I intended. A minority government can remain in power - but only if it is not voted down by greater numbers amongst the opposition. It will not have escaped your attention that the first Wilson government of 1974 didn't last very long.

It needs the goodwill of some number of the opposition (so as to form a majority in the house) to remain in power. At the moment, David Cameron is in the process of trying to generate that goodwill by negotiating with the Lib Dems. If his attitude had instead been "stuff you lot", we are going to govern as a minority then his premiership might not have lasted beyond 25th May 2010.

Andrew

 

[Deleted account DD]

Apologies if I appear to have misunderstood but the point is there is nothing at all other than Brown stopping the Tories moving into office. Browns position is no stronger than Camerons, in fact probably weaker other than possession being etc. Cameron has a clear mandate from the ballot box.

There is no problem in the formation of a minority government and pending amongst other things opposition party attendance on the day and whip activity theres no reason they cannot get things voted through.




More importantly than worrying about that I am still waiting for that link to guidance which you firmly believes exists in one form or another and therfore locatable hopefully in its statutory form

I reckon it doesn't exist, cant find it and therefore whilst strongly backing up my argument unfortunately means I cant point you towards (having done myor research days ago )

Very firmly over to you :augie

 

[andrewk]

there is nothing at all other than Brown stopping the Tories moving into office.

You cannot substantiate that.

The BBC have, for days, been wheeling various Professors of Political Science behind the microphone to ask about the constitutional position. They have all said the same thing. Gordon Brown has a constitutional duty to remain as PM until a new PM is available to replace him. It will not be known who that is until NC and DC (and/or GB) and their respective parties finish their (now becoming protracted) negotiations.

These professor characters are the same constitutional experts that would have been your lecturers had you chosen to continue your studies in political science. I am perfectly happy to acknowledge that they know a lot more than I do about the subject. I'm not sure, though, why you seem not to accept the authority of their "expert" opinion.

Andrew

 

[briggie]

as a further debate point , may i ask what people think is the single most important issue facing this country at this time ?

 

[Deleted account DD]

You cannot substantiate that.

To the same degree as you have watching the BBC to support your side of the debate I can and have, the quotation I gave you ages ago was from a respected political analyst writing in a respected paper,it and other examples are out there

The BBC have, for days, been wheeling various Professors of Political Science behind the microphone to ask about the constitutional position. They have all said the same thing. Gordon Brown has a constitutional duty to remain as PM until a new PM is available to replace him. It will not be known who that is until NC and DC (and/or GB) and their respective parties finish their (now becoming protracted) negotiations.

These professor characters are the same constitutional experts that would have been your lecturers had you chosen to continue your studies in political science. I am perfectly happy to acknowledge that they know a lot more than I do about the subject. I'm not sure, though, why you seem not to accept the authority of their "expert" opinion.

"Accepting Authority of their expert opinion" hmmmmmm........ you shoot your own argument in the foot with that very last statement.

You say opinion, yes thats correct it is opinion.I respect their opinion based on their understanding and knowledge of the constitution which is way above mine.

However the devils in the details and thats what youre missing.

Way back up this post and throughout libraries and internet material my explanation and those of people far brighter than me on the same topic tell you one thing very clearly.

A massive amount of our constitution is not de jure, it is de facto and therefore not a statutory requirement. I have a very strong suspicion the requirement of this particular so called constitutional duty is via evolved protocols rather than statutory duty. Therefore no criminal harm done if a credible replacement is installed as he leaves.

It would be unusual for Brown to ignore protocol and would mean him giving up the power he adores but there again they've got previous for disregarding historic arrangements and we are in extraordinary times so he should listen to the evidenced views expressed via the ballot box.

Therefore I will quote you directly with regards to Brown has to stay put:

You cannot substantiate that.

and repeat my request for you to do so via the relevant statutory instruments.

Particularly relevant as you yourself used the term "opinion" and made no reference to the statutory instruments they were perhaps talking about. I'm only sorry I cant prove the non existance of them but of course doing that's a conundrum too far

Until then I'm afraid your assertions that he cannot leave office are flawed to the degree they are worthless. My heads getting sore banging it off the wall so realistically theres no future in this strand, until you identify that statutory instrument and support your argument. I'm sure you'll agree :nenau

 

[Deleted account DD]

as a further debate point , may i ask what people think is the single most important issue facing this country at this time ?

Establishing a stable and credible administration in accordance with the mandate given via the ballot box.

 

[briggie]

Establishing a stable and credible administration in accordance with the mandate given via the ballot box.

not winning the world cup then ? :augie

 

[Deleted account DD]

not winning the world cup then ? :augie

No....thats the impossible dream

 

[andrewk]

may i ask what people think is the single most important issue facing this country at this time ?

Winning the world cup would be nice - as would winning the ICC World Twenty20 Cricket 2010 cup.

For the politicians, I think dealing with the financial crisis we face whilst simultaneously trying to minimise the amount of harm to the maximum number of people.

Having a policy to raise the inheritance tax threshold to £1 million does not convince me that the party most likely to form a government shares my hopes for minimising harm.

Andrew

 

[andrewk]

Particularly relevant as you yourself used the term "opinion" and made no reference to the statutory instruments they were perhaps talking about. I'm only sorry I cant prove the non existance of them but of course doing that's a conundrum too far

The best advice that GB can get is that from the cabinet secretary. The advice given by the constitutional experts fielded by the Beeb is as I have explained - and seems to be the same. Your arguments to the contrary are just political posturing. I strongly suspect that it is you that is the closet politician.


Andrew