UK General Election 2015
Discussion
Aiui it is still the case that in the event of a hung Parliament the incumbent Government remains in office until the Prime Minister tenders his and the Governments' resignation to the Monarch. They are entitled to wait until the first meeting of Parliament to see if they can command the confidence of the House.
I think the Prime Minister is also able to request the Monarch to request a further election, though the Monarch is not obliged to agree to such a request. Again aiui the Monarch may request the parties to check further there is definitely no possibility to form a government which can command the confidence of the House before agreeing to a further election, especially if this is soon after a previous dissolution and election.
If this is wrong then very willing to be corrected. Every day is a school day.
I think the Prime Minister is also able to request the Monarch to request a further election, though the Monarch is not obliged to agree to such a request. Again aiui the Monarch may request the parties to check further there is definitely no possibility to form a government which can command the confidence of the House before agreeing to a further election, especially if this is soon after a previous dissolution and election.
If this is wrong then very willing to be corrected. Every day is a school day.
JustAnotherLogin said:
Short answer no and yes.
The Queen can ask anyone to form a govt. It is likely that she would ask the party who has won most seats first. But if they cannot command a majority that she would ask the next. So if Lab has an agreement with SNP that gets a majority then they will be asked.
In practice she would never actually ask until she knows the answer. SO they will all go through their machinations until someone has a majority. Unless no-one can, then the party with the most single seats (or votes?) will be asked. New territory as the constitutional precedents are weak or non-existent
Increasingly however it looks like 2 parties will not be enough. Which more than doubles the complexity
ETA I had missed the short answer to the first question
Merci BeaucoupThe Queen can ask anyone to form a govt. It is likely that she would ask the party who has won most seats first. But if they cannot command a majority that she would ask the next. So if Lab has an agreement with SNP that gets a majority then they will be asked.
In practice she would never actually ask until she knows the answer. SO they will all go through their machinations until someone has a majority. Unless no-one can, then the party with the most single seats (or votes?) will be asked. New territory as the constitutional precedents are weak or non-existent
Increasingly however it looks like 2 parties will not be enough. Which more than doubles the complexity
ETA I had missed the short answer to the first question
Edited by JustAnotherLogin on Wednesday 21st January 22:03
JustAnotherLogin said:
Short answer no and yes.
The Queen can ask anyone to form a govt. It is likely that she would ask the party who has won most seats first. But if they cannot command a majority that she would ask the next. So if Lab has an agreement with SNP that gets a majority then they will be asked.
In practice she would never actually ask until she knows the answer. SO they will all go through their machinations until someone has a majority. Unless no-one can, then the party with the most single seats (or votes?) will be asked. New territory as the constitutional precedents are weak or non-existent
Increasingly however it looks like 2 parties will not be enough. Which more than doubles the complexity
ETA I had missed the short answer to the first question
True. But I think there may be some informal recognition that the third place party ought to try to align itself with the party that has the most seats; it would seem to subvert wilfully the will of the people to do otherwise. The Queen can ask anyone to form a govt. It is likely that she would ask the party who has won most seats first. But if they cannot command a majority that she would ask the next. So if Lab has an agreement with SNP that gets a majority then they will be asked.
In practice she would never actually ask until she knows the answer. SO they will all go through their machinations until someone has a majority. Unless no-one can, then the party with the most single seats (or votes?) will be asked. New territory as the constitutional precedents are weak or non-existent
Increasingly however it looks like 2 parties will not be enough. Which more than doubles the complexity
ETA I had missed the short answer to the first question
Edited by anonymous-user on Wednesday 21st January 22:03
Which is yet another reason to loathe the scum-ridden pox that is the SNP...
Greg66 said:
True. But I think there may be some informal recognition that the third place party ought to try to align itself with the party that has the most seats; it would seem to subvert wilfully the will of the people to do otherwise.
Which is yet another reason to loathe the scum-ridden pox that is the SNP...
I think that might be true in some circumstances. And for that I think Clegg deserves a lot of respect. he doesn't get much nowadays, but he went with the party that had the most votes even though he know it would antagonise a lot in his party or even destroy it (as it virtually has).Which is yet another reason to loathe the scum-ridden pox that is the SNP...
But I can see in other circumstances that might not be credible. THe SNP could not really offer to form a coalition with the Tories - they are too far apart on almost every significant issue. Similarly if it comes to arranging a 3 party coalition it would not be credible for UKIP and Greens to be involved together. They do not have enough to form a common consensus whatever the votes maybe.
C
There's a reason I selected a picture of two 
s for that posting, they are equally to blame for our countries decline.
Seventh of May, vote for change.
turbobloke said:
NicD said:
Mojocvh said:
Chilcot.
This is what the 2015 election is about.
I would love to see the snake Blair examined in the cold light, but don't expect it. It will be brushed under the carpet.This is what the 2015 election is about.
s for that posting, they are equally to blame for our countries decline.Seventh of May, vote for change.
on and on and on....
The only two people it dilutes are the PM and the Leader of the Opposition.
Farage's problem, I suspect, will be living up to the expectation. I've seen it said a few times that he will wipe the floor with the rest of them. He runs the risk of disappointing by failing to deliver to that standard.
Miliband should be made to squirm by possible allegiances with Sturgeon and the watermelons, which (I hope) will shock many into realising that the drak circle they've been looking at is, in fact, the wrong end of the barrel of a gun.
Wonder how the leaders will all react to this. There are pitfalls a-plenty now, for all of them...
Farage's problem, I suspect, will be living up to the expectation. I've seen it said a few times that he will wipe the floor with the rest of them. He runs the risk of disappointing by failing to deliver to that standard.
Miliband should be made to squirm by possible allegiances with Sturgeon and the watermelons, which (I hope) will shock many into realising that the drak circle they've been looking at is, in fact, the wrong end of the barrel of a gun.
Wonder how the leaders will all react to this. There are pitfalls a-plenty now, for all of them...
realistically, if it's an hour long debate, they will each get less than 5 mins actual talk time.
so, by the time you have lost the intros, questions, interruptions, etc, you're actually looking at probably 2-3 minutes actual talk time each, which let's face it, is pointless.
Nobody has that kind of attention span.
so, by the time you have lost the intros, questions, interruptions, etc, you're actually looking at probably 2-3 minutes actual talk time each, which let's face it, is pointless.
Nobody has that kind of attention span.
Esseesse said:
JustAnotherLogin said:
Increasingly however it looks like 2 parties will not be enough. Which more than doubles the complexity
Con/Lab coalition (in the national interest)?But however you try, it is difficult to think up a coalition that is likely to have enough seats and would not immediately break apart under its own internal disagreements. Closest I can get is Labour + SNP+ LibDems + Plaid, with maybe some NI parties thrown in for good measure.
Stable? Doesn't look it.
Which suggests either a Tory-Lab coalition or another election this year.
I just can't see Tories and Labour agreeing enough - in particular on benefits, taxation and the economy. Nor can I see Cameron and Balls in the same cabinet
As someone said when I posted the odds of another election this year (6/1) at the time IIRC)- "they look good odds". I see they have already dropped to 9/2.
Greg66 said:
The only two people it dilutes are the PM and the Leader of the Opposition.
Farage's problem, I suspect, will be living up to the expectation. I've seen it said a few times that he will wipe the floor with the rest of them. He runs the risk of disappointing by failing to deliver to that standard.
Miliband should be made to squirm by possible allegiances with Sturgeon and the watermelons, which (I hope) will shock many into realising that the drak circle they've been looking at is, in fact, the wrong end of the barrel of a gun.
Wonder how the leaders will all react to this. There are pitfalls a-plenty now, for all of them...
CMD and Milliband get there own seperate debate, so not diluted at all.Farage's problem, I suspect, will be living up to the expectation. I've seen it said a few times that he will wipe the floor with the rest of them. He runs the risk of disappointing by failing to deliver to that standard.
Miliband should be made to squirm by possible allegiances with Sturgeon and the watermelons, which (I hope) will shock many into realising that the drak circle they've been looking at is, in fact, the wrong end of the barrel of a gun.
Wonder how the leaders will all react to this. There are pitfalls a-plenty now, for all of them...
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff