UK Election aftermath

[ParadigmShifter]

So, no-one won and the discussions are now underway to try and form a coalition government. What do you think should/will happen?

There'll be a poll for what you reckon would be best for Britain, but since the last CFC poll had an enormous majority for the LibDems, I wouldn't put much trust in the results

EDIT: I'm a bit undecided but I think a minority Conservative government looks the most likely.

EDIT2: After a short deliberation, I think a minority Tory government, Labour choose a new leader, most excesses of Tory cronyism being voted down, LibDems and Labour come to some agreement on standing for electoral reform, followed by a general election in the next year or 2.

 

[Mise]

Immediate aftermath

Well, I can't see the Lib Dems coming to any kind of power sharing agreement with the Tories. Frankly, if that happened, it would be completely unjustifiable to vote for the Lib Dems in future, if you knew that your votes were simply going to be channeled directly to the Conservatives. When someone votes for the Lib Dems, they are voting for a progressive, centre-left government, not a freaking Tory one. (I'm desperately trying to come up with a joke about how voting for the Libs is actually a Con. Maybe "vote Lib get a Con"?)

The only two viable options for me are a Con minority gov't or a Lib/Lab minority coalition gov't. To me, the Conservative minority gov't seems most viable, which will mean no referendum on electoral reform for at least until the gov't collapses. If on the realistic but still unlikely chance that Lib/Lab get to form government, we'll probably have a referendum on some sort of electoral reform in the near future.

Either way, though, Brown won't be PM, Tories won't have sufficient mandate for their damaging policies, and the national debt will still get cut.

Longer-term aftermath

What we're seeing at the moment is a severe and widening disconnect between the three parties' top brass and their grass roots support and back-benchers. Clegg's team and Cameron's team will see eye to eye on a lot of things; but Clegg's party and supporters are more left wing than he is, and Cameron's party and supporters are more right wing than he is. Even if Clegg and Cameron formed a government, they would still have difficulty getting their respective parties to support them.

What I see, therefore, is a widening gap between the executive (cabinet, front bench team, senior ministers) and the legislative (back benchers, the majority of MPs), that appears to echo what has always happened across the pond. Not all Democrats see eye to eye with Obama, and frequently (and without any shock or scandal) vote against their own party's bills. It's likely that, if Cameron struck a deal with the Lib Dems over, say, taxes on the rich, their own party would revolt and vote against the government; it may, however, get support from the Labour party, meaning it goes through anyway. In that case, you have the executive completely severed from the legislature, as far as party allegiance goes.

Not sure if that would be a good thing or bad thing. Probably a bit of both.

 

[ParadigmShifter]

Brown and Clegg reportedly had an angry exchange on the telephone last night? That's what BBC news is saying right now.

Dimblemby on again on BBC1 in a bit.

 

[Kerozine]

Don't foresee that Tory minority government lasting very long, especially if there's no formal/coalition agreement of whatever nature between parties.

 

[ParadigmShifter]

I see it lasting a bit longer than the alternatives, unless the LibDems do sell out (seems unlikely though, especially considering Nick Clegg's words today).

Right wing press (i.e. everyone except Mirror, Guardian and Independent) will be so negative if a Rainbow pact occurs.

 

[Kerozine]

Only if those nationalist parties make some absurd demands.

Truly a hung Parliament.

 

[ParadigmShifter]

I hate the Tories with a passion but honestly if we get a LibDem/Lab pact both parties will seen to be weak and get hammered at the next election (which would be fairly soon). I'm not sure if a referendum on electoral reform would get through either, the press will be all "this is what you are going to end up with all the time".

LibDems are in a very unfortunate position, if they agree to any deal with either party.

Best for them to keep credibility and keep out of it.

 

[Masada]

How strong is party discipline in the UK? Its a scandal here if even a single MP crosses the floor for anything. I would be interested to see a situation like what Mises suggested developing where the party rank and file vote against the leadership. Wouldn't that make coalition governments simply unviable? If that were to occur would we expect to see anothe election in the short term? If so, what do you think the likely results would be?

Best for them to keep credibility and keep out of it.

Politically, that would by my opinion as well. It wouldn't be to hard for Cameron to setup the coalition to fail only to blame the obstructionist lib-dems before going to the polls. If he played his cards right and crucially picked a half-decent wedge to go to the polls over he might win a majority. Is it feasiable or even possible for the Conservatives to form a government under those circumstances i.e. without a clear majority and with two parties in opposition who collectively hold the majority? Its not possible in Australia simply because we lack a viable third party alternative to mess with our majorities. I honestly don't think we've ever been in a similar position either.

 

[Tee Kay]

Didn't thousands of people never got a chance to vote due to being turned away by "long queues" or whatever? Maybe there should be a new election...

 

[ParadigmShifter]

I think the Tories would get a Queen's speech through and a budget (if it wasn't too insane) with a minority government.

Hopefully then compromises would be bargained for, for other policies put forward by the tories.

 

[Mise]

The Tory blogosphere is increasingly saying that a Lib/Lab coalition is inconceivable, which means that they are increasingly scared of it.

 

[ParadigmShifter]

Labour would need to ditch Brown though I suspect, and then we'll have "yet another unelected PM" thing again. Clegg isn't feasible for PM either.

Maybe Clegg should team up with the Tories if they sack Cameron and put Kenneth Clarke in charge That would be hilarious I like Ken Clarke. The Tories don't though.

 

[bathsheba666]

The thing that most irritates me is that economic failings due to tory policies should occur on a (so-called) labour watch.

Let the tory scum implement their policies as a minority government, then the others can overturn them just as they have become unelectable.

Problem is, voting reform will probably not result from any of the possible options.

How anyone - alive and conscious in the 80s - can vote tory ever again is beyond me.....

 

[bhsup]

I am a bit confused about the possible partnerships being suggested. Now first I just want it understood that I personally don't care which government you guys pick/get. That's your internal business and I just wish you all well in that regard.

My question is, how is a lab/lib coalition which adds up to 315 any more legitimate/better than tories by themselves at 306? Neither is a majority.

 

[ParadigmShifter]

Lab/LibDem would need a few more seats. SDLP takes the Labour whip already so they are in.

Lab 258
LibDem 57
SDLP 3

Total: 318

Other feasible partners for Lab/LibDems

SNP 6
Plaid Cymru 3
Green Party 1

All of those will give them 328.

EDIT: 326 technically required for a majority.

EDIT2: That's vs. Tories (306) + DUP (8) = 314. Tories need the LibDems. Clegg is an atheist so that should please you and MobBoss VRWC

 

[bathsheba666]

I am a bit confused about the possible partnerships being suggested. Now first I just want it understood that I personally don't care which government you guys pick/get. That's your internal business and I just wish you all well in that regard.

Personally, I think we should bring in the UN to sort it all out...

My question is, how is a lab/lib coalition which adds up to 315 any more legitimate/better than tories by themselves at 306? Neither is a majority.

Well, it very much depends if you are hypnotised by the number of seats in parliament option.
If you are, then your point stands.


However, if you look instead at the parties' share of the votes cast across the entire country....

Then you can argue that the tories should not get to rule with 36% of the vote.
On the other hand, a lib/lab pact would represent around half the country's votes, so this would be entirely legitimate.

 

[bhsup]

Thanks guys Particularly Bath's remark about the vote percentages!

Personally, I think we should bring in the UN to sort it all out...

My head was *this* close to exploding!

 

[Shekwan]

Now first I just want it understood that I personally don't care which government you guys pick/get. That's your internal business and I just wish you all well in that regard.

I've seen Tanicius Fox make a comment along these lines aswell. Is it some sort of quirk of American culture that you have to be sensitive to not be seen as being "involved" in other countries internal politics?

Because it certainly doesn't translate to the behaviour of the American government.

I mean I can say that the Tories are scum, but its not like I'm trying to say that Irish people should have any say in the British government.

 

[bhsup]

I can't speak for America as a whole. But as for me, I don't even like Washington telling Missouri what to do, so I cannot imagine how insulting it would be to my beloved Mother Country to have some hick from Missouri telling their Parliament what to do!

(that said, those CCTV things....tsk tsk )

 

[ParadigmShifter]

When I was in New Orleans the bloke who's house I went round to for a few bongs and drinks said there were CCTV cameras on the streets.

I left my wallet at his house, and he rang my hotel up and returned it though, what a nice guy!

He did try to pull me though

EDIT: His bong was shaped like a gun though! And he had a fragment of a scud missile on his wall which just missed him when he was serving in Gulf War I! And a Butthole Surfers poster! I did tell him I wasn't gay before agreeing to have a few drinks with him. He only liked straight men though apparently