Prompted by Iain Dale's post I listened to Danny Alexander on Stephen Nolan's Radio5 show. What a car crash.
There are only three possible outcomes to the next General Election a Labour win, a Conservative win or a hung parliament. There is no one who carries any credibility who believes that the Lib Dems can form the next government, talking about what they would do as a stand alone government is futile.
There is a very real chance that they could be the king makers in a hung parliament and it is important to know what they would do if it was the case, if they won't be open about this then why would anyone vote for them?
They also can't maintain a position either, first they say that they'll support the party with the largest electoral mandate. Then Clegg says that they have a shopping list of policies that will be a prerequisite for a deal. Which is it?
I genuinely don't know where they stand or who they might prop up in the event in a hung parliament. It is for this reason that a hung parliament is such a dangerous possibility.
Remember a hung parliament is not a coalition government. Uncertainty, back-room deals and policy deadlocks are not something anyone should be voting for.
NHS watchdog faces 'cover-up' claim
3 hours ago
Posts
5 comments:
Assuming there is a hung parliament who would you prefer the Conservatives to do a deal with and what would be your terms? Would a vote for the Conservatives be a vote for a Conservative government controlled by the DUP, the SNP, or possibly both?
Given that most polls are now pointing to a hung parliament shouldn't all the parties be questioned on coalition government rather than only one party even considering what they would do?
No one party have a majority in the GLA, the Scottish Parliament, or the Welsh Assembly, but there is nothing 'dangerous' about these situation and politics continues as normal.
Actually, the two positions Clegg has set out are not contradictory. The LDs will support the plurality party in forming a minority government. However, they will vote according to their own policy preferences on specific pieces of legislation.
If the Conservatives fail to win a majority they have no right to govern as they please. They should focus on publishing some clear policy positions instead of using threats about the supposed dangers of a hung parliament to cover their own shortcomings.
Jimmy
I suspect (but can't give a cast iron pledge) that we would be more likely to run a minority government than enter a formal coalition.
Nick
If the Lib Dems form a coalition they will need to accept the governing coalition whip, they can't just go off piste when they feel like it. If they did why would anyone form a coalition with them?
There's a difference between forming a coalition (has only happened in wartime discounting Conservative-UU governments) and allowing a minority government. The second would essentially involve not forming a coalition with Labour and not combining with them to topple the government on a motion of confidence - didn't go brilliantly in 1923. The second process would be far less stable and would almost certainly lead to a relatively quick dissolution of parliament. It would, however, not necessarily lead to the type of policy gridlock that the Conservatives imagine.
I listened to Danny Alexander on Nolan's show. Mandate is a fairly obvious concept - whoever the Queen invites to form a government... surely?
Nick
"Mandate is a fairly obvious concept - whoever the Queen invites to form a government... surely?"
Very good point which leaves me wondering why Danny didn't just say that.
Post a Comment