Should the UK see a grand coalition? Watch

Poll: Should the UK see a Tory-Labour coalition?
Yes (9)
17.31%
No (41)
78.85%
Undecided (2)
3.85%
Zander01
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#81
Report 4 years ago
#81
(Original post by TIS200)

The second reason is, I seriously think a Tory government can get rid of the Human Rights Act and introduce a Bill of Rights again. What a load of tosh, the Human Rights Act. I never pledged allegiance to it? Why should we pledge allegiance to it? A LABOUR government would block this.
.
Dear god, you are stupid.
0
reply
young_guns
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#82
Report 4 years ago
#82
(Original post by Quady)
Well they can...Whether Labour would is a different matter.
I said not reasonably. They can vote against the Labour confidence motion if they want to be destroyed in Scotland.

It would be so divisive, given they have campaigned on the idea of supporting a Labour government, that their parliamentary party would split. Their activists on the ground would become extremely hostile at the perceived betrayal.

In some ways, I would be happy for the SNP to do that. It would mean Labour would then be getting Scotland back
0
reply
young_guns
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#83
Report 4 years ago
#83
(Original post by TIS200)
The second reason is, I seriously think a Tory government can get rid of the Human Rights Act and introduce a Bill of Rights again. What a load of tosh, the Human Rights Act. I never pledged allegiance to it? Why should we pledge allegiance to it? A LABOUR government would block this.
What on earth are you babbling on about? Three points that destroy your comment and position.

(1) The whole strain of Conservative thought is that they generally oppose codifying rights through legislation.

(2) How would a bill of rights differ from the current Human Rights Act? Specifically?

(3) The 1689 Bill of Rights is still in effect, so we do have a bill of rights.

By the way, what are you talking about re pledging allegiance? You don't pledge allegiance to a piece of legislation, you swear allegiance to her majesty the Queen (if you are an MP, judge, military officer, privy counsellor etc). You've obviously been reading too much American crap without realising how little of it is actually applicable to Britain
1
reply
young_guns
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#84
Report 4 years ago
#84
(Original post by Zander01)
Dear god, you are stupid.
It's painful, isn't it? I've just responded to part of his comment above.
0
reply
nulli tertius
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#85
Report 4 years ago
#85
(Original post by young_guns)
Don't be daft.

Say the Conservatives and Lib Dems have more seats than Labour (seems pretty likely). Labour doesn't give the SNP what they want, so the SNP decides to abstain in a Tory confidence motion. Labour opposes, Tories and LD's vote aye. They win the confidence motion and are thus installed on the Treasury benches

The SNP can either oppose a Tory confidence motion, or abstain. If SNP abstain, and the Tories have LD support, they win. Of course, politically speaking abstaining is not really an option for the SNP, they would slaughtered in the next election by Labour. Their constituents would not care about mealy-mouthed justifications and distinctions from SNP leadership between abstaining or voting for the Tories, if their actions resulted in a Tory government

So practically speaking, the SNP must support Labour even if they are unhappy with what Labour offers them for confidence and supply. All other votes are taken on a vote-by-vote basis, and again the SNP would have difficulty explaining why they voted down centre-left measures and sided with the Tories.

If Labour + SNP have a majority, it effectively forms a bloc that locks the Tories out of power and Labour into power given the SNP's limited options re failing to support Labour where that would lead to a Tory administration coming to power
Labour may take the view in that situation that they are in government but not in power.

The SNP can run rings round Labour provided they always outflank them from the left. Effectively whatever policy Labour proposes, it won't be good enough and the SNP will promise more and better. When nothing concrete happens because Labour without the SNP are defeated by the Conservative opposition, the SNP will say that is because of Labour's failure to support its more generous proposals. The SNP will have supported the Labour Queen's Speech and will support any question of confidence but will abstain on Labour's proposals as to the specific content of each and every policy outlined in the Queen's Speech.

This will be a version of the Labour left-wingers' complaint historic complaint that the Labour Party's failure down the ages has been because it is not left wing enough.

The scenario you do not discuss here, is the Queen's Speech debate proceeding in this way.-

Cameron doesn't resign and meets the Commons. He drafts a Queen's Speech (interestingly the Queen may choose to absent herself from the State Opening perceiving that this will be divisive and have the Speech delivered by Lords Commissioners). There will then be a debate on the Loyal Address in Reply. The Labour Opposition will put down an amendment to the Loyal Address saying that the Commons have no confidence in HM Ministers. The Queen's Speech debate therefore takes place on the Labour amendment to the Loyal Address when Labour (and others) attack the Tories.

However, when the debate concludes Labour withdraw their amendment. When the substantive motion on the Loyal Address is put to the Commons, Labour abstains. The minnows (Lib Dems, SNP, UKIP whoever) may choose to vote against Loyal Address but ultimately Cameron carries the Loyal Address by say 290 votes to 40
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#86
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#86
(Original post by Zander01)
Dear god, you are stupid.
(Original post by young_guns)
It's painful, isn't it? I've just responded to part of his comment above.
Keep these insults to a minimum. I'm the OP and i'm not above having the mods clean up anything that pollutes my threads. Critisise the arguments, not the person.

Other than that, largely agree with your other comments.
0
reply
Davij038
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#87
Report 4 years ago
#87
The idea of the Tories scrapping the HRA is terrifying. Chris Grayling is a buffoon highlighting that the Tory party would rather cater to ukip voters than stand upo for what it believes in.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...hts-convention

Further proof that the Tories need the Lib Dems to neuter the nasty element of the Tories!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ky-Morgan.html
0
reply
young_guns
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#88
Report 4 years ago
#88
(Original post by nulli tertius)
Cameron doesn't resign and meets the Commons.
Labour doesn't require Cameron's resignation or his permission.

If Labour agrees a confidence and supply arrangement with the SNP and both parties say as much to their contact at Buck House, then the Queen will commission Miliband as Prime Minister. No need to wait until the Queen's Speech. It would be unprecedented and plain contrary to our constitutional conventions to commission a party as the government if it can't command a majority and another bloc in the House of Commons can

The SNP can run rings round Labour provided they always outflank them from the left. Effectively whatever policy Labour proposes, it won't be good enough and the SNP will promise more and better.
Nope. Labour doesn't really need to offer anything to the SNP. If the SNP's actions result in a Conservative government (including by abstaining on a Labour confidence vote), they will be slaughtered in Scotland. The SNP has no choice but to prop up a Labour government. Labour does not need to buy their support for confidence and supply. Every other vote can be taken on a case-by-case basis, and it's no skin off Labour's nose given they are to the SNP's left when it cames to actual policy (not perception or poses)
0
reply
nulli tertius
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#89
Report 4 years ago
#89
(Original post by young_guns)
Labour doesn't require Cameron's resignation or his permission.

If Labour agrees a confidence and supply arrangement with the SNP and both parties say as much to their contact at Buck House, then the Queen will commission Miliband as Prime Minister. No need to wait until the Queen's Speech. It would be unprecedented and plain contrary to our constitutional conventions to commission a party as the government if it can't command a majority and another bloc in the House of Commons can
And if they don't?

It isn't a criticism of one hypothetical scenario to say that a different hypothetical scenario may occur,

In your scenario it would of course be unconstitutional for Cameron to attempt to cling on.
0
reply
young_guns
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#90
Report 4 years ago
#90
(Original post by nulli tertius)
And if they don't?

It isn't a criticism of one hypothetical scenario to say that a different hypothetical scenario may occur,

In your scenario it would of course be unconstitutional for Cameron to attempt to cling on.
As someone who is an elected Labour activist in Southwark, and fairly plugged in to Labour politics and to goings on at Westminster (aka the Westminster village / bubble), there's no question Labour will agree to a confidence and supply agreement.

In any case, Labour is just playing politics by spurning the SNP pre-election. Sturgeon today asked Labour to commit to locking the Tories out of Downing Street; Labour will not agree pre-election for reasons relating to political viability in Scotland. But post-election, there's no question Labour and SNP will form a centre-left bloc.

Ultimately, it is much more to Labour's benefit than the SNP; as soon as centre-left Scots voters see Labour governing reasonably, introducing left-wing measures, they will drift back to Labour. The SNP will be wedged in every vote; either they side with Labour, or the Conservatives.

And the SNP have wedged themselves by making Scots politics so black and white. You are either against the Tories 100%, or you are a Tory, according to he political narrative and atmosphere they have created. If they are seen to vote with the Tories, or even abstain and permit the Tories to block the Labour programme (where it is a centre-left programme), they will only damage themselves.

Labour doesn't need to offer the SNP anything, except perhaps full home rule and fiscal autonomy (and how can any Englishman oppose that? It will mean the categorical end of any real subsidy to Scotland, and that they will be fully responsible for their own finances)
0
reply
nulli tertius
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#91
Report 4 years ago
#91
(Original post by young_guns)
As someone who is an elected Labour activist in Southwark, and fairly plugged in to Labour politics and to goings on at Westminster (aka the Westminster village / bubble), there's no question Labour will agree to a confidence and supply agreement.
Provided Nicola (or Salmond who is showing every sign of wanting to run a separate platform from London) doesn't demand too much. If she or he does, Labour cannot agree to it.
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#92
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#92
Personally my main worry with the SNP is not that they'll have enough power to force an end to austerity or anything (they won't, even if Labour win the Tories will do what is required for the nations finances unless they elect a nutter) but rather that Cameron or Miliband could be weak enough to grant Scotland devo max.

Now don't get me wrong, i think Scotland should have more powers and the SNP think that if they have a majority, that's a mandate for it. However, devolution should not be the road to independence and while some powers (economic) are best in Scotland, others are best kept at Westminster. Additionally, there's a difference between an optimal outcome and a satisfactory outcome. As much as the nats would believe devo max or nothing, it's likely that a large proportion of the population can be bought with less. For the unionist parties, they must cope with the SNP until the recovery is felt more broadly, because until then the SNP will carry on taking advantage of a recession caused in Westminster (in their mind, regardless of global vs labour) and austerity from Westminster.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Why wouldn't you turn to teachers if you were being bullied?

They might tell my parents (2)
9.52%
They might tell the bully (4)
19.05%
I don't think they'd understand (3)
14.29%
It might lead to more bullying (7)
33.33%
There's nothing they could do (5)
23.81%

Watched Threads

View All