Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Lol this surprised me a bit :o:

    As a party we were all happy to form the official opposition, in fact we thought we'd benefit a lot by doing so rather than neglecting many of our policies/ideologies in the aim of trying to form a coalition with centrist parties...

    So the fact that Labour have formed a coalition, and not just any coalition - a rainbow coalition including UKIP and the lib dems (probably the most loathed party bar the BNP at present), it makes me wonder how much of their ideology have they forsaken and how badly is that going to come back to haunt them come next election, when they'll be having to justify a coalition with UKIP... :lol:

    Interesting times.

    And like jesus *coughsimon* says, we'll be working with the Libers this term even though we aren't in a coalition. In fact Wednesday Bass is our first ever (permitted...!) dual party member, now a member for both our parties and he'll keep our link maintained.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paddy__power)
    And to create a situation where the support of the government en masse will mean a bill passes
    Will there be government whipping? If not, then it's no easier of more difficult than garnering the support of the house out of government - I speak from experience. If so, then I'll love to see the dissent as the broadness of the ideology means defections, eventually.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paddy__power)
    I have faith that common ground can be found on a variety of issues. We have 6 months to work out what they are and where they come from. I would, for my part, prefer we be judged on what we achieve - and if this includes improvements to the country then people should look past the superficial.
    You should be judged on what you promised. Given you nicked my words and promised those ...
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Adorno)
    You should be judged on what you promised. Given you nicked my words and promised those ...
    Please rate some other members before rating this member again.
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by ukebert)
    Then, to be honest, they shouldn't be called UKIP.
    They are in favour of UK Independence from the EU. I am in favour of changing all party names though, but that's for another day.

    There's a government forum now? God that dates me :p: Even so, nonsense. The whole point about the House is that it is a forum for debate. If your party isn't capable of putting together a well thought out bill on their own then that's their problem and inter-party collaboration is accepted if you aren't in government. I remember the education bill, which was the best piece of legislation that I had seen (although I had gone inactive even before that) and which was submitted jointly afaik.
    I simply disagree.

    Some positive change at the expense of some negative change, don't forget. If you think that all the bills in a coalition agreement are positive ones then there is no need for a coalition. My question to you is, do you think that your electorate were aware that you were willing to compromise on the ideology that they voted for in order to fulfil your own goals?
    I'm not sure of the usefullness of the question given that the electorate on here are aware of very little. Even if we assume they are then yes, they entrust us to make decisions we feel enable us to better work towards positive changes for them. I believe that's what we've done. You're entitled to disagree of course but this is neither here nor there for my conscience.

    As a slight aside, speaking as a Socialist, I object to you saying that submitting bills that will not pass is an exercise in vanity. If we submit a bill then it shouldn't pass! We are a radical left wing party and that is what people vote for. We are betraying our electorate and going against their wishes if we dumb down what we stand for just in order to get a few bills passed. That's Labour's job (only half meant as a joke). We are (or should be) consistent with the ideology that we portray to the voters in presenting a radical alternative to the house. Sometimes bills pass, which is fine and is a triumph, but bills shouldn't be designed to pass. That applies to all parties. Bills should be designed to accurately follow what you set out in your manifesto, both in terms of policy objectives and manifesto ideals. They should be designed to be right and good, not pandering to popularist views. We've had the popularity contest, that was the election. The outcome of an election should make no difference to the policies of an individual party, just their amount of votes. Anything else is breaking an implicit promise in election.
    I suppose we differ regarding the function of government. For me it is for them to make decisions aimed at making changes - which involved bills passing. Do you think working class Labour voters would prefer a bill giving them and extra 5 pound a week passing or one giving them 50 not passing, and never passing?
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by jesusandtequila)
    Will there be government whipping? If not, then it's no easier of more difficult than garnering the support of the house out of government - I speak from experience. If so, then I'll love to see the dissent as the broadness of the ideology means defections, eventually.
    That's why we have a chief whip, so yes.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jesusandtequila)
    Will there be government whipping? If not, then it's no easier of more difficult than garnering the support of the house out of government - I speak from experience. If so, then I'll love to see the dissent as the broadness of the ideology means defections, eventually.
    Indeed, the last I heard UKIP spat the dummy out in a coalition not too long ago on the very issue of government whipping, how'd those negotiations go I wonder :tongue:
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by Adorno)
    You should be judged on what you promised. Given you nicked my words and promised those ...
    Yes, and you can't judge us on this until the end of the term :rolleyes:
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by Indievertigo)
    Indeed, the last I heard UKIP spat the dummy out in a coalition not too long ago on the very issue of government whipping, how'd those negotiations go I wonder :tongue:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I'll be interested to see how effective a whip is in a 4 coalition party.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jesusandtequila)
    Will there be government whipping? If not, then it's no easier of more difficult than garnering the support of the house out of government - I speak from experience. If so, then I'll love to see the dissent as the broadness of the ideology means defections, eventually.
    There cabinet has a Chief Whip so looks like it. Gonna be difficult though!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paddy__power)
    Yes, and you can't judge us on this until the end of the term :rolleyes:
    But neither UKIP, the Centre, nor the Lib ****ing Dems would ever stand at an election on those words. THAT's the issue we have with what Labour have done. You've lied to the electorate and now seek to justify it by claiming "loose coalitions". Nowt looser than a Nick Clegg turncoat.
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by Adorno)
    But neither UKIP, the Centre, nor the Lib ****ing Dems would ever stand at an election on those words. THAT's the issue we have with what Labour have done. You've lied to the electorate and now seek to justify it by claiming "loose coalitions". Nowt looser than a Nick Clegg turncoat.
    You don't know that we've lied as nothing has come to pass - it is a clear issue with your conclusion and one presumably you can see but prefer to ignore for your denigratory comments. You may well be correct, and you can make a prediction but stating that we have lied, or failed in some way now simply isn't correct.
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by cambo211)
    I'll be interested to see how effective a whip is in a 4 coalition party.

    (Original post by OrangeStu)
    There cabinet has a Chief Whip so looks like it. Gonna be difficult though!
    We have an agreed system. There were, as you can imagine, extensive talks.

    If we fail we fail, and all the people that wanted to be on government won't anymore and I will say I was wrong to think it could work but until that time I am fully committed to the coalition.
    Offline

    15
    First part of the Labour Party Manifesto negated in 24hrs - "Be the only sensible left-wing alternative on TSR."

    Not that they wrote it. :yawn:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paddy__power)
    You don't know that we've lied as nothing has come to pass - it is a clear issue with your conclusion and one presumably you can see but prefer to ignore for your denigratory comments. You may well be correct, and you can make a prediction but stating that we have lied, or failed in some way now simply isn't correct.
    I see neg rep is more your style now.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Adorno)
    I see neg rep is more your style now.
    That was me.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Adorno)
    But neither UKIP, the Centre, nor the Lib ****ing Dems would ever stand at an election on those words. THAT's the issue we have with what Labour have done. You've lied to the electorate and now seek to justify it by claiming "loose coalitions". Nowt looser than a Nick Clegg turncoat.
    This Coalition is the correct course of action for all parties concerned. It guarantees a wholehearted centre-left alliance, shutting out extremists on both sides of the political spectrum, and allowing us to move forward with some very progressive policies.

    If you seek to oppose this on the basis of it being a 'Nick Clegg turncoat' Coalition, ignoring its goals completely, then good luck to you, I doubt that'll be viewed as a very mature attitude to take.
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by Adorno)
    I see neg rep is more your style now.
    I didn't neg rep you =/
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Eru Iluvatar)
    That was me.
    Well there we are then.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.