Sunday, 9 May 2010
The world will know by now that England has a ‘hung parliament’ an expression that is taken from ‘hung jury’, meaning no clear decision has emerged. The Tory Party gained almost a hundred seats, one of the most significant electoral advances in its history, but one that still left it short of an overall majority in the House of Commons. Labour and the Liberal Democrats both lost seats and votes, with the former having a share of the vote as bad as 1983, a real electoral disaster, and the latter failing to make the much promised breakthrough, despite all the media hype.
So, what do we have now? Simple; we have one of the worst, most unpopular Prime Ministers in this country’s history clinging on to power for the sake of power, no matter how much damage this is doing. We have the Liberal Democrats, third in the share of the votes, third in the share of the Parliamentary seats, attempting to sell themselves to the highest bidder.
This party is a positive danger to the country, this party of proportional representation, unlimited immigration and unilateral nuclear disarmament. Yet, here we are with these amateurs effectively dictating terms. We have had a whole weekend without an effective government, without any clear idea of where we are going. If one wants to see the future, a future with a ‘fair’ voting system then one could do no better than look at the present.
There was a demonstration in London yesterday in favour of the aforesaid ‘fair’ voting system, presumably to put some iron in the soul of Nick Clegg, the Liberal Democrat leader. A ‘fair’ voting system, however it is devised, is the worst possible option for this country. Never again would a party be returned with a strong mandate. Manifestos would almost invariably be based on a lie because no clear programme would be possible.
The Liberal Democrats, third, always third, would forever be in a position to dictate terms. They would also most likely enter into a permanent and undemocratic ‘progressive’ bloc with Labour, forever blocking a right-of-centre programme, even if that is what a majority of the electorate wanted. A ‘fair’ voting system is the worst possible solution, no matter how loud rent-a-mob shouts out platitudes and slogans. These people have not got the first clue.
Posted by Anastasia F-B at 17:04
Labels: british politics.
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
If Cameron agrees to a deal with Corporal Clegg he's consigning himself and the Party to a very perilous fate. Whoever forms the next Government will be a Government traduced on a daily basis by those of all ideologies and none--just as the Callaghan Government was. If Dave is clever, he'll do one of two things.ReplyDelete
First of all, he can try to form a minority Government. This Government will not last long but it could last long enough to establish a record in Government, which he could then take to the public in the rapidly approaching next general election(less than one year--no more than 18 months, I reckon). If Labour and the Liberals were to suddenly bring the Government down, that would be to Dave's advantage as he could then say, with credibility, "The petty politics of the Labour and Liberal parties de-stabilised us during an economic crisis".
The other option, which will at first make you recoil is for Dave to push Clegg into the arms of the vampires Brown and Mandy. If Clegg is tainted with the smell of death emanating from Labour Central HQ, Cameron will not only have won the largest share of the vote, but will be able to say he's the last un-tainted man standing, which if Clegg does a deal with Labour, he would be. At this point, Cameron could watch and wait for the Lib/Lab coalition to implode as the last one did, and wait for the right moment to pounce, as Thatcher did.
Cameron could do a Faustian deal with Clegg in order to secure a few sleepless nights in No. 10, but this next Government is going to be a transitional one, no matter who is in No. 10--far better to be the first in a lifeboat than the captain of the Titanic.
This comment has been removed by the author.ReplyDelete
Adam, I suspect in the end we will have the 1924 or the 1929 solution. No matter; there is another election coming, within a year at the most.ReplyDelete
OC, it really depends what you want from goverment, stability and a clear sense of direction or fudge and endless compromise.
Quite so. Oh those wretched Governments, the horrible Macdonald, and the treasonous Baldwin, oh at least Churchill was there holding them to account!ReplyDelete
But yes the next election is in Cameron's hands, I hope the boy becomes a man before it's too late.
By the way, in a response to a blog in the other place, I've ended up posting my 20 point manifesto. Would be curious to hear your thoughtsReplyDelete
1. Immediately withdraw from the EU, and repeal all EU originated legislation.
2. End the war in Afghanistan immediately.
3. Require all those who want to ban hunting to dress in silly fox costumes every other Tuesday--also fully reinstate the hunt.
4. End all duty in pubs that don't show a profit.
5. Treble the size of the RN
6. Force non-smokers to drink outside in the rain whilst we take our pubs back--restore smoking in other words.
7. Get rid of every Health and Safety regulation and restore sanity.
8. Reinstate all Hereditary Peers.
9. Make Britain energy independent within a decade through the creation of new nuclear power plants.
10. Build new grammar schools and reinstate 11+. Fully restore the Butler Act.
11. Legalise drugs--and make the selling of drugs on the black market punishable by life imprisonment.
12. Create Chamberlain's free trade Commonwealth area, once and for all.
13. Employ the immigration reforms I shall blog on tomorrow.
14. Apologise to Serbia for Tony Blair's War.
15. Move to have Tony Blair tried in The Hague for war crimes.
16. Resolve to always defend The Falklands.
17. Scrap Trident
18. Replace council tax with a fairer income tax that would be evenly distributed to local councils.
19. End devolution.
20. Require the face to be exposed in public at all times.
Oh, almost forgot--implement UKIP's proposal for binding local and national referenda.ReplyDelete
Oh, I've thought of one more thing--abolish the GLA and London Mayor--after the term of the current one expires. I love you Boris, but you belong in the Commons, not a fake office that has no precedent in London's history.ReplyDelete
If I've understood correctly, the UK electoral laws allow the persistence of what used to be called "rotten boroughs"...malaportionment of representation whereby constituencies vary greatly in size. Some very small districts can thus distort the result...am I on the right track there?ReplyDelete
Go Miliband!! :))ReplyDelete
I'm not a religious man, but I will pray to what ever god you may have, that you were not being serious about Miliband. He is the worst Foreign Secretary in UK history. He ascended to the Lisbon Constitution in meek defiance of the manifesto he rode to power, and in spite of the will of the British people. He has been hell bent on waging diplomatic wars--some verging on the provocation of a military response, with the Russian Federation. His speech at Sevastopol after Georgia's attempted genocide of Russian's in South Ossetia, stopped just short of a declaration of war on Britain's oldest, most trusted continental ally, with whom we twice saved the world from mad tyrants.
Adam, mostly good. I'll go with most except seventeen. Twelve rather belongs to the past. Nineteen is really not up to us, and after the election I’m rather in favour of giving the Scots independence, whether they want it or not! I would certainly like to see Boris back in Westminster though I think he’s doing a rather good job as mayor.ReplyDelete
Retarius, yes, we do have rotten boroughs still, mostly inner city constituencies where the population has been in steady decline.
Kunday, Green Ed or Banana Man? :-))
If I live to convince you to change your mind about the Commonwealth(an area in which I depart from Enoch Powell's more cynical views in his later years--preferring Chamberlain's views or that of the young Powell), I can die knowing I've done a great thing.
Secondly, I know repealing devolution wouldn't be easy, be Constitution dictates Parliamentary Supremacy, Westminster can foolishly giveth devolution, She can wisely take it away.
As for Trident, I know you Thatcherites like your nuclear weapons, I of course am I Powellite unilateralist in such views--I'd be lying if I didn't say I quite like basking in the derision normally reserved for the unwashed left.
Yes, I simply can't do without my nuclear weapons. :-))ReplyDelete
1. Immediately withdraw from the EU, and repeal all EU originated legislation.ReplyDelete
Should the UK withdraw from one of the biggest markets on Earth?
14. Apologise to Serbia for Tony Blair's War.
Why should the UK apologize to Serbia and not to Iraq and Afghanistan? Or why should the UK apologize at all for the Kosovo war? It seems like a much more legitimate attack on a real thread for peace than the other two phony wars. It had also a lower human and economical cost.
16. Resolve to always defend The Falklands.
Isn't that a given or is someone in the UK really considering not to defend a part of its territory?
The un-tapped resource of The Commonwealth is the biggest, most diverse economic zone in the world--India alone in the next several decades will represent 20pct of all world trade. And besides when did I ever, ever, say I didn't want to freelytrade with Europe? Norway and Switzerland and Iceland from their position in Macmillan's EFTA have full, free trade with Europe from outside the EU, and thus haven't got to pay Brussels £127 billion a year for the privilege--some 'free' trade, we have. By the way South Korea and Mexico also have full free trade with the EU.
Tony Blair's disgusting War on Serbia is one of the darkest moments in UK military history. A nation that was our ally in two World Wars, a country defending her territorial integrity against terrorists and other foreign fighters, and we took the side of the more vicious of two admittedly vicious sides in a civil war. It is never wise to intervene in a civil war lest broader implications imply(the Spanish Civil War for example where intervention should have occurred in order to stop the fascist menace).
But as Lord Hurd said of intervention in Yugoslavia, such an act would do nothing but "Level the killing fields".
Why not Iraq and Afghanistan? Because the Serbian State was not dismantled like Iraq and Afghanistan was, there is no legitimate lest consistent Iraqi or Afghan Government to apologise to. There is a gaol cell in The Hague that I hope will be reserved for Tony Blair.
As for the Falklands--you'd be surprised at the Halifaxs that walk amongst us...I know I never cease to be.