Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

Speeches what a waste of time, If we all lived off the speeches of these people we would live such wonderful lives eh.

Thanks for the link to it cynic. ???

Anyhow, here it is: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/oct/08/hung-parliament-2015-liberal-democrats-coalition

Andrew Neil , I didn't like this man once , but having watched him a bit lately i'm warming to him . Maybe just because he hates bullshit and couldn't give a fig what people think of his line of questioning.

sorry Exec, but i get the guardian link on my phone so no idea how to put it on here ..... that's the blessing and bane of being a dinosaur!

well written and sensible article is it not
will no doubt have certain posters spluttering somewhat, especially given its provenance

I see on the exit poll at Clacton Donkey rides - 40% Ice cream stall - 30% Hot dog stand -20% all others equal.

An interesting article, but misguided. The 5 year term is not a barrier to a new election. If the minority government wants an election then they just have to propose legislation that will get voted down. In the case of the Conservatives it would be the referendum. A visit to the queen would generate a request for any other party to form a government. That one would be in even more of a minority and would be unlikely to chance it. The result would be a new election. Minority governments have not survived in the UK for more than months. The article also forgets the looming Scottish changes to voting on English legislation.

hays - unless i misread, your prime assumption is wrong ..... anyway, it is such a pleasure and indeed relief to read something that is both sensible and balanced for once

Aplogy accepted, cynic. It was a very intersting thoughtful article.

Let's have a cool beer on it.

fred must be spluttering in his well-padded armchair, while apparently young sticky has squelched me some unknown and no doubt obscure reason, so hasn't even read my posts (he'll say!) :-)

Manuel.

You are easily swayed and that article helps you to hold on to crumbs of hope!

Unless things change significantly from what they appear to be at the moment, the outcome of the GE. may lead to a short period of political chaos with different allegiances being formed.

I think simply put that the present tory party and many of its policies, for a variety of reasons are distrusted and detested by the general public. These factors is and will be reflected to a degree by the various political parties or groups.

If an general election was held at the moment, I think it is possible that the Scottish (SMP) element may have an influential part to play it the formation of any government and reduce Labour's chances of and overall majority, but the Scottish MPs are more likely to ally themselves to a Labour agenda.

I still think that much of the disillusioned liberal vote in England will flow towards Labour. That will be seen as a stimulus for the more moderate Lib/dems to push for a coalition with Labour to form a government. (The Lib/dems are centre left party and a "moderate" party.)

My guess, at the moment, while UKIP will get more seats than expected by some, the con party will lose 10-15 % of theirs.

Libs will overall will lose about 20-30% and Labour will gain seats in England, especially the North and Midlands and there will be a smattering of gains by the other minor parties.

The chances of a Con government is negligible!

unlike you, i and other more sensible people on this site can read dispassionately a sensible article such as the one in the guardian and not cherry-pick the bits that i like and discard others

The second last paragraph of the article seems to disagree with some of your points Haystack.

I think this is the present state of termination of government escapes!

Section 2 of the Act also provides for two ways in which a general election can be held before the end of this five-year period:

If the House of Commons resolves "That this House has no confidence in Her Majesty's Government", an early general election is held, unless the House of Commons subsequently resolves "That this House has confidence in Her Majesty's Government". This second resolution must be made within fourteen days of the first.
If the House of Commons, with the support of two-thirds of its total membership (including vacant seats), resolves "That there shall be an early parliamentary general election".
In either of these two cases, the monarch (on the recommendation of the prime minister) appoints the date of the new election by proclamation. Parliament is then dissolved 17 working days before that date.

Apart from the automatic dissolution in anticipation of a general election (whether held early or not), section 3(2) provides that "Parliament cannot otherwise be dissolved". The act thus removes the traditional royal prerogative to dissolve Parliament.

The Act repealed the Septennial Act 1715 as well as references in other Acts to the royal prerogative of dissolving parliament.

Manuel,

I am surprised you have the intellect required to read the "The Guardian", but aren't you "cherry picking" what suits your cause?

Face the facts "you are doomed, DOOMED"!

hardly .....
i haven't made any other comment other than to say that the article is sensible and balanced with a prime conclusion that a hung parliament is the most likely outcome at the next election ..... it then continues as to what could or even might well happen next

all a bit too subtle for you i'm sure

David Cameron secures tougher immigration restrictions on new EU numbers

The commission says it will now consider the need for new “transitional measures” when a country joins the EU






By Peter Dominiczak, and Bruno Waterfield in Brussels

11:28PM BST 08 Oct 2014



David Cameron secured a major victory in Brussels after the European Commission indicated that it will impose tough new immigration restrictions on countries that join the EU.


The commission said it will now consider the need for new “transitional measures” when a country joins the EU.


It could also create a “safeguard mechanism” that countries like the UK could use to restrict immigration in the event of a large influx, like the one seen when Poland joined the EU in 2004.


It is the first time the commission has conceded the problem needs to be addressed following a backlash across Europe following a surge in migration from poor eastern European countries.


It will come as a major boost to the Prime Minister ahead of his bid to renegotiate Britain’s relationship with the EU before holding an in-out referendum in 2017.



More bullshit here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11150390/David-Cameron-secures-tougher-immigration-restrictions-on-new-EU-numbers.html

another article well worth reading, this time from this morning's FT ......

France to tackle rules that hamper company growth


much of this mess can clearly be put at hollande's door, so it rather serves the french right (a bad pun!) for allowing this left-wing loony to come to power

The commission says it will now consider the need for new “transitional measures” when a country joins the EU

The critical thing about governments is their ability to pass legislation. Apart from that you might as well have the civil service run the country. Once a government fails to put through key legislation such as the budget the the government is finished whether it is minority or not and including 5 year parliaments. Under those circumstances there will be an election.

Fred is getting forgetful in his old age , he thinks his Private Frasier when we all know his Captain Mainwareing , that pompous know-all