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.

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

Manuel,

Your intellectual omniscience and critical powers and ability to evaluate the opinions of others and give vent to your own unbiased opinion, continue to amaze me.

Section 2 of the Act also provides 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".

This means that a no confidence vote trumps the 2/3 majority and the 5 year rule. A no confidence vote would happen if the minority government failed in key legislation such as the budget.

Has anyone ever thought about blowing the Houses of Parliament up before .

Guy Fawkes - the only man to enter parliament with honest intentions!

Guy Fawkes?
Edit - snap Haystack! :-)

Looks like Hays is panic stricken today, I wonder why.

By Hannah Furness, arts correspondent10:06AM BST 09 Oct 2014
Would-be politicians should not be allowed to be MPs until they are 40, the broadcaster Andrew Marr said, as he laments the lack of "gritty, real-life experience" in the House of Commons.
Marr, the former BBC political editor and host of the Andrew Marr Show, said he would like to ban anyone being elected before the age of 40, to ensure they had to have "real life experience" first.
He added the political world he had entered as a young journalist had been full of politicians "who had done other things first", arguing it "really mattered" when representing the electorate.
Speaking at the Cheltenham Literature Festival, he condemned the state of modern politics, saying those in government had "lost a radical amount of power", with the "real power" being left to finance, global factors and the "mysterious world of PR".
He told an audience he wishes he now had the job of BBC economics editor Robert Peston, saying he would choose to study economics rather than politics if he "had his time again".
Related Articles
Andrew Marr accused of bias over Scottish independence 16 Mar 2014
Andrew Marr's novel: 'feeble' 19 Sep 2014
Andrew Marr called 'self-important little weasel' after independence comments 18 Mar 2014
Andrew Marr: 'Yes voters are like peasants in War and Peace' 23 Sep 2014
Author Andrew Marr gains currency with the City for shortselling plot 25 Sep 2014
Isa or pension for retirement? Sponsored by Barclays
Appearing at an event to publicise his new novel, Head of State, he was asked about his opinion on modern politics.
"I'm turning into an old git, so I'll give you a passionate old git response to that," he said.
"When I started out I. Politics reporting, there were still Tories who had had a good war, built their own companies, had really good experience, knew the inside out of a balance sheet, had employed and sat and worried about profits.
"On the Labour side you had ex-miners, metal workers, ex-factory hands, ex-posties.
"So there were people all over the House of Commons who had done other things first and that really mattered.
"We've lost most of that gritty, real-world experience in the House of Commons.
"I would like to see nobody - this is ridiculous but I'm going to say it anyway - nobody in the House of Commons until they are 40. That way they always have to do something first."
MPs at 40: Do you agree with Andrew Marr?
No
Yes
Vote
View Results
Speaking about the inspiration for his novel, set in the world of British politics, he said he believed MPs and government had lost a "radical amount of power", leaving many of them "despised" by the public.
"I think all democratic government is partly about deceiving," Marr said. "In the sense that it's about shaping and directing public opinion.
"They want you to look in one direction and not in the other direction. Make the public think about one thing rather than another.
"We are very easily deceived; ridiculously easily deceived. Most of the time we have colluded in our own deception.
"We want to believe there's somebody in charge. We want to believe that when politicians says I'm going to make sure the NHS will not be privatised, that's what they can deliver. We want to believe that if the Foreign Secretary says I can give you absolute guarantees that we're going to go to Europe and agree no immigration without controls, they can actually do that.
"But most of the time, the real powers around us are much more often financial and global than they are local and political. And the people who provide the connection between big financial power and local power are the myriad and mysterious, dark world of PR.
"So there is a serious message here.
"For example, a long time ago government could fix people's pay packets, they ran the industries and controlled things like mortgages. Now, they can't even tax the biggest companies in this country.
"They have lost a radical amount of power.
"And that I think is the reason many people despise politics; not because they're bad people but because they don't have any power any more."
When asked whether he would like to have pursued another career, such as that of Peston, he added: "Yes I would, that's where the action is.
"What we need more than anything else, even more than political journalists, is good economics journalists explaining to us is words of two syllables, not five, what's going on.
"If I had my time again I would spend more time over economics text books, really trying to understand economics jargon, to explain what they're doing in clear terms because that drives everything else."
His first novel, Head of State, is out now. This is Marr on:
Margaret Thatcher's Number 10
“The whole place was almost pin-drop silent in case the PM walked through. They adored her, but were completely terrified of her.”
John Major's Number 10
“All the way through, he felt besieged. He was sitting there feeling misunderstood and unloved.”
Tony Blair's Number 10
“His Number 10 was full of very, very beautiful girls, half in love with Tony, with Cherie following around with a scowl. And two or three huge other characters.”
Gordon Brown's Number 10: “He had a gang of big boys, rather overweight big boys with florid faces who glared at you a lot. I'm not saying it was Reservoir Dogs, but..."
David Cameron
“David Cameron is absolutely loved by the Civil Service. Absolutely loathed by the hard right of his party. More than I can really understand myself."
Ed Miliband
"Trailing way behind his party in the opinion polls. But the Labour Party is much more squeamish about changing leaders than the Tory Party so I think for the moment, Ed Miliband, like it or not, is there secure and safe.
Nick Clegg
"Probably the most despised politician in the country. But he has astonishing resilience. I was watching him last week in Glasgow and he was bouncing around on stage like everything was going enormously well. Like Jiminy Cricket. You have to stand there with your jaw lolling in admiration."
Boris Johnson
"I suspect all the promise he's made to Cameron is that he's not going to cause too much trouble before the election. He is one of the most intelligent, certainly the most glamorous and charismatic politicians in the country. He has limitless ambition.
"He's never going be happy until he's Prime Minister and then he'll set his sights on the White House. There's no loyalty between them at all. This idea of the Old Etonians sticking together? Go back to the history books: never."